Fuel consumption-Nissan 3.0L TD Nissan and 4.2 TD

Hi Money,
I can't help with the 4.2 stats, but as a 3.0 owner, I can tell you about my car. A 5-speed ST. Just clicked 20,000klm in 4.5 mths.
Fuel economy is always around 10-12lt per 100klm. No matter what I do with it. That's a comfortable 1000klm for each fill. Surprisingly it doesn't effect the numbers much city to hwy. Those figures are just normal running around with nothing in tow, in Sydney.
Couldn't be happier with mine.

Josh

MP,

Point to consider, 4.2 has 5K service intervals, 3.0 has 10K. Even if you change at 5K yourself the logbook will still look good. I've got an Auto 3.0, about 11 on the highway, 14 suburban and about 14 towing 2 Tonne.Regds

Bill

Moneypit,
I have owned a 4.2TD GU since new for 4 years and 150000kms....
I now have several friends with either the 4.2TD and the 3.0L model.
I get a consistent 12.5L/100kms highway and city, best ever was 10L/100kms worst ever was 17L/100kms loaded and in sand.
On 4wd trips while on the highway, my friends with the 3.0L get about 11L/100kms and I get about 12.5L/100kms.
When we hit the dirt, hills and hard going, the 4.2 jumps to about 13.5L/100kms and the 3.0L jump to about 12.5L/100kms.
On a recent long trip up to North Qld, the 3.0L in the group used the same as both 4.2s in the group (heavy going) while a 2.8 towing a kimberley camper used much more than both....
On running costs you should also consider how long you are expecting to keep it.
4.2 (mine) not a single problem all these time....
3.0L several calls back to Nissan with fiddly problems (air flow sensors, computers etc).
The 4.2 costs more to service too, it has two oil filters, and 10.5L of oil while the 3.0L takes one oil filter and 8L of oil and service intervals are 10000kms.
I hope this first hand info helps.
My personal opinion:
When I am out there in the bush (remote areas), I want low down torque, no fiddley electronics, a throttle operated by cable which is not sensitive to the touch and simplicity, reliability and longevity.
If I had to make the decision again I would go for the 4.2 again....
Will

Hi Moneypit,
I've had a GU 4.2TD for 3 1/2 yrs and 75,000km. It's best around town; I consistently get about 11-11.5 L/100km. Unladen in the country, at 110Km/h, it gives about 11.5-12L/100km, but when heavily laden inside, roof rack loaded, nothing towed, it increases to 13-15L/100km at the same speed. Only once have I seen it give 10L/100km, and that was around town. Not sure that it's optimal; Nissan had to recalibrate the injector pump at the 1000km service, which improved the economy lots, but I thought it would be a bit better than what it is.
Not as good as the old GQ, and a bit worse than the current turbo diesel LC; I travelled north in convoy with a friend in his- the LC was consistently better with similar loads and speeds by about 1L/100km.
Drove a 3.0L GU round for a week recently and once I got used to having to give it a bit of throttle to get it moving off the mark, I was impressed-it really performed - much better on the open road than the 4.2. The 4.2 is much better at low revs tho'. Didn't check the economy - someone else was paying the fuel bill.
rgds Gerry

I can shed some light on your question. I own a 4.2 turbo GU (manual) and my brother has the 3.0ltr GU (auto). Both great vehicles !! Lots of off roading together in a variety of terrain. Most noticable is the torque band - waste of time going much higher than 2500rpm in the 4.2, heaps of low down torque, turbo lag is almost non existent. the 3lt is a much freer reving motor and will VERY quickly spin out to 4500rpm, very noticable turbo lag but once it cuts in at about 2000rpm it flies. In terms of fuel consumption, with the exception of heavy sand driving eg Carpenters Rocks to Robe the 4.2 uses less fuel (obviously the auto trans comes into play here).
Even on bitumen the 4.2 uses less fuel.
At the risk of being shot down by 3ltr owners I'd have to say the hi-tech motor would be far more highly stressed than the prehistoric 4.2 and this brings engine longevity into the question.
Oil change intervals- 10000k for 3.0, 5000 for the 4.2. Similar volumes (3.0ltr had a recall and increased the sump capacity), identical fuel filters, identical air filters but 4.2 has two spin on filters @ cost of around $70 !! (nissan) or $26 non genuine, single oil filter replacement cartridge for 3.0ltr, in summary,4.2 more expensive to service but only time will tell.
If you are not going to do much towing, an extra $7000 for the 4.2 needs a lot of justifying but being familiar with the two, I feel I made the right decision for my purposes.

My brains going in circles trying to absorb all these consumption figures hope your logging them into a spreadsheet moneybags. Both vehicles are great so decide if you want to do any real time towing if so go the 4.2. If not the 3.0L is great that's what I have in auto and I do local towing with a 2 tonn boat behind. I service every 5000 - check with your local distributor and ask the service department about each service charge - they usually have a fixed price + extras.
If you want some excellent fuel figures use this sites records - go to Trip Planning in the menu then Fuel Consumption. Check the different sized engines and compare.
Good luckCarpe Diem

Thanks very much to anyone who has taken the time to answer. I got what I was expecting I think which is a pretty good consensus about the two versions.

In researching other threads on the vehicle I'm very surprised by the number of people who have moved into automatics instead of manuals in the 3.0l TD. In fact surprised enough to have placed driving an auto version in my 'to do' list before I make a decision. Never thought I'd hear myself say that!!!

I will no doubt be in again soon with more questions but I'm building up a pretty good argument to put to the 'Minister for Finance' about the good things about owning a new car.

The information to date is very much appreciated.