Horrendous fuel consumption

**rovercare** · 22nd March 2010, 08:22 PM

Originally Posted by Sprint

he's an idiot for even considering a 200 series

if I was in the position to buy a 100 series (yes, i love my landies, but if i could afford to do it, i'd still buy a 100 series wagon too), my pick would be a 2006 turbodiesel 5 speed automatic VX

the worst i could manage with one was 13L/100km, and that was while i was having a bit of high speed fun.....

and yes, a turbo diesel landcruiser wagon WILL do 180+, and feels disgustingly stable at that speed.....

apparently being sensible, cruise at 100km/h with a family and luggage on board, they will do 10L/100km on the highway........

btw Pat, tell your mate to put a decent exhaust on it, K&N filter and a snorkle, it should drop his fuel consumption down to ~15L/100km

1HD-FTE, best thing since sliced bread, I'd have one......but in a 79 series Tray

**Bushie** · 22nd March 2010, 08:57 PM

We used ~18/100 across the Madigan on our trip, that also included the trip down to Geosurveys Hill.

Edjits Tour Madigan Line 2008

I've heard of some ridiculous fuel consumption figure from the new Toyotas, and some ridiculous oil consumptions as well.

Martyn

**Sprint** · 22nd March 2010, 09:20 PM

Originally Posted by rovercare

1HD-FTE, best thing since sliced bread, I'd have one......but in a 79 series Tray

if i was to go for a ute, i would go for a GQ patrol over a landcruiser, just personal preference though

**PAT303** · 22nd March 2010, 09:42 PM

Originally Posted by Sprint

he's an idiot for even considering a 200 series

if I was in the position to buy a 100 series (yes, i love my landies, but if i could afford to do it, i'd still buy a 100 series wagon too), my pick would be a 2006 turbodiesel 5 speed automatic VX

the worst i could manage with one was 13L/100km, and that was while i was having a bit of high speed fun.....

and yes, a turbo diesel landcruiser wagon WILL do 180+, and feels disgustingly stable at that speed.....

apparently being sensible, cruise at 100km/h with a family and luggage on board, they will do 10L/100km on the highway........

btw Pat, tell your mate to put a decent exhaust on it, K&N filter and a snorkle, it should drop his fuel consumption down to ~15L/100km

You did better than me,I had a 100 series T/D for 4 months and didn't get near 10ltres and was not anywere near as stable as the L322 at speed.Just to add the 3.0T/D pulls harder than Toyo's 4.7 above 140k's/hr and it doesn't have any aftermarket exhaust or filters or any other stuff that king off the road cruisers need.

Pat

**Sprint** · 22nd March 2010, 10:43 PM

what gearbox did you have in it though? I've found the pre 2003 4 speed auto's are closer to 14L/100km, and the manuals are around 16L/100km

both when driven normally of course.......

**Dougal** · 23rd March 2010, 05:25 AM

Originally Posted by Sprint

he's an idiot for even considering a 200 series

if I was in the position to buy a 100 series (yes, i love my landies, but if i could afford to do it, i'd still buy a 100 series wagon too), my pick would be a 2006 turbodiesel 5 speed automatic VX

the worst i could manage with one was 13L/100km, and that was while i was having a bit of high speed fun.....

and yes, a turbo diesel landcruiser wagon WILL do 180+, and feels disgustingly stable at that speed.....

apparently being sensible, cruise at 100km/h with a family and luggage on board, they will do 10L/100km on the highway........

btw Pat, tell your mate to put a decent exhaust on it, K&N filter and a snorkle, it should drop his fuel consumption down to ~15L/100km

There is a 100 series in my family, but it's the 4 speed auto (slushbox). Apparently they will do close to 200, but they won't do 10 km/l unless you're really babying them on the open road. Meaning cruising under 100km/h. Best ever tank full on this particular one is about 10.5 km/l. Average is I think 8-9 km/l and it's very easy to make them drink heaps. I'd expect the 5 speed auto to do better in mixed driving, but on the highway when they're in top gear and locked up it should be all the same.

The 1HD-FTE is an excellent engine, but in the 100 it's pushing a 2.9T barn. As far as stability at speed, my 85 RRC with koni's is a far better drive. There's something about the steering on the 100 that makes it really frustrating if you're doing anything but relaxed cruising.

**numpty** · 23rd March 2010, 06:45 AM

Madigan Line 2008......2 x 200Tdi's 1 x 300Tdi and 1 x Td5 all used around 165 litres, returning around 17l/100 average. As said, nearly the whole time in low range 2nd and 3rd. The side trip out to Geosurveys Hill was the killer and probably accounts for the high average overall.

Tombie · 23rd March 2010, 08:39 AM

Originally Posted by Sprint

and yes, a turbo diesel landcruiser wagon WILL do 180+, and feels disgustingly stable at that speed.....

apparently being sensible, cruise at 100km/h with a family and luggage on board, they will do 10L/100km on the highway........

So they're only disgustingly unstable from say 0-120 km/h then?
I've got mates with those wallowing things.. None are stable at speed.

And cruising open road in top, they just cant do 10l/100km...
Sounds like yet another tugmota myth.

**SSmith** · 23rd March 2010, 09:08 AM

Originally Posted by Sprint

if i was to go for a ute, i would go for a GQ patrol over a landcruiser, just personal preference though

if i was to get a ute it would be this
Discovery 2a ute

**Sprint** · 23rd March 2010, 08:17 PM

Originally Posted by Tombie2

So they're only disgustingly unstable from say 0-120 km/h then?

no, just saying that for a stock suspension/tyred 2.5 tonne 4x4 wagon, it drove quite well at that speed, wasnt all over the road, wasnt bouncy, etc

Originally Posted by Tombie2

I've got mates with those wallowing things.. None are stable at speed.

and how many of them are lifted, how many are maintained in perfect condition with no wear in the bushes and shocks? I scared the hell out of myself pushing a crapbox 220,000km 100 series through the gogango range coming home from Rockhampton one day, BUT, it had a 2" lift, **** tyres and it was generally flogged out

Originally Posted by Tombie2

And cruising open road in top, they just cant do 10l/100km...

the 2003-onwards turbo diesel 5 speed automatics can and will do that, but not if you drive them hard, go easy, and they WILL do it, same as anything, the more the right foot goes down, the more the fuel consumption goes up

Originally Posted by Dougal

There is a 100 series in my family, but it's the 4 speed auto (slushbox). Apparently they will do close to 200, but they won't do 10 km/l unless you're really babying them on the open road. Meaning cruising under 100km/h. Best ever tank full on this particular one is about 10.5 km/l. Average is I think 8-9 km/l and it's very easy to make them drink heaps. I'd expect the 5 speed auto to do better in mixed driving, but on the highway when they're in top gear and locked up it should be all the same.

the 5 speed auto is a LOT better on fuel than the earlier 4 speed auto's

Originally Posted by Dougal

There's something about the steering on the 100 that makes it really frustrating if you're doing anything but relaxed cruising.

only problem i ever had with 100 series landcruisers in regards to driving is that the seats arent much chop after 120,000km, especially if the regular driver has been larger than average....

as for handling, the biggest shock i had was when i took a turbo/manual 100 series wagon for a run home one night, didnt have any more go than a regular 100 series, but it was like sikaflex to a blanket around town.......

stuck my head underneath, the springs and shocks werent stock items, god alone knows where they came from, but it wasnt lifted, and i only noticed what wouldve been the most important part when a customer asked why it had flares......

up till around 2003 toyota used wheels with a different offset to the later ones, i think something to do with the IFS models, as the wagons with the beam front axle still had the earlier wheels, but the difference in offset was ~38mm, and the vehicle in question was fitted with the earlier wheels..... with an increase in track of 76mm, no wonder it cornered damn well!

Thread: Horrendous fuel consumption

Thread Tools

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions