Fuel Comsumption

[JuanJ]

Hello,

As I wrote some time ago, I was collecting fuel comsumption data for the 1FZ-FE gasoiline engine. At 4.5 L it packs a lot of power and appears to be gas thirsty.

Available information on the 1FZ-FE engine indicates that it is powerful yet sensitive to low-octane fuel, natural gas and poor quality spare parts. And it does resent poor driving. No data is provided about comsumption, though

I found some data on the Internet, namely 5.7 km/L, provided you are not towing. There where more figures, all revolved around this value, but all came from 80 series Land Cruisers. There was no data for the 70 series.

Series 70 models were built in Venezuela, where gas in cheap and topping the tank is not a problem, financially speaking. But these 70s went to other select markets in South America, where gasoline is more expensive; on the other hand, gas-powered 70s were likely to be found in the Middle East, parts of Africa and Australia, where prices vary and fuel economy is a concern. Prices aside, again there were no figures.


After some compiling and a few calculations, I have some data on consumption for the 70 series, which I would like to share. I considered three driving scenarios:

1. Sudden start, acceleration to 60 km/h or more and forced stop. The most consuming situation according to the user's manual, quite likely to happen in heavy traffic or due to poor driving (and not reading the manual, of course.)
2. Constant speed, gentle braking and acceleration, as per manual's advise and available engine information. The sound thing to do if you care about your Land Cruiser.
3. Highway driving at 95 km/h average speed.

The results are:

1. 3.7 km/L (14 km/US Gal, 8.8 MPG, 27 L/100 km)
2. 5.3 km/L (20 km/US Gal, 12 MPG, 19 L/100 km)
3. 6.3 km/L (24 km/US Gal, 12.5 MPG, 16 L/100 km)

These data apply for an FZJ71 using 95 octane gasoline. Certainly not a cheap power pack in these days, but not a gas guzzler as its size might suggest. Therefore, a 90-Liter fuel tank will yield between 470 and 560 km.

Modifications that increase weight are likely to reduce fuel economy.

I have some numbers for off-road driving, but not enough. My guess is that it would be around 4.5 km/L or so.












Juan





2006 FZJ71 - Pure Breed. Mostly Stock

 

[crushers]

considering both the 70 series and the 80 series share a lot of the same driveline components i would say the 70 series will be a bit better on fuel due to lower weight.
the 93 80 series i had returned 18 mpg at 140 km/hr which i thought was very good, of course i had heard of real crappy fuel returns on other 80s...

basicly, if you have to ask the milagte of a gasser Land Cruiser then you should be looking at a diesel...

 

[Basie]

We have the same 24 valve 4500 EFI gas engine here in Namibia and the alternative is a 4.2 liter normally aspirated diesel which uses less fuel, but is slow and noisy and smelly etc.

I have a 79 series converted to a double cab, so a bit heavier than standard, but have very much the same consumption figures that you show, but highway speed 125 km/hr ( it goes to 160 if you are not careful) about 20 litres/100 km fully laden. So a lot, but quite cheaper to buy that the diesel, much more fun and definitely cheaper to maintain. Tend to go about 600 000 km before major work needed

 

[JuanJ]

Hello,

Thank you for the comments. Basie, I am glad to know our numbers are much the same.
I have some data on highway driving at 110 km/h, which is close to your number; however, I rarely go beyond 100 km/h.

Series 80 have smoother lines than 70 series, drag and aerodynamics are different, and therefore fuel economy is different. On the other hand, it is good to know how much you get from a full tank. These reasons prompted me to find out about fuel comsumption.

There was another reason, much more personal: some friends who drive Samurais and Monteros referred to the Land Cruiser as a heavy, fuel-hungry beast. Performance first, and numbers now, have proven them wrong.

Diesels have much better fuel economy but are slow and maintenance is more complicated, as Basie wrote. You can manage to have a good parts supply, but finding a competent diesel mechanic has proven real hard, at least for me. I drove diesel-powered Toyotas for a while and experienced these problems first hand.

Overall, I am satisfied with my gasser Land Cruiser. Satisfaction now includes fuel economy.





Juan

 

[crushers]

i fyou feel diesels are slow then you have never driven a turbo'd intercooled, Propane assisted 1PZ or HZ...

i would not use the term "slow" to describe the results...LOL!!

 

[JuanJ]

Hello Crushers,

In fact I have driven turbocharged diesels, but not intercooled ones or propane assisted. I would like to give one of these a try.

By slow I meant acceleration rather than speed. Again from my experience, a diesel may go as fast as a gasser, but the latter will accelerate faster; probably an intercooled turbocharged engine will accelerate like a gas engine.

Maintenance aside, diesels are fuel efficient and provide good torque at low rpms.

Anyway, thank you for the comments.






Juan

 

[crushers]

0-120 km/hr in 13 seconds on 35s... isn't really slow...