wow thats a marginal difference vs a 6 cylinder truck with no hybrid. even less so that you have to run premium.
thanks for this example
LC250 hybrid real MPG (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter MeWantLC
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
wow thats a marginal difference vs a 6 cylinder truck with no hybrid. even less so that you have to run premium.
thanks for this example
Tacoma and 250 are both turbo 4.
Oh I didn’t realize he was talking about a 2024 Tacoma. But still it’s a pick up truck design with no hybrid and gets near the same mpg and doesn’t need premium fuel. I wish Toyota just make the LC a fuel efficiency hybrid instead of a performance hybrid because it seems like the turbo 4 provides enough sufficient power
Hybrid isn't really going to help much on highway mileage on a vehicle with this sort of drag coefficient. New 4runner may be what you are looking for.
Perhaps so if I can get over the look of the front end lol. Would be interesting to see if the limited full time version can be had without the hybrid
Just a note. I spent a few days in Pebble Beach at an Airbnb just at Monterey and the aquarium w/ family. Anyone that knows the area understands that there are tons of stop signs and as well as numerous up and down areas. For the most part, all of 17-mile drive is only 25MPH.
I ended up driving only a few miles each day (less than 10) and experienced something like 14-16 MPG each day.
The hybrid system configuration is really bad. It won't go into electric only mode much if ever and doesn't charge when you use the brakes. Back on the freeway I got 21mpg.
I really want an automotive journalist to get into the hybrid system configuration. With the hybrid system, the expectation is better range on the trail as well as needing to carry less fuel externally to make range goals vs previous vehicles. With the current experience, I can't imagine making 500 miles on dirt without carrying 3+ jerry cans.
I ended up driving only a few miles each day (less than 10) and experienced something like 14-16 MPG each day.
The hybrid system configuration is really bad. It won't go into electric only mode much if ever and doesn't charge when you use the brakes. Back on the freeway I got 21mpg.
I really want an automotive journalist to get into the hybrid system configuration. With the hybrid system, the expectation is better range on the trail as well as needing to carry less fuel externally to make range goals vs previous vehicles. With the current experience, I can't imagine making 500 miles on dirt without carrying 3+ jerry cans.
It’s not the same kind of hybrid system as a Prius. It is not designed for maximum efficiency.
Same here. We’re still running mid teens around town 500mi in. Highway jumps closer to 20.
I don't think these really exist these days. We're left with paid shills that just omit anything bad for fear of not getting invited on the next all expenses paid vehicle introduction.
Fort9378
SILVER Star
I'm at 1700 miles and still riding at 21mpg combined over all of that. 50/50ish highway and city. Not in eco mode or driving for mileage.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Threads
- 168
- Messages
- 5,354
- Location
- Durango, Colorado
- Website
- www.durangomagazine.com
I’m not even half way through my first tank but today saw 43.3MPG on my 15 mile commute to town. I left the house with about 40% charge on the hybrid battery. My Subaru would do the same drive averaging 55MPG. So I’m hoping to do better in the 250 with more battery. About 30% of the way the engine was off.
turbo8
Supporting Vendor
Now average it out going back home. 
I got 96 mpg going from 12k feet down to 5k feet.
I got 96 mpg going from 12k feet down to 5k feet.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Threads
- 168
- Messages
- 5,354
- Location
- Durango, Colorado
- Website
- www.durangomagazine.com
Now average it out going back home.
I got 96 mpg going from 12k feet down to 5k feet.
View attachment 3703255
Oh it’s going to drop. Hopefully not below 20.
edit: 19.6 when I got home
Last edited:
sleeoffroad
Supporting Vendor
Both are hybrid 4 cyl.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #119
A lot of good interesting data ! 
.
When I see avg of ~18 ish mpg @ 85 mph, I can't stop to compare vs my LC200 which does 14mpg lifted and with KO3's
. We drive a lot at 85 here in Texas. Certainly not the savings many were happy to read about in the early days of the LC250 launch. And there is the premium vs regular debacle... I see more rigs now on town, and it is really pretty 
.
.When I see avg of ~18 ish mpg @ 85 mph, I can't stop to compare vs my LC200 which does 14mpg lifted and with KO3's
. We drive a lot at 85 here in Texas. Certainly not the savings many were happy to read about in the early days of the LC250 launch. And there is the premium vs regular debacle... I see more rigs now on town, and it is really pretty .
ryanjl
SILVER Star
Just got back from Colorado.
Started from home in KC with around 1,000 miles on the odometer. I have removed the front air dam thingies and put on 275/70/18 E-rated Falken Wildpeaks, so I expect a little worse MPG. Was also driving with my XL-sized mountain bike hanging off the back on a 1Up hitch-mounted rack, and probably around 600 pounds worth of luggage and occupants. Cruise set on 80 mph.
Was getting 13.7 mpg on the way to Colorado, according to the carputer. That's way worse than I was expecting. On the way home today, I calculated the last stretch myself and wound up with around 14.2 mpg. Still bad.
Before I changed the tires, the stock tires were getting me around 19.5 mpg in town according to the carputer. I never really checked in-town with the Falkens as I picked them up about a week before I left town, and never checked highway MPG with the original tires because I never took a highway trip with them.
I didn't really buy this Land Cruiser for the MPG savings, as ultimately the price of gas is a drop in the bucket compared to the price of a new car. But where this really plays a factor is in the 18-gallon fuel tank. I was having to stop far more than I would like to refuel. Speaking-of, other commenters are correct: the vehicle's "miles remaining" ticker is way off. Today I refueled once when it said I had 11 miles remaining and only put around 14.5 gallons in.
My hope is that there is something with the powertrain that takes some miles to fully break in. But I'm at almost 3,000 miles now. Surely some heavier and bigger tires didn't put that big of a dent in the MPG?
Started from home in KC with around 1,000 miles on the odometer. I have removed the front air dam thingies and put on 275/70/18 E-rated Falken Wildpeaks, so I expect a little worse MPG. Was also driving with my XL-sized mountain bike hanging off the back on a 1Up hitch-mounted rack, and probably around 600 pounds worth of luggage and occupants. Cruise set on 80 mph.
Was getting 13.7 mpg on the way to Colorado, according to the carputer. That's way worse than I was expecting. On the way home today, I calculated the last stretch myself and wound up with around 14.2 mpg. Still bad.
Before I changed the tires, the stock tires were getting me around 19.5 mpg in town according to the carputer. I never really checked in-town with the Falkens as I picked them up about a week before I left town, and never checked highway MPG with the original tires because I never took a highway trip with them.
I didn't really buy this Land Cruiser for the MPG savings, as ultimately the price of gas is a drop in the bucket compared to the price of a new car. But where this really plays a factor is in the 18-gallon fuel tank. I was having to stop far more than I would like to refuel. Speaking-of, other commenters are correct: the vehicle's "miles remaining" ticker is way off. Today I refueled once when it said I had 11 miles remaining and only put around 14.5 gallons in.
My hope is that there is something with the powertrain that takes some miles to fully break in. But I'm at almost 3,000 miles now. Surely some heavier and bigger tires didn't put that big of a dent in the MPG?
Last edited:
