Who’s got this best mpg?

[2001LC]

15.98 mpg yearly average city driving.

That works out to 15.49 during winter fuel blend and 16.72 summer fuel. I think my mpg drops in the winter mostly due to the fuel blend and to a lesser extent due to warm up time (80%/20%).

Tips:

a) I found that running the climate control on auto reduced mpg by and annual average of ~1.44mpg. By turn off the auto fan I raised my yearly average, which was 14.54 mpg with very little difference between summer and winter.

b) Extend time between fill ups by planning trips, avoiding multiple short trips which reduce number of cold starts.

c) Avoid rush hour traffic.

d) Plan routs with fewer lights and stop signs.

e) Light foot, slow take off.

f) Synthetic oil 5w-30 & gear lube 75w-90, K&N filter. Third row seats removed.

Premium gas from Phillips 66.

2001 TLC with 100,000 miles, OEM tire and wheels size, Michelin LTX M/S 275/70R16 114H.

5,250ft Above Sea Level, up to 11,500ft ASL occasionally (camping and skiing)


Trivia: $6,574.00 spent on gas in 3 ½ years (38,583 miles).

Anyone else have any gas savings tips?

Someone recommended replacing the O2 sensor around 75,000 miles.

Someone else told me he increased his mpg on a V-12 by 40% from 9 to 12 mpg with a cold air intake and a flow master muffler (10%/90%), hard to believe.

Note: The 200 TLC with a 5.7 liter has the same mpg rating as the 100 TLC; Toyota recommends 0W-20 oil, I hear uses synthetic ATF.

Notes:
I have recently changed my Transmission & power steering ATF and bearing & propeller shaft lubes' to all synthetics. Added one can of 44K and put 30PSI in front tires. I’m hoping this raises my average to 16.2 or better ~15.7mpg winter and ~ 17 summers.

I will be cleaning the throttle body and testing PCV soon. I’m looking into the possible benefit of a PCV catch can to help keep intake system cleaner.

I will test my O2 sensors and ECT with any drop in mpg or sooner.

 

[Colicious]

11-12mpg, all highway

99 cruiser, 3" lift, 315 toyo mt, stock gears

 

[spressomon]

11-12mpg, all highway

99 cruiser, 3" lift, 315 toyo mt, stock gears

I don't know about sea level...but at 4,500' and up the 4.88's increased my MPG about 12% overall. Probably not a good payback...but FYI.

 

[Jim_Chow]

15.98 mpg yearly average city driving.

Anyone else have any gas savings tips?

Make sure your front wheel bearings are properly torqued. The Toyota dealer did my bearings at 60K mi one year ago, way overtorqued (probably closer to 70 ft-lbs on the left side outer axle nut). This was during my 60K mi service. I had the dealer do the front wheel bearings at ATF, I did the rest. I drove about 3K highway miles on it (mileage was definitely ~2mpg lower than before the 60K service despite the new air filter, fluids, cleaned TB). Over the summer, I replaced all rotors/pads and torqued the bearings properly according to the FSM (both sides read the same torque on the spring scale). Fuel economy increased by 2mpg immediately (back to the way it was before the 60K service!) and has stayed at that level since!

 

[2001LC]

Make sure your front wheel bearings are properly torqued. The Toyota dealer did my bearings at 60K mi one year ago, way overtorqued (probably closer to 70 ft-lbs on the left side outer axle nut). This was during my 60K mi service. I had the dealer do the front wheel bearings at ATF, I did the rest. I drove about 3K highway miles on it (mileage was definitely ~2mpg lower than before the 60K service despite the new air filter, fluids, cleaned TB). Over the summer, I replaced all rotors/pads and torqued the bearings properly according to the FSM (both sides read the same torque on the spring scale). Fuel economy increased by 2mpg immediately (back to the way it was before the 60K service!) and has stayed at that level since!

I had a similar experience: I recently replaced the boots on the right driveshaft and pulled the steering knuckle. While I had it apart I decided to clean and grease inside of the spindle, thrust bushing and axle roller bearings along with the wheel bearings. The grease in the spindle, thrust bushing and roller bearing area look good as new, and was a blue color with a very light texture, probably the factory synthetic lithium NLGI #1. The wheel bearing grease also looked good and was red, probably NLGI #2 most likely done at 30,000 miles maintenance. I bought the TLC at 58,000 miles and had a Toyota Dealer do the 60,000 mile maintenance, I later found out they didn’t do the wheel bearings, can’t figure out what they charged me $700.00 for.

I used Mobil 1 NLGI #2 on the thrust bushing, axle roller bearing and inside the spindle as I hadn’t found the synthetic lithium NLGI #1 that the FSM called for “yet”. I’ve been told by a shop that the only problem they see with NLGI #2 in this application is a groan while slow turning when cold, but that it didn’t hurt anything. My only concern is heat build up as it is a very tight area for the heavier grease, but being synthetic it shouldn’t be a problem.

I torque the tension nut to 43lb ft spun the hub to settle the bearings, then loosened too hand tight and torque to 5lb ft. (FSM spec 5 to 7lb ft) I use my digital fish scale at the 12:00 and only read 2.5lb ft (FSM spec10 to 15lb ft) on the scale in the direction of travel. I tighten to 10lb ft and read 8lb ft on the scale. I decided to go with ~7lb ft on the tension nut with ~3lb ft on the scale. My thinking here is the wheel bearing is broke-in (the FSM called for new bearings and races) and the synthetic Mobil 1 is better-quality grease then the FSM called for. Once I tighten the lock nut to 47lb ft the fish scale read about 3.5lb ft. I recheck with the scale once I had the wheel on and the scale read 15lb ft.

That was the right side; the left side looked like someone else packed it. The grease was black inside the spindle, thrust bushing and axle roller bearing area, also in the wheel bearing area. The drive shaft axle was discolored where the axle bearing rolls on it. The spindle was scorched where the wheel bearings sit on it as was the bearings at the points where it sits on the spindle axle. The back of the spindle was worn about .13mm were the bearing presses up against it and the claw washer was grooved about 2mm at the point were it contact the bearing. It looked like someone left the tension nut at 43lb ft. Causing the bearings to over heat and wear at the pressure points, until the excess pressure caused it to wear until it found its’ optimal tension (torque).

Edited 10-29-10: I now believe the left bearing was to loose and this is what caused the damage.
SEE: https://forum.ih8mud.com/100-series-cruisers/420496-wheel-bearing-fsm-torque-light-just-right.html

I R&R the axle, spindle and bearings with emery cloth and assembled the thrust bushing and axle bearing with Amsoil synthetic lithium NLGI #1(I had found some #1) and use Mobil 1 NLGI #2 on the wheel bearings, put I in a new claw washer and used a thicker snap ring to bring the gap to less then .2mm (.12mm) per FSM. I torque the same as I did on the right and got the same reading on the fish scale.

I plane on R&R both thrust bushings, axle bearings and wheel bearings again in the spring to see what if any difference/effect the various greases I use had, and if the left side is holding up to spec. Unless something sways me I will be using Amsoil synthetic lithium moly NLGI #1 on the thrust bushing & bearings and NLGI #2 on the wheel bearings. I am going with the moly because of all the good things I heard and read about it, one of which its’ ability to restore metal surfaces. My only concern with moly in the bearings is possible heat build up.

Sorry for the off topic long post, but I thought you would appreciate it Jim. I don’t think I’ll gain much from R&R of the left wheel bearing as it had loosened itself up probably before I bought the TLC, but I may pick up some from the synthetic greases, oils, ATF and power steering I used. The first tank of gas mpg was encouraging but need at least through the winter to get a good average.

 

[2001LC]

My MPG just went up after recently replacing the PS upstream O2 sensor. Now I am thinking about replacing the DS upstream O2 sensor even though I don't have a code. I am getting, now, about 15mpg (14.5-15.5mpg...if I stayed at 60-63mph I can easily get 20% better efficiency) which, post O2 sensor install, is up from 13.5mpg even before the code was displayed... with my heavy pig of a rig on the highway (13.5-14.5 around town): 4,000' elevation and up; 70mph; 87 octane. I am pretty happy with that considering how my rig is set-up, overall weight, turning 35" MT/R rubber and the elevation factor.

Pulling the trailer however is an automatic 20% decrease in MPG .

Did your check engine light go on?
Or did you replace the O2 sensors just to see if you could get better gas millage?

 

[2001LC]

Results to date:

We have three groups with the average in each group running at;

1) 15.63MPG
2) 14.25MPG
3) 11.40MPG

Assuming all TLC are well maintained, conservative driving probably contributes the most to higher gas mileage. Conservative use of the automatic climate control and 100% gas (none blended) coming in second.

Consider have your O2 sensors checked if you can not get your MPG up to the number one group on an annually basis. Naturally if you’re towing, have weight adding modifications or live in a very hilly area you’ll have to adjust your mpg accordingly.

 

[Jim_Chow]

Got some results over the holiday running AZ gas vs. CA gas (all gas was chevron 91). My route goes from Tucson to Quartzite, AZ (at the border) to South Orange County, CA. Going there, we hammered it to make it for T-giving dinner, 75mph into a stiff headwind, 16.4 mpg, all AZ gas, virtually empty vehicle (2 adults, 1 child). While there, I drove 100 mi (about 80mi freeway, 20 mi on hilly surface streets) w/ 5 passengers, no gear, 16.0 mpg. We gas up in CA. On the way home, to Quartzite, we got 15.9 mpg (265 mi, no wind, 69-70mph avg on cruise control, heavily loaded vehicle). We gas up in Quartzite, drive on cruise control at 72-73mph to Tucson, gas up (cram as much of the cheapo $3.25/gal chevron 91 into the tank as I could)...still 17.5 mpg. So the AZ gas increased the fuel economy by about 10% (or more due to the slightly higher speed) under identical interior loads, identical tire pressure, in very similar weather.

 

[2001LC]

Using blended gasoline “without a doubt” reduces gas mileage by 8 to 10% whether highway or city. I have a hard time understanding; how reducing MPG with watered down gas helps the air quality.

 

[uzj100]

I have added 285s at 42 psi, removed 1 third row seat (44lbs), changed to new air filter pushed my roof rack cross bars all the way back and run my heat without the AC on. I am also following the speed limit based on the fact that 285s are larger and run the cruise control as much as possible. I have 135k miles on a 2000 LC. I run 5w30 regular oil and regular diff fluids (no synthetics yet in diffs). This next tank of fuel will be interesting. I always run 87 octane.

 

[1loudLX]

*********runs Around Screaming Like A Retarded Maniac Mumbling Something About Mpgs, Tire Pressures, Wheel Size, Wings And Blood Alcohol Content*******

 

[2001LC]

I have added 285s at 42 psi, removed 1 third row seat (44lbs), changed to new air filter pushed my roof rack cross bars all the way back and run my heat without the AC on. I am also following the speed limit based on the fact that 285s are larger and run the cruise control as much as possible. I have 135k miles on a 2000 LC. I run 5w30 regular oil and regular diff fluids (no synthetics yet in diffs). This next tank of fuel will be interesting. I always run 87 octane.

The greatest benefit will come from a slow easy acceleration while getting up to the speed limit, and a steady foot on the throttle (don't be a throttle jockey) keep the RPMs as steady as possible. IMHO one can get better MPG following these guidelines, than by using the cruise control.

Try turning the heat all the way up while keeping the fan off or on a low setting. The electrical draw form the fan puts a heavy load on the alternator using up as much or more horse power than the AC pump.

I’ve been wondering, if, the high output segment conductor type alternator used on the TLC starting in 2003, would reduce the load on the engine (drag on horse power) when using the accessories and whether it would bolt in without any modifications?

I would be very interested to hear back from you after 3 tanks full of 87, than see if you get any diffrence from 3 tanks of 91 octane. Note IMO the higher above sea level the more effect from octane.

 

[Jim_Chow]

Also with the cruise control, it's mostly effective if the road is pretty flat. If there's a big hill, you're better off disengaging the cruise and either gradually building up speed/momentum before the climb then keeping the throttle constant uphill, or keeping the throttle constant on the approach and letting the speed drop over the climb and let the speed gradually build back up as you crest. The cruise control will try to hang on uphill and then suddenly gun the engine...bad on fuel economy!

 

[1loudLX]

then suddenly gun the engine...bad on fuel economy!

so wait, if everyone is only getting 2-3 more mpg then me thats not that bad considering im gunning the engine most of the time. What is bad is that i got half (read:12mpg less) in the loaner RX350 i had!

Basicly the 100 gets the same fuel mileage then give or take 2-3mpg for the driver?

 

[hks3sgte]

Land Cruisers have always had fuel efficient engines. For their size/weight. It's not as good as a Corolla but it weighs almost 3x as much. What would happen if a corolla weighed 6,000 lbs?

Anyway, my wife mostly drives the 100 (all 110 lbs of her). She averages 14 city and up to 19 (can probably make 20) hwy. Completely stock 2004 wth 59k miles. 87 octane.

 

[2001LC]

I've been wondering if the 2003 with its' 5 speed transmission, updated alternator and changes to the fuel system and throttle is capable of better MPG.

It would be nice to see more 2003 and 2004 chim in, as well as 2005 and up (I think 2005 is when they went to VVT)

IS 87 octane recommend in the 2004?

 

[hks3sgte]

I imagine the 5 speed is what makes the biggest difference. But then again, it's all in the driving style.

87 is the recommended fuel octane for an '04

 

[1loudLX]

(I think 2005 is when they went to VVT)

2006/2007 are the only 100s i thought that had VVT-i

 

[2001LC]

I'm not sure if VVT started in 2005 or 2006.

 

[2001LC]

I imagine the 5 speed is what makes the biggest difference. But then again, it's all in the driving style.

87 is the recommended fuel octane for an '04

I agree