2024 Land Cruiser require Premium Fuel?

Perhaps that was a factor in the conflict between the initial leaked fuel economy and the officially released number. It could be that the initial 27mpg was based on using premium and the revised 25mpg is based on regular.

I have a Mazda CX-30 Turbo that gets one set of power and fuel economy numbers on regular, and a better set of power numbers on premium. My personal experience has also been a slight increase in mileage when I give it the full 94. The engine adapts to what you feed it.
 
fhb said:
FWIW, all the press I have seen or read for the new Tacoma Hybrid (same engine as LC ), is that regular fuel only is required. The above comments are the first time I’ve heard that premium fuel will be required for the Max engine.
Click to expand...
Looks like the same engine in the Tacoma can run 87 octane.

Screenshot 2024-02-29 at 4.08.17 PM.png
 
Nowhere near enough speculation on this forum. I am sure Toyota enjoys not contributing. /s
 
Came here to post the same thing. Very disappointing that it requires premium. I'm going to be considerably less likely to go Land Cruiser over 4Runner now... especially if 4Runner hybrid goes on regular.
 
Well that's too bad. But, to put this in perspective, the fuel economy rating on the LC is 10.4 l/100km (Canadian). That happens to be the same gas mileage I get on a Mazda CX-30 and a Mercedes C300 wagon, which also both use premium. So in that context, I think this is still pretty good, given the difference is vehicle sizes and aerodynamics!
 
LCNorth said:
Well that's too bad. But, to put this in perspective, the fuel economy rating on the LC is 10.4 l/100km (Canadian). That happens to be the same gas mileage I get on a Mazda CX-30 and a Mercedes C300 wagon, which also both use premium. So in that context, I think this is still pretty good, given the difference is vehicle sizes and aerodynamics!
Click to expand...
I tolerate premium on performance vehicles. My beef isn't so much the cost increase but the lack of transparency on pricing. Regular is posted big and clear at every gas station. Premium can be as little as $0.40/gal cost up or as much as $0.90/gal cost up over regular and it wildly varies in my area and station to station. I don't know the cost of premium until I pull up to the pump. I use an app to check premium prices, but it is only so accurate. The Sheetz stations are always 100% correct. The one Exxon station near work regularly puts into the app $0.40/gal lower than what they actually are on the pumps. I've caught them doing it 3 times now.

I wish that we'd just do away with regular all together because manufacturers could design for 91 or 93 across the board and we'd get better fuel economy and economy of scale by making only one type. The manufacturers have actually lobbied for this.
 
Dragoon said:
Toyota USA hasn't released an official Specification sheet for the new Land Cruiser yet so my money is that it's the same as the Tacoma.
Click to expand...
The manual is out....your money has been lost. Premium fuel it is.
 
Bronconomore said:
Then why does the LC require Premium fuel? I am so confused. Never believe what you read ony what you see?
Click to expand...
The engines are, for most purposes, the same, but the software can be different between the two. It would be nice if Toyota came out and said that you could use 87 but the vehicle will only make X power. I haven't seen Toyota do that on an individual model in a long time, though. They effectively do this with the Highlander and RX. Same engine, different software. Highlander makes 265hp on 87 and RX makes 275hp on 91. But they still don't specifically call out that it is OK to run the RX on 87. It is still a little perplexing why the peak numbers are the same between the Tacoma Hybrid and Land Cruiser despite requesting different fuel.

IMO, you can run 87 on a Land Cruiser without it really being detrimental to the vehicle. That's up to each owner's risk tolerance, though.
 
Last edited:
I will never buy a car that requires premium gas(except with plugins). I had a 2016 GLE350d and I had zero issue in my almost 7.5 years ownership. It was big and heavy, but only burnt 7L/100km on highways (My previous ML350 BT was even more efficient, achieving 6L/100KM Hwy). But MB's reliabiity has been going down as I heard. My next choice would be either gle 450e or x5 50e. Even though I really like the LC, I guess I'll have to pass.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Esquire
Pre-Owned LC LC -- No Premium PKG --Auction Vehicle-- 1,200 Miles -- $16k off....Down to $76,995 today only!!
Replies
14
Views
1K
HammerTheWall
HammerTheWall
cyclesurfer
New to Land Cruiser - braking is "interesting"
Replies
15
Views
2K
No15
No15
W
It all boils down to range anxiety.
2 3
Replies
41
Views
3K
Winchester44
W
gregj992
💵 For Sale Selling 20" Premium Wheels - 2024 Land Cruiser
Replies
0
Views
656
gregj992
gregj992
Esquire
Dealer Selling LC to Their Own Dealership
Replies
11
Views
989
LCOceans
L

Latest Discussions

Back
Top