2024 Land Cruiser require Premium Fuel?

[Bronconomore]

Not sure if this has been posted, but does the LC 2024 require premium gas only? With the now known much lower MPG it may very will take me out of the LC buyer and onto the 2025 4Runner gang.

 

[APIOQM]

Regular gas

Edit: guess I was wrong

 

[Bronconomore]

Regular gas

That is confirmed?

 

[supersix]

From my understanding you'll be able to run regular, however for optimal performance premium will be required. This is a snippet from a Carbuzz article comparing the Grand Highlander to the Lexus RX 500 Hybrid:

When asked about the differences between the Grand Highlander's output and the Lexus RX 500h F-Sport Performance, Toyota's engineers told us the key difference. The answer... is fuel. "We rated the vehicle using regular fuel," Toyota's engineer explained. "If you fed it premium, it would yield superior performance.

So if you were to feed premium fuel (91 octane or above) to the Grand Highlander, it would almost certainly match the RX 500h with 367 hp and 406 lb-ft of torque. That might not be a huge gain, but perhaps some Grand Highlander owners might want to maximize their performance by spending a bit more on gasoline. Conversely, the engineers confirmed it would be safe to run the Lexus on regular fuel; you would simply lose out on about five hp and six lb-ft of torque.

 

[Nuke]

Even on the GX550 with the twin-turbo V6, premium fuel is only "recommended." Sure, if I were towing in the summer in the desert SW, would use premium, but not as a general rule. Just be sure one has enough onboard fuel to bypass Baker, CA., or any other small desert town for that matter...

 

[Economist]

Even on the GX550 with the twin-turbo V6, premium fuel is only "recommended." Sure, if I were towing in the summer in the desert SW, would use premium, but not as a general rule. Just be sure one has enough onboard fuel to bypass Baker, CA., or any other small desert town for that matter...

I think its required, someone posted a photo inside the fuel cover and it said "premium fuel required". If it ends up taking regular, that may push me from the LC to the GX

 

[Nuke]

I think its required, someone posted a photo inside the fuel cover and it said "premium fuel required". If it ends up taking regular, that may push me from the LC to the GX

A post somewhere, possibly on the GX550 forum, indicated the owner's manual says "recommended". Need to confirm this, as I am with you, this is a key factor for me to consider the GX. Update - Yes, now I see the photo on the GX550 forum. Rats! Update 2 - Found the Owners Manual online, and it definitely specifies 91 octane. Double Rats!

 

[Rocket]

Wait. I need clarification. The LC now requires premium gas and get worse than expected MPG?

I had an early FJ Crusier that required premium and then Toyota changed engines after 2009 and the newer engine required regular grade. That can be a significant difference considering that the price between regular and premium in TN is approx $1/gal.

Looking less and less likely to get an LC if this is indeed the case.

 

[Nuke]

Wow, I have not heard this! For sure the V6 in the GX550 does, but it would not be like Toyota to demand premium fuel in the LC. However, being a turbocharged engine, anything is possible. Interest peaked!!!

 

[fhb]

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.

 

[Economist]

No we are talking about premium in the GX550, not the land cruiser. Land Cruiser confirmed regular gas and now seems the Lexus is confirmed for premium only. So not only do you factor in worse mpgs on the Lexus, but now also premium vs regular. This pretty much concludes my decision to stick with the land cruiser, even though it's only a few grand away from a GX overland. Bummer

 

[Nuke]

No we are talking about premium in the GX550, not the land cruiser. Land Cruiser confirmed regular gas and now seems the Lexus is confirmed for premium only. So not only do you factor in worse mpgs on the Lexus, but now also premium vs regular. This pretty much concludes my decision to stick with the land cruiser, even though it's only a few grand away from a GX overland. Bummer

I think we can agree, the top-end LC came in price-wise startlingly close to the GX. Tough call!

Additionally, seems I read that although the Toyota 2.4 turbo does not demand premium fuel, it certainly likes it. I suppose it depends on the parameters, such as the boost pressure. Strange, that essentially the same turbo V6 is in the Tundra, and detuned a bit for the GX, but nevertheless the GX specifies premium.

 

[qberg]

I think we can agree, the top-end LC came in price-wise startlingly close to the GX. Tough call!

Additionally, seems I read that although the Toyota 2.4 turbo does not demand premium fuel, it certainly likes it. I suppose it depends on the parameters, such as the boost pressure. Strange, that essentially the same turbo V6 is in the Tundra, and detuned a bit for the GX, but nevertheless the GX specifies premium.

I'm pretty confident that you could get away with regular in the GX for the reasons you have listed. Usually, when Lexus requires premium in a vehicle that shares a powertrain with Toyota, they give an extra 5-10hp. This one is a little confusing since it lines up perfectly with the detuned Tundra V6TT.

But, just like my wife's MINI Cooper S Clubman that makes only 189hp out of a turbo 2.0L, if it says to put premium in it, I'd probably put premium in it even though my brain says that it makes no sense. It's pretty hilarious that the main bay of my garage has a 2.0L 4cylinder turbo making 189hp (requiring premium) and beside it is a 1.6L 3cylinder turbo making 300hp (requiring premium). Why is the MINI doing so little with that much displacement while my Corolla manages so much more on the same fuel?!

 

[Dangler]

Does the GX550 require premium gas or just recommend it? As I’ve come to understand it there’s a big difference. My wife was recently shopping for a new car and this became a determining factor. Certain auto manufacturers (Audi as an example) make it clear that using less than 91 octane can be damaging to the engine. Others state that using 91 and above will improve performance but you can certainly burn 87 octane gas without risk to the engine.

 

[jnsplace]

From Google.

 

[Nuke]

Modern engines should be able to accommodate 87 or 91. Good grief! This said, I like what I see above. However, was this chart was released prior to the advent of the GX550? Hopefully it falls within the "Not shown." Unfortunately, in the GX550 owner's manual available online, and on the filler door, it specifies a minimum of 91 octane. Perplexing!

 

[Samister]

 

[qberg]

Is that Canada? Those MPG ratings don’t match up with US.

 

[Nuke]

Wow! This is contrary to all I have seen. I'm sure that turbo-driven engine would prefer premium, but hopefully not require it.

 

[Nuke]

Is that Canada? Those MPG ratings don’t match up with US.

Would Canada use MPG? I would think kilometers per liter.