My 1999 8 cyl Land Cruiser said 91 as well. But, I heard a couple trusted mechanics say that if the truck didn’t knock with 87, it was just fine. Might risk warranty however. I will report back when my new LC comes in soon.
2024 Land Cruiser require Premium Fuel?
- Thread starter Bronconomore
- Start date
My 1999 8 cyl Land Cruiser said 91 as well. But, I heard a couple trusted mechanics say that if the truck didn’t knock with 87, it was just fine. Might risk warranty however. I will report back when my new LC comes in soon.
For 200,000 miles in a new LC the extra fuel costs of premium figures to be about $3,600+\-
So let's say $30/month if one is driving 20,000miles/year.
I totally get that everyone budgets in different ways and prioritizes different things... but owning a 2022 RS3, looking at purchasing a $55,000-75,000 vehicle for a daily and choosing to take issue with an extra $30/month in fuel does seem a little funny to me too.
But hey, variety makes the world go round!
You guys can run 87 if you want. I'm running 110 Race Fuel. Nothing is to good for my Sweet Pea!
So it’s what TRD Jon said after the “91 recommended” comment, he said….”but not required….” “Do what u want with that info but bro I’m not putting premium gas in any Toyota or my LC…” His opinion only, but this is a few auto journalists now that have said this and just shrugged it off. I get it as these guys probably only keep the vehicle a couple years at most.
About 15 years ago, I was listening to NPR’s Car Talk on a Saturday morning and the subject of premium gas came up. I have always trusted Tom and Ray, and feel like they give honest, informed, academic (they had graduate degrees in engineering, I believe) useful car care information. Tom died some years ago, but Ray is still serving the community in a similar fashion. I distinctly remember both Tom and Ray saying that unless your engine starts to ping, there really is no reason to use premium if you are satisfied with the performance you are getting. As I said above, my 1999 LC has 250,000 miles on it and it has only drunk 87 octane. I will report back if my 2024 LC FE doesn’t do well on the cheap stuff.
I have heard the same. My 2000 BMW 328i never saw premium when I owned it, and that thing ran amazing.
- Moderator
- #187
I have owned many 91+ octane vehicles and rarely have put anything other than the cheap stuff. I visited Yellowstone a few years back and I did have to put in midgrade to keep the Beemer from being sluggish but after I got home back to the cheap stuff. I have never ever had any engine damage. To each their own, but some of the concerns in this thread are kinda of comical.
87 to 93 is about $1.20 difference where I live, so that 20k mile a year is actually a little over $1,000 a year difference or about $10,500 over 200k miles. And that's with gas prices under somewhat control right now. Trust me if it was only $30 more a month this wouldnt even be a conversation lol and yall thinking its that little, well i understand your confusion. Also we dont have 91 here. It goes 87 - 89 - 93.
Last edited:
This is from a video that I posted yesterday of a First Edition at the dealership.
When I purchased my 1st edition LC at Rivera Toyota in Mount Kisco, NY, I asked about the need for premium fuel.
Liam, one of the sales managers, then called Toyota’s East Coast headquarters and was told the following which he passed on to me: “87 octane/regular fuel is okay to use and will neither harm the engine nor void the warranty. The window sticker mpg rating is based on 89 octane.”
This was related to me in a sales situation, so probably best to proceed with some caution.
As my 2012 Benz E350 got older, I began running regular instead of the required premium fuel.
I did that for the past 4-5 years with no issues, relying on the car’s computer to make the necessary adjustments.
Liam, one of the sales managers, then called Toyota’s East Coast headquarters and was told the following which he passed on to me: “87 octane/regular fuel is okay to use and will neither harm the engine nor void the warranty. The window sticker mpg rating is based on 89 octane.”
This was related to me in a sales situation, so probably best to proceed with some caution.
As my 2012 Benz E350 got older, I began running regular instead of the required premium fuel.
I did that for the past 4-5 years with no issues, relying on the car’s computer to make the necessary adjustments.
- Moderator
- #191
This reinforces my suspicion, Toyota had an MPG goal, and could only achieve it with premium fuel.
- Jun 8, 2024
- 284
- Media
- 27
- 441
- Vehicles
- 2007 Toyota Tundra 4X4 Double Cab 5.7L V8, 2015 Chevrolet SS LS3 V8
ASTM D4814 specifications for AKI is 87 Octane.
Suggest sticking to 91 Octane or higher. Everyone here is citing examples of naturally aspirated engines being run with standard grade fuel. This is a turbocharged engine that already has a healthy static compression ratio before we throw positive manifold pressure/air density at it.
At a minimum if run on 87 Octane it will probably pull timing which will kill fuel economy, and reduce boost pressure a bit reducing power.
Worst case scenario on a hot day getting worked pulling a trailer or loaded down with gear you end up with damage from pre-detonation. Or get a self protective reduced power fault.
Turbocharged engines benefit from frequent oil changes to keep turbos happy and fuel dilution in the oil at bay. Premium fuel to reduce knock risks and other bad things like actual catastrophic pre-detonation that melts pistons, like those more frequent OCI’s is relatively cheap insurance against potentially expensive problems down the road.
All good info, but why is the Tacoma i-FORCE Max happy with 87?
I think it’s because the Tacoma has a different type of Johnson Rod.
I saw a video the other day on here. It showed the sticker on the inside of the gas cap door that said premium fuel only.
- Jun 8, 2024
- 284
- Media
- 27
- 441
- Vehicles
- 2007 Toyota Tundra 4X4 Double Cab 5.7L V8, 2015 Chevrolet SS LS3 V8
I have no idea to be honest. It’s quite possible the power ratings and fuel economy ratings are based on 87 Octane for both engines. The EPA fuel economy cycle is pretty lame and not reflective of highway speeds in many states now so it’s no surprise in actual use with 87, 89, 91, or 93 Octane EPA highway numbers are tough to achieve.
As far as the Tacoma and Tundra being rated to use 87 Octane I personally still wouldn’t use that grade in a turbocharged engine. I don’t drive a ton of miles each year though, so if I were to buy a new Land Cruiser and got 20 MPG average driving 10-12,000 miles per year the extra cost of premium isn’t a make or break proposition for me. Since I’m mostly driving two lane rural highways at 65-70 MPH I might average closer to 23-25 MPG, and the cost difference is even less worrying.
- Moderator
- #197
I don't see where a turbo charger would require premium fuel. It will be tuned for premium fuel and achieve better performance, but the turbo is just forced air, packing more air into the combustion chamber, which will require more fuel etc... but as log as it's not pinging on 87 ............
- Jun 8, 2024
- 284
- Media
- 27
- 441
- Vehicles
- 2007 Toyota Tundra 4X4 Double Cab 5.7L V8, 2015 Chevrolet SS LS3 V8
I’ve owned 2 turbocharged cars to this point in life, both of them ran better and achieved better fuel economy on 91 Octane.
What will remain to be seen is whether or not the ECU on the T24A-FTS will recognize higher octane fuel and take advantage of it by advancing timing or making a bit higher boost. I have read that the fuel, ignition, and boost tables Toyota has on their newest generation of ECU’s are massive so the potential is there. Ford EcoBoost engines will take advantage of higher octane fuel, Mazda as well. Will be interesting to see some real world test results with consistent controls of variables such as weather, road conditions etc.
What will remain to be seen is whether or not the ECU on the T24A-FTS will recognize higher octane fuel and take advantage of it by advancing timing or making a bit higher boost. I have read that the fuel, ignition, and boost tables Toyota has on their newest generation of ECU’s are massive so the potential is there. Ford EcoBoost engines will take advantage of higher octane fuel, Mazda as well. Will be interesting to see some real world test results with consistent controls of variables such as weather, road conditions etc.
- Jun 8, 2024
- 284
- Media
- 27
- 441
- Vehicles
- 2007 Toyota Tundra 4X4 Double Cab 5.7L V8, 2015 Chevrolet SS LS3 V8
I would hope so, but Toyota is famously conservative.
That conservative mindset does make me optimistic that the T24A-FTS will be fine in all engine load conditions with 87 Octane. Toyota has been good in the past understanding that most of their customers are cheap skates and want their vehicle to run on low grade cat urine pulling a trailer up a mountain in 105F ambient temperatures.
That conservative mindset does make me optimistic that the T24A-FTS will be fine in all engine load conditions with 87 Octane. Toyota has been good in the past understanding that most of their customers are cheap skates and want their vehicle to run on low grade cat urine pulling a trailer up a mountain in 105F ambient temperatures.
Similar threads
