Does anyone actually get the posted 22/24 mpg?

Clocking in at 10k miles with Nitto Ridge Grapplers and just road tripped 5 hrs to Hilton Head, SC and averaged 20.6. I'm definitely cool with that since I've been averaging 18 lately.
 
Clocking in at 10k miles with Nitto Ridge Grapplers and just road tripped 5 hrs to Hilton Head, SC and averaged 20.6. I'm definitely cool with that since I've been averaging 18 lately.
Report mpg without factors below is not really helpful information/reference:

LC model (1958, LCLC, LCFE)
Light gas pedal or not (average speed)
A/C
Tire/wheel size
Roof rack, roof bars
Rock slide, running board
ACC stuffs
Lifted kit, level kit
FE Skid plate, LCLC skid plate
Loaded or not with people/gears

My 2-cent suggestion!
 
Less rolling resistance

1. lighter weight

2. Less mass requiring less inertia

3. less friction due to smaller contact patch

4. better aerodynamics if narrower.

However there is definitely a point where tires get too small and things go the other way where the gearing pushes engine rpm higher to maintain the same speed and mpg actually decreases
Back in ‘91, I bought a ‘91 Chevy G-20 conversion van. As is usually the case, the OEM wheels were lacking in ‘robustness’. I think they are referred to as pizza cutters buy some on this forum. Three years later, when I replaced the worn tires, I bought one or two size larger Michelin (and therefore wider) tires. The van looked much better with them on it. Highway Fuel economy dropped from 20 mpg, to 18 mpg, if that.
 
Report mpg without factors below is not really helpful information/reference:

LC model (1958, LCLC, LCFE)
Light gas pedal or not (average speed)
A/C
Tire/wheel size
Roof rack, roof bars
Rock slide, running board
ACC stuffs
Lifted kit, level kit
FE Skid plate, LCLC skid plate
Loaded or not with people/gears

My 2-cent suggestion!
Stock LCLC base so no cross bars, wimpy skids, running boards, 18" wheels and LTX Trails
~ 50-100lbs of gear - Yakima Exo Swing Base + gear box or bikes or skis, activity dependent, less impact on aerodynamics than roof storage (and easier to access)
~ 175lbs of kids
~130lbs of dog
~200 lbs of driver
~an unspecified number of lbs of front seat passenger (I'm no fool, if it every got out I blabbed the remains wouldn't be identifiable. Let's just say bigger than a breadbox and smaller than a house.)

Mileage:
Mid to high teens on short errands less than 30minutes
Goes up to around 20mpg for more prolonged city driving where the temp gets up to normal operating range
Weekend road trips gets us into the 25-30mpg range on the highway, depending on how much uphill vs downhill. I don't drive like grandpa, I keep up with the flow of traffic but I also don't thrash the engine going up the pass and will let it coast as much as possible on the way down.
Overall MPG has been 22.1 per the vehicle's computer. I've not cross checked with any calculations of my own, I bought it to drive, not to do math problems. I don't notice a significant difference whether it's just me by myself or loaded up with the family unit but I probably drive more "assertively" on my own without all the distractions and back/side seat driving.
Of note I recently put Michelin X-Ice SUV's on for the winter which seems to have shaved off about 1 mpg.
 
I have a FE and prior to switching to the KO3s, I was getting 20.8 -21.2 MPG.

Since the KO3s in stock size, I am getting anywhere from 20.2 - 20.5.

That is fine with me.
 
I just put fuel in my '25 1958 for the first time today, the fuel economy hovered around 20 MPG for my first tank. I drove maybe 70 miles of highway and rest were street with some hills included.
 
My gas mileage is disappointing. I have to work to get 15/16 MPG. I have tried everything. I am in ECO mode. I have the First Edition, which has a slightly aggressive all-terrain tire. I have the First Edition roof rack. I am very disappointed with the mileage. I think Toyota exaggerated the MPG estimate on the window sticker. Typically, I get the lowest MPG advertised, and I would be happy with that. But I am getting five mpg worse than the lowest MPG advertised. That has never happened to me. Count me in if there is a class action lawsuit on this issue.
This is normal. Embrace it! EPA estimates are not meant to be real, they’re meant to achieve compliance.
 
Does anyone get close to the stated mpg. I am 7 months in with 5,000 miles on my totally stock first addition and now using winter fuel I find it hard to get 18 mpg use premium gas since day one and two oil changes using AMS signature. Very unhappy and looking to find some relief.
 
Thank you so much! I agree, I think over sizing the tires, and making them poke out just makes it look stupid. It is a luxury SUV for crying out loud.. if you want KO3’s, fine.. just do The OEM size. Keep them within the wheel wells, as required by law in some states.
Very unhappy with the range between lower than expected mpg 15-20% lower and the tiny gas tank, I now will need to stop on my 280 mile trip to NH. I could have gone electric if I wanted this situation.
 
I'm clocking in at 17.2 mpg. 700 miles on ODM, I drive like a grandma, I have only put in premium gas, stock wheels, in ECO mode 100% of the time. What gives???? I should be at minimum getting 22 mpg. I wouldn't really care all that much except the tank is tiny...15 gallons. I only get a range of 280 miles per fill.
Same here
 
To each their own, but if I worried over fuel mileage as some do here, it would take away from the simple enjoyment of just driving the Land Cruiser to begin with, and why bother then? :)
 
To each their own, but if I worried over fuel mileage as some do here, it would take away from the simple enjoyment of just driving the Land Cruiser to begin with, and why bother then? :)
I agree. It's a big box pushing wind going down the road, weighs over 2 1/2 tons, full time 4WD, and the complaints about gas mileage, acceleration, wind noise, not "sporty" handling...ugh.
 
Getting 24+ mpg in local driving with at least 5 mins of warmup in the mornings.
I’ve got the mid trim with 20 inch wheels and drive in ECO mode.

Before anyone roasts me, yes I fill up my Land Cruiser with regular fuel. It’s a personal choice.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_3633.jpeg
    IMG_3633.jpeg
    140 KB · Views: 18
The mileage on my “Land-Cruiser” mid-grade model with the premium pack, cross bars and 18” stock tires is consistently getting 20.9 to 21.9 mpg combo city highway driving in regular mode. Normal driving, not to slow not to fast with premium fuel.

First oil change at 1k, second oil change and tire rotation at 5k, mpg increased as the motor broke in.

Longer trips with highway driving average freeway speed 65-70 typically 22.9 mpg with the cross bars.
IMG_1577.jpeg


7,284 miles on the clock, just removed the cross bars today, have to see if it helps
mpg, hopefully reduces the slight occasional rapid swirling wind noise.

I have driven it in ECO mode for long highway trips, 376 miles round trip and did get 22.9 mpg in bad weather, rain and wind.
 
Getting 24+ mpg in local driving with at least 5 mins of warmup in the mornings.
I’ve got the mid trim with 20 inch wheels and drive in ECO mode.

Before anyone roasts me, yes I fill up my Land Cruiser with regular fuel. It’s a personal choice.
You use 87 octane?
 
Getting 24+ mpg in local driving with at least 5 mins of warmup in the mornings.
I’ve got the mid trim with 20 inch wheels and drive in ECO mode.

Before anyone roasts me, yes I fill up my Land Cruiser with regular fuel. It’s a personal choice.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but 5 minutes of idling is just wasting gas unless it's to warm up the cabin. Modern engines need maybe 30 seconds of idle, then gentle driving for a few minutes. This has been a holdover from the carb (and choke) era...
 
Back
Top