Did you reset your mpg calc? It was mentioned somewhere that the cars sit idling at port and if you don’t reset it when you get your car the total mpg gets skewed by that.
Real World mpg
- Thread starter fhb
- Start date
I did not. I will do that. Thank you.
your engine will also break-in over the course of the first 500-1000 miles and mpg should improve a bit over time
Octane ratings are a bit confusing. The 91 number is what you would see at the pump here in the US.
Octane rating - Wikipedia
I never knew. Great info. Thanks for linking.Octane ratings are a bit confusing. The 91 number is what you would see at the pump here in the US.
Octane rating - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Costco gas is the worst gas you can fill in your tank. Some will say it comes from the same source and it's BS. But I will ask you to test it yourself. Fill up 2 tanks in a row in costco and not your MPG on the second fill. Then fill up 2 tanks in a row in chevron and note the mpg on second fill. Compare the results. I tried this on my 5th gen and chevron gave me best range. Costco and here in canada we have petro canda gas stations which are the worst in gas mileage. Costco and petro canada gas does not even go in my lawnmower.
When I lived in Idaho, I was talking to the guy filling up the underground fuel tanks at a local Costco, from a Chevron labeled tanker, and he said that Costco pays his company to put 5X the amount of Techron in Costco fuel, as is in Chevron fuel.
Number of things happening here...
80mph is killer on fuel economy. The vehicles are rated by the EPA with a highway cycle that isn't anywhere near 80mph. Here's the one I found on the EPA site, but I thought they had changed it to include a little more high speed driving. Either way, this schedule looks nothing like your 80mph sustained trip.
Next, something with a lot of aero drag will see a TON of aero drag when the speeds start getting up there. 70mph is 31m/s. Squaring that is ~980m^2/s^2. Now do the same math with 80mph and compare them. Your aero drag at 80mph is ~31% bigger than your drag at 70mph. So, by driving 80 instead of 70, you've increased an already big number by 31%. High speed, big frontal area, and high coefficient of drag means that it takes a lot of energy just to maintain speed down the road.
Rolling resistance drag is a function of weight, which is also not great on the Land Cruiser, but it isn't the biggest chunk of the overall drag equation. Aero drag is still king at these speeds.
Headwinds can have a big impact out there in the plains. Anyone who has ever ridden a road bike can attest to how a small headwind really makes a noticeable difference. A 10mph headwind makes the vehicle moving at 80mph do the same work that it would do at 90mph.
Finally, a road trip like that isn't really the ideal situation for a hybrid. It's going to return the efficiency of a 2.4T pushing 5300lbs with a big aero profile at 80mph on flat land because there isn't much opportunity for the electric motor to recover energy. Hybrids really shine when you would normally have to waste some energy slowing the vehicle with mechanical brakes; the motor acts as a generator and pushes some energy to the battery to be used the next time you take off. You are getting the benefit of the friction loss of a 4 cylinder rather than a 6 cylinder, but you are probably still into the boost some amount because of the aforementioned 5300lbs big aero profile at 80mph -- which negates that friction loss benefit a little bit.
If you put 12k miles per year on your vehicle, and 10k of those are shlepping around town with some traffic, local driving, etc, you will be seeing the benefit of the hybrid 5 out of 6 miles that you put on the vehicle. It will be those particular road trips where it will feel like it isn't helping with efficiency.
FWIW, driving a similar route back east from Denver in my 4Runner was only 18mpg and I drove 70mph the whole way. So, you matched my efficiency, covered distance 14% faster, and had more power at your disposal for passing.
My 2000, 100 Series currently gets 11 MPG at best (was 13-14 before CATS stolen). I would appreciate and warrant an upgrade to the new LC for better fuel economy. I can't go anywhere with my 100 anymore without running low on fuel constantly. 20 MPG would almost double what I achieve now. 25 would obviously be much sweeter!
As a physicist I endorse this post. Same with my FJ, I only drive 80 if I’m in a hurry and don’t care how much gas I burn. Slowing down even just to 70 makes a lot of difference.
On our last two other vehicles, both hybrids, there are various modes and tricks for increasing highway efficiency. Our last one had some kind of mode to use in the mountains, the current one if you’ve programmed a route it uses map and elevation info to optimize battery usage and levels. Does the Land Cruiser have anything like that? Of course if you’re just driving flat endless west Texas interstate there’s not much optimizing to be done.
Same. About 3,500 miles on the odo and seeing a consistent 23mpg now. Again, this is on Nitto Ridge Grapplers... so not the most efficient tire. Overall happy with the mileage but the size of the gas tank sucks.
Nice! Are you running mostly in standard mode or eco?
Yeah, 100% eco mode.
- Jun 8, 2024
- 296
- Media
- 30
- 459
- Vehicles
- 2007 Toyota Tundra 4X4 Double Cab 5.7L V8, 2015 Chevrolet SS LS3 V8
The small fuel tank on the LC is really forcing me to consider a different vehicle. Plus I’m putting on maybe 10% of my mileage in stop and go driving, so the hybrid is of very title benefit to me.
What size Nitto Ridge Grapplers?
Dude was just trying to complain about his MPG and homie took him to school instead
Respectfully disagree. I spent the first part of my career helping refineries around the world safely and efficiently make gas and diesel. There are lots of filling stations, but only so many refineries. Local stations get their fuel supplies from the same handful of regional refineries. It's the same fuel. Each refinery has a terminal for dispensing fuel into tanker trucks, and it's all the same gas and diesel going into those differently branded tankers.
There are some things that do change, though, and that could impact fuel economy and engine health:
1. Winter blend. Refineries have to meet regulations, but the exact day of when they switch between summer and winter blends will vary, and depending on how much stock is left over, changes when it hits a dispenser pump. If one station still has winter blend in their tanks and another has summer blend in their storage tanks, you'll notice a difference in mpg.
2. Ethanol. Ethanol has a lower energy potential, so the more ethanol, the less MPG. How much ethanol is included depends on the station. If one station uses no ethanol and another 10% or 15%, you'll see a difference in mpg.
3. Maintenance and turnover. Station storage tanks and trucks can become contaminated, and if the station has low fuel customer turnover, the fuel can age. It's best to use stations with more traffic for this reason. Keep it fresh.
4. Additives. This is where station brands vary the most. At the terminal where the trucks are filled, the contracts require the refiner to include the additive package advertised by the brand. Chevron Techron as an example. Not all brands have additives. Some have more than others. Costco is one of the best, plain and simple, and it's my first choice for fueling my own vehicles. High customer turnover, well maintained stations and transport trucks, and an impressive additive package. If Costco isn't available or convenient, then I select another brand from the Top Tier list and find a station that sees traffic.
