Low gas milage

[Sugarloafer80]

LC mileage, forget mods folks, you brought that on yourselves, is highly dependent on mileage. It's all about the aero.
I routinely see a 2+mpg drop from 75-80 mph for example. After 6000miles it is is obvious.
Therefore, I give you a range which accounts for variations in temps, winds etc that I have witnessed. On a + note, the onboard calculations are always +/-.2-.3mpg. Impressive. These are based on CC regulated speed
80mph 17-20mpg
75mph 21-23mpg
70mph 23-25mpg
65mph......too boring to try but I have routinely seen 25++mpg in the hypermiler zone....and this is precisely the speed the EPA testing is done at!!!

Snow tires have traditionally reduced MPG on any vehicle I have owned by 1 mpg.

Sport modes kill mileage in several ways.
1. They hold shift points to give one a "sporty" sensation..often regardless of actual effective and often with a disregard to torque peaks. great for towing and hilly terrain if loaded. Does NOTHING for passing ability etc.
2. They are nothing but a throttle controller hyped up making a vehicle bounce on and off boost unless your inputs are deadly smooth. I ghave hated every TC installed car I have ever tried. STUPID MOD!! TheyNEVER make a car faster...same people thought Vornados helped hehe.
A very detailed review of our LC called out the accelerator as aggressive btw, so sport mode exacerbates this behavior. I routinely make students shut off sport mode when teaching till they learn to modulate smoothly. It is a major weakness in the driving skills of many. Affects mileage, car control at the limit, winter skills esp icy conditions and MILEAGE. Scott Dixon (Indycar) is the absolute master at these skills and a prime reason he is among the winningest racers of all time.

Drive with the battery and boost gauges to teach yourself how to be smooth. That is my second set of gauges and I used it A LOT while learning vehicle....it helped me and I have 25yrs of track skills behind me. If it helped me, I am sure it can help you low mpg folks unless you are always 75mph and above, THEN YOU WILL DRINK FUEL.

Finally, so far, my mileage differences are minimal between regular and premium and this makes sense as the octane really only comes into play at WOT/peak power, high heat, towing conditions etc.

Just food for thought without too much science, but a fair amount of skills and experience.

For the record, 18 v 20s NO DIFFERENCE (SAME OD and weight VERY CLOSE). My setup is stock Yokos on the 20s and Michelin X Ice 3s on the 18s....both treads pretty optimal for highway and snows pulled off when temps broach 40 to save them when they DO get their most inefficient (soft and squishy). Michelins may actually be quieter much to my surprise. My pressures are always 33/33 or less cold. (31/31 bout as soft as I start but ride is exponentially better) More pressure just kills the ride esp at low speeds where all that unsprung weight gets jousty. Notice the minimal number of variables.

My gut says a moderate AT terrain would be like a snow in the mileage department. An aggressive one far worse and a E Load worse sill (unsprung weight is ALWAYS the enemy). While fine climbing in deep snow, they will NEVER compete with true winter rubber unless VERY heavily siped, even then I have never seen a test where they are close.

Hope the summary helps a few folks...in English, if your mileage sucks, you ARE NOT SMOOTH, live in hilly terrain that OF COURSE, kills mileage, lots of redlights/stopngo, jack rabbit starts etc. Try driving like a limo driver and I say that seriously because I did that one summer....you CAN be smooth AND FAST!!!.......ask Frank Perdue.......torque is your friend.

 

[Mopper]

LC mileage, forget mods folks, you brought that on yourselves, is highly dependent on mileage. It's all about the aero.
I routinely see a 2+mpg drop from 75-80 mph for example. After 6000miles it is is obvious.
Therefore, I give you a range which accounts for variations in temps, winds etc that I have witnessed. On a + note, the onboard calculations are always +/-.2-.3mpg. Impressive. These are based on CC regulated speed
80mph 17-20mpg
75mph 21-23mpg
70mph 23-25mpg
65mph......too boring to try but I have routinely seen 25++mpg in the hypermiler zone....and this is precisely the speed the EPA testing is done at!!!

Snow tires have traditionally reduced MPG on any vehicle I have owned by 1 mpg.

Sport modes kill mileage in several ways.
1. They hold shift points to give one a "sporty" sensation..often regardless of actual effective and often with a disregard to torque peaks. great for towing and hilly terrain if loaded. Does NOTHING for passing ability etc.
2. They are nothing but a throttle controller hyped up making a vehicle bounce on and off boost unless your inputs are deadly smooth. I ghave hated every TC installed car I have ever tried. STUPID MOD!! TheyNEVER make a car faster...same people thought Vornados helped hehe.
A very detailed review of our LC called out the accelerator as aggressive btw, so sport mode exacerbates this behavior. I routinely make students shut off sport mode when teaching till they learn to modulate smoothly. It is a major weakness in the driving skills of many. Affects mileage, car control at the limit, winter skills esp icy conditions and MILEAGE. Scott Dixon (Indycar) is the absolute master at these skills and a prime reason he is among the winningest racers of all time.

Drive with the battery and boost gauges to teach yourself how to be smooth. That is my second set of gauges and I used it A LOT while learning vehicle....it helped me and I have 25yrs of track skills behind me. If it helped me, I am sure it can help you low mpg folks unless you are always 75mph and above, THEN YOU WILL DRINK FUEL.

Finally, so far, my mileage differences are minimal between regular and premium and this makes sense as the octane really only comes into play at WOT/peak power, high heat, towing conditions etc.

Just food for thought without too much science, but a fair amount of skills and experience.

For the record, 18 v 20s NO DIFFERENCE (SAME OD and weight VERY CLOSE). My setup is stock Yokos on the 20s and Michelin X Ice 3s on the 18s....both treads pretty optimal for highway and snows pulled off when temps broach 40 to save them when they DO get their most inefficient (soft and squishy). Michelins may actually be quieter much to my surprise. My pressures are always 33/33 or less cold. (31/31 bout as soft as I start but ride is exponentially better) More pressure just kills the ride esp at low speeds where all that unsprung weight gets jousty. Notice the minimal number of variables.

My gut says a moderate AT terrain would be like a snow in the mileage department. An aggressive one far worse and a E Load worse sill (unsprung weight is ALWAYS the enemy). While fine climbing in deep snow, they will NEVER compete with true winter rubber unless VERY heavily siped, even then I have never seen a test where they are close.

Hope the summary helps a few folks...in English, if your mileage sucks, you ARE NOT SMOOTH, live in hilly terrain that OF COURSE, kills mileage, lots of redlights/stopngo, jack rabbit starts etc. Try driving like a limo driver and I say that seriously because I did that one summer....you CAN be smooth AND FAST!!!.......ask Frank Perdue.......torque is your friend.

Agreed that rims make no difference as long as you put an appropriate tire on that rim. From there tires can change things significantly as in the case of 295/70R18 v 265/60R20. This configuration can also be conceived of as 34.3" in diameter as opposed to 32.5" in diameter (stock), ~ a 5.5% difference. It should also be mentioned that the larger tire is also wider implying the larger tire will affect wind resistance, rolling resistance, and mechanical advantage of applied torque. Regardless of why and how, this certainly influences reported mileage. Full disclosure: I have not yet run either tire using anything to gauge mileage other than the vehicle itself and both need to be compared objectively using a GPS to control for tire size and to avoid false reporting by the LC. Even then, the problem of how much gas was used still exists as it seems questionable to expect the full point/pump shutoff to be at exactly the same physical spot to check mileage even at the same pump. And I'm going to add the battery and boost gauges to a configuration- either there is more behavioral change coming to my LC or somebody needs to tell the other cars that I have a led foot and to stop passing me!

 

[Sugarloafer80]

That is why I ALWAYS use the EPA recommended fill technique. Look for it. Some call it blasphemy.
I call it consistent. Case in point, you stop to gas car and drive home 5-10 miles.........even if I stuffed it, it isn't anymore.....will leave this one alone..with it 48yrs experience and NEVER an issue over a few million miles.......
definition of stuffed is irrefutable. Fuel to neck. I don't do that ever.

Ironically, it happens ALL the time at the track when refueling with or track cans. Never heard anyone harp about the 1st click BS at a track day.......that number is also well documented by me at this point. Typically it takes 2.3 slow fill gallons after the 1st click for pump to reshutoff. Hyper fill pumps can be 1-1.5gallons....like the damn Costco pumps with their pressure seals. PIA on my cans as well.

BTW, the Gran Turismo generation of drivers are REAL PIA's to teach on track. They all THINK they are fast because they are used to driving off the road, hitting reset and continuing. They carry over those techniques to public roads. I have parked a few of them at track days BECAUSE THEY SUCK AND ENDANGER OTHERS.

 

[bennettlo]

I'm using aftermarket tires: A/T 4W 275 70 R18. I get 19mpg in the Winter and 21mpg in the Summer by basically hypermiling. My regular life includes highway driving, but it's mostly stop and go. I can get 24-25 on a long, flat highway drive. I love the vehicle, but I'm not a fan of the mileage.

 

[Mopper]

That is why I ALWAYS use the EPA recommended fill technique. Look for it. Some call it blasphemy.
I call it consistent. Case in point, you stop to gas car and drive home 5-10 miles.........even if I stuffed it, it isn't anymore.....will leave this one alone..with it 48yrs experience and NEVER an issue over a few million miles.......
definition of stuffed is irrefutable. Fuel to neck. I don't do that ever.

Ironically, it happens ALL the time at the track when refueling with or track cans. Never heard anyone harp about the 1st click BS at a track day.......that number is also well documented by me at this point. Typically it takes 2.3 slow fill gallons after the 1st click for pump to reshutoff. Hyper fill pumps can be 1-1.5gallons....like the damn Costco pumps with their pressure seals. PIA on my cans as well.

BTW, the Gran Turismo generation of drivers are REAL PIA's to teach on track. They all THINK they are fast because they are used to driving off the road, hitting reset and continuing. They carry over those techniques to public roads. I have parked a few of them at track days BECAUSE THEY SUCK AND ENDANGER OTHERS.

As a former overfiller, I can testify to the fact that filling to the neck will shortly back contaminate the carbon canister. If you park indoors, it makes everything stink. Outdoors it's just unburned hydrocarbons floating around

 

[basicxj]

I'm using aftermarket tires: A/T 4W 275 70 R18. I get 19mpg in the Winter and 21mpg in the Summer by basically hypermiling. My regular life includes highway driving, but it's mostly stop and go. I can get 24-25 on a long, flat highway drive. I love the vehicle, but I'm not a fan of the mileage.

Really, for the size and weight of this platform, that is impressive fuel mileage. In order to do better you’d probably be looking at a much smaller SUV with less capability.

To give perspective, I drive vehicles from a fleet of Ford Explorer hybrids at work (small V6). They get marginally better mileage, but have less usable interior space and frequently have mechanical and electrical issues…even from brand new. I would not sacrifice the superior qualities of the Land Cruiser for anything about one of those Explorers. I couldn’t tolerate the down time and shudder to think what fixing one out of warranty could cost on a regular basis.

 

[bennettlo]

Really, for the size and weight of this platform, that is impressive fuel mileage. In order to do better you’d probably be looking at a much smaller SUV with less capability.

To give perspective, I drive vehicles from a fleet of Ford Explorer hybrids at work (small V6). They get marginally better mileage, but have less usable interior space and frequently have mechanical and electrical issues…even from brand new. I would not sacrifice the superior qualities of the Land Cruiser for anything about one of those Explorers. I couldn’t tolerate the down time and shudder to think what fixing one out of warranty could cost on a regular basis.

All Fair points.

For context, I got interested in the LC when it was initially advertised as having "a manufacturer-estimated combined fuel economy of 27 miles per gallon." A few months later they cut the expectations to what they now advertise, which is 23 combined. So, I perceive two downgrades because I don't get 23mpg either.

Edit: I've also owned other vehicles where I could easily get over the estimated MPG by hypermiling. I'll acknowledge that my tires suck for mileage.

 

[Onandoffroaddriving]

I just bought a 2026 cruiser. I’ve been getting 16-17mpg vs the 21-23 stated.
Anyone getting better milage?
Cheers

2024 with 13k miles- new it was getting 18 MPG around town. Now getting 24 MPG.

 

[basicxj]

All Fair points.

For context, I got interested in the LC when it was initially advertised as having "a manufacturer-estimated combined fuel economy of 27 miles per gallon." A few months later they cut the expectations to what they now advertise, which is 23 combined. So, I perceive two downgrades because I don't get 23mpg either.

The Land Cruiser isn’t for everybody. In my short time here, I have seen a few “farewell-selling my Land Cruiser” posts. Sometimes a buyer’s expectations aren’t met. The actual mileage achieved vs. EPA figures varies for most vehicles, and if actual consumption is a deal breaker for you, only you can say.

I would say 27 mpg might be a difficult target to hit with anything mid sized with a true 4wd system. I haven’t looked into the Highlander and variants, but a hybrid on that platform is set up differently than how they did it for the Land Cruiser and its EPA mpg is going to be closer to 35. It will be AWD as opposed to a true 4wd, in that it will primarily be driving the front wheels unless the ECU detects slip front/rear- a different animal, but not everyone needs a true 4wd system.

For more perspective, I rented a previous generation 4Runner last year. An afternoon’s driving burned a half a tank running in 2wd and it cost me $100 to return full with 89 octane. The new 4Runner is more fuel efficient than the previous generation, and the IForce Max version has similar consumption to the Land Cruiser.

 

[bennettlo]

The Land Cruiser isn’t for everybody. In my short time here, I have seen a few “farewell-selling my Land Cruiser” posts. Sometimes a buyer’s expectations aren’t met. The actual mileage achieved vs. EPA figures varies for most vehicles, and if actual consumption is a deal breaker for you, only you can say.

I would say 27 mpg might be a difficult target to hit with anything mid sized with a true 4wd system. I haven’t looked into the Highlander and variants, but a hybrid on that platform is set up differently than how they did it for the Land Cruiser and its EPA mpg is going to be closer to 35. It will be AWD as opposed to a true 4wd, in that it will primarily be driving the front wheels unless the ECU detects slip front/rear- a different animal, but not everyone needs a true 4wd system.

For more perspective, I rented a previous generation 4Runner last year. An afternoon’s driving burned a half a tank running in 2wd and it cost me $100 to return full with 89 octane. The new 4Runner is more fuel efficient than the previous generation, and the IForce Max version has similar consumption to the Land Cruiser.

I love the vehicle. And I don't mind calling out its faults and some (imho) misleading marketing.

 

[basicxj]

Edit: I've also owned other vehicles where I could easily get over the estimated MPG by hypermiling. I'll acknowledge that my tires suck for mileage.

My previous vehicle was a Jeep JK Unlimited Rubicon. It had horrible mileage- about 17.8L/100km around town with 4:10 gears on All Terrains in OEM size. I was able to hypermile that when necessary. I did a 17 1/2 hour road trip straight through years back, stopping only for gas & coffee. The average consumption dropped to 11.9L/100km (mostly highway) on that trip. The lowest I saw in nine years of ownership.

Much like the Land Cruiser, that Jeep was a brick, not exactly prime wind tunnel testing material. It was advertised as 15L/100km highway and 11.4L/100km city. Even with hypermiling I could never achieve those numbers, and when the next gas station was hundreds of km away you can bet I was trying to extract maximum economy.

The EPA allows manufacturers to average the figures from different sub models- if they hit targets with the most fuel efficient version they earn credits which permit them to build less fuel efficient sub models and retain the average in specs. While that can lead to some surprised consumers, it is how the business works.

 

[basicxj]

I love the vehicle. And I don't mind calling out its faults and some (imho) misleading marketing.

I love ours too. I just look at actual fuel efficiency as the cost of doing business if I am depending on it getting me to work on time in a blizzard.

I had my Jeep off road, and when opportunity presents the Land Cruiser will also. While I might not do certain things with the Land Cruiser that I did with my Jeep (like coming around a corner on dark 2 lane highway, finding a landslide and simply going over a portion of it) without some extra ground clearance, I consider the actual fuel efficiency a sunk cost considering the capabilities of the vehicle.

 

[Sugarloafer80]

I'm using aftermarket tires: A/T 4W 275 70 R18. I get 19mpg in the Winter and 21mpg in the Summer by basically hypermiling. My regular life includes highway driving, but it's mostly stop and go. I can get 24-25 on a long, flat highway drive. I love the vehicle, but I'm not a fan of the mileage.

Irony again. You bought a 5500 lb SUV that 1 generation prior was lucky to get 15mpg highway and you call your numbers unsatisfactory. It just don't add up! What would you be a fan of for mileage.....? RAV4 numbers???

 

[Sugarloafer80]

As a former overfiller, I can testify to the fact that filling to the neck will shortly back contaminate the carbon canister. If you park indoors, it makes everything stink. Outdoors it's just unburned hydrocarbons floating around

Reason I never fill to the neck......but 1st cutoff is silly IMHO..........someone should see actual amount intank at 1st cutoff. I'm not a betting man, but I can almost guarantee it is not the actual 17.9 gallon tank.......as a public service, someone that upgraded their tank should have an OE one available to test fill accurately with water.......let science put this BS to rest.

 

[Mopper]

Reason I never fill to the neck......but 1st cutoff is silly IMHO..........someone should see actual amount intank at 1st cutoff. I'm not a betting man, but I can almost guarantee it is not the actual 17.9 gallon tank.......as a public service, someone that upgraded their tank should have an OE one available to test fill accurately with water.......let science put this BS to rest.

I think any disappointment I had was about the relative distance to the sticker mileage number on non-stock tires! (a lot of layers to that onion) I am delighted with my Land Cruiser and can't wait to get it off road. As to fill up, I could never figure out a better way than to use the slowest setting and bail out at first click... unless the gallons were obviously amiss. From there, two RotopaX mounts are in-hand and destined for the roof rack- I'm betting that 4 gallons is enough range margin guarantee for everything I'll attempt (or I'll double up when the time comes)

AND WOULDN'T IT BE NICE TO HAVE A SIGHT-GLASS!!

 

[basicxj]

I am acquainted with the layers to the onion. The law of unintended consequences.

Bigger tires- mileage takes a hit
Lift- mileage takes a hit
Roof rack- mileage takes a hit
Full load of gear- mileage takes a hit

…and so on. A build with lots of mods (the sky is the limit) and added weight will have troubles approaching published fuel efficiency numbers.

 

[DubDub]

Between the FE roof rack, roam roof case, removal of air dams and 250lb cargo loadout, I’ve experienced about a 1mpg redux in efficiency. I’m impressed and satisfied.

 

[Mopper]

LC mileage, forget mods folks, you brought that on yourselves, is highly dependent on mileage. It's all about the aero.
I routinely see a 2+mpg drop from 75-80 mph for example. After 6000miles it is is obvious.
Therefore, I give you a range which accounts for variations in temps, winds etc that I have witnessed. On a + note, the onboard calculations are always +/-.2-.3mpg. Impressive. These are based on CC regulated speed
80mph 17-20mpg
75mph 21-23mpg
70mph 23-25mpg
65mph......too boring to try but I have routinely seen 25++mpg in the hypermiler zone....and this is precisely the speed the EPA testing is done at!!!

Snow tires have traditionally reduced MPG on any vehicle I have owned by 1 mpg.

Sport modes kill mileage in several ways.
1. They hold shift points to give one a "sporty" sensation..often regardless of actual effective and often with a disregard to torque peaks. great for towing and hilly terrain if loaded. Does NOTHING for passing ability etc.
2. They are nothing but a throttle controller hyped up making a vehicle bounce on and off boost unless your inputs are deadly smooth. I ghave hated every TC installed car I have ever tried. STUPID MOD!! TheyNEVER make a car faster...same people thought Vornados helped hehe.
A very detailed review of our LC called out the accelerator as aggressive btw, so sport mode exacerbates this behavior. I routinely make students shut off sport mode when teaching till they learn to modulate smoothly. It is a major weakness in the driving skills of many. Affects mileage, car control at the limit, winter skills esp icy conditions and MILEAGE. Scott Dixon (Indycar) is the absolute master at these skills and a prime reason he is among the winningest racers of all time.

Drive with the battery and boost gauges to teach yourself how to be smooth. That is my second set of gauges and I used it A LOT while learning vehicle....it helped me and I have 25yrs of track skills behind me. If it helped me, I am sure it can help you low mpg folks unless you are always 75mph and above, THEN YOU WILL DRINK FUEL.

Finally, so far, my mileage differences are minimal between regular and premium and this makes sense as the octane really only comes into play at WOT/peak power, high heat, towing conditions etc.

Just food for thought without too much science, but a fair amount of skills and experience.

For the record, 18 v 20s NO DIFFERENCE (SAME OD and weight VERY CLOSE). My setup is stock Yokos on the 20s and Michelin X Ice 3s on the 18s....both treads pretty optimal for highway and snows pulled off when temps broach 40 to save them when they DO get their most inefficient (soft and squishy). Michelins may actually be quieter much to my surprise. My pressures are always 33/33 or less cold. (31/31 bout as soft as I start but ride is exponentially better) More pressure just kills the ride esp at low speeds where all that unsprung weight gets jousty. Notice the minimal number of variables.

My gut says a moderate AT terrain would be like a snow in the mileage department. An aggressive one far worse and a E Load worse sill (unsprung weight is ALWAYS the enemy). While fine climbing in deep snow, they will NEVER compete with true winter rubber unless VERY heavily siped, even then I have never seen a test where they are close.

Hope the summary helps a few folks...in English, if your mileage sucks, you ARE NOT SMOOTH, live in hilly terrain that OF COURSE, kills mileage, lots of redlights/stopngo, jack rabbit starts etc. Try driving like a limo driver and I say that seriously because I did that one summer....you CAN be smooth AND FAST!!!.......ask Frank Perdue.......torque is your friend.

Great advice- I had the gauges on in my driveway for 20 seconds and learned something. I should add that at 7500 miles my LC acts differently with respect to battery and boost than it did when new (and the gauges were mostly useless)

 

[ultane]

As a former overfiller, I can testify to the fact that filling to the neck will shortly back contaminate the carbon canister. If you park indoors, it makes everything stink. Outdoors it's just unburned hydrocarbons floating around

Carbon canisters are a pain in a$$ to replace, and expensive if you pay to have it done. Do NOT overfill the gasoline tank. Fill it at ‘wide open’ speed, and when it shuts off, STOP filling. This according to the owners manual, and The Car Care Nut.

 

[Sugarloafer80]

Carbon canisters are a pain in a$$ to replace, and expensive if you pay to have it done. Do NOT overfill the gasoline tank. Fill it at ‘wide open’ speed, and when it shuts off, STOP filling. This according to the owners manual, and The Car Care Nut.

STOP ALREADY: that is NOT the EPA technique. If anyone is going to be hyperconservative, it is the EPA.
That is heresay, anecdotal etc. It shows Car Care Nut has a lack of knowledge as well.......and I will stand by that.

Prove me wrong!!! I forget who upgraded the tank but they hold the answer. Tank design etc has a huge effect on why that 1st flow obstruction occurs. My 2021 RR would shutoff and you couldn't put another qt in if you tried for example. My Stelvios have always required a slow fill to fill fully. Not rying to be an ass, but I have learned to ignore a lot of internet, You Tube fodder based on speculation. Car Care Nut should put his assertion to the test and pull a tank and fill it...he has the garage to do it. Again, PROVE IT!!!! Science without fact is bullshi!!