Range is a real problem - I'm heading to do the Trans Tiaga Road this month

[Sugarloafer80]

My biggest disappointment in this vehicle is the range. WIth a rooftop tent and slightly upsized AT tires my fuel economy is about 14-15mpg. You can only put about 15 gal into the stupid thing so range can be as low as 210 miles and that is not leaving some reserve. I'm going on this trip with friends and I actually embarrased for this Land Cruiser that can't go even 250 miles between fuel stops.

As soon as I "sign in" to enter the backcountry at Matagami I won't even be able to make it the first (easiest) paved leg up the James Bay road to Relais Routier to "start" the trip as that is a 236 mile leg. I'll need to get into a fuel jug before we even reach the first stop.

View attachment 44428


Then after visiting Hudson Bay and Radison I can't make it from Radison to the next remote fuel stop which I understand is a pretty informal/remote place about half way out the Trans Tiaga.

View attachment 44429

From there at MINIMUM i want to get to the end of the road and back to this same place for fuel. That is AT LEAST 382 miles not counting side trips or exploring the remote road south from the end of the Trans Tiaga. I need close to DOUBLE the range of the vehicle. And we want to go exploring on side quests etc so the situation is actually far worse.


View attachment 44430

This problem can't be solved by 1 or 2 or even 3 jerry cans. I think I need to carry at minimum 4x5gal cans and even then I will need to keep a close eye on things. Luckily one of my buddies is doing the trip in a pickup and he said I can throw fuel in the truck bed. I think I'm just going to get a 4-pack of VP Racing fuel jugs. If it were not for my buddy carrying the fuel for me I'm not sure I would be making this trip in this supposed "Land Cruiser."

I think the range is almost a deal breaker for me. I will admit I had not considerd it fully when purchasing the vehicle. I wish I could have gotten the diesel and forget the hybrid. Though I will admit that I like the integrated high output inverter.

Total BS. None of these off roaders are efficient. Ineos gets 13mpg if lucky, 15 on highway. yea 27 gallon tank so maybe 350 range. In reality probably 10-12 off road so less than 300 miles. Your LC even at 15mpg x 18 gallons has 270 miles of range. Maybe the driver just isn't very efficient??? Pickups slurp far more gas but that huge tank solves that problem. Sounds like you needed a fuel rig anyway.
Go put out the fires please while you are up there...or are they on the other side of the bay?

 

[l00semarble]

Total BS. None of these off roaders are efficient. Ineos gets 13mpg if lucky, 15 on highway. yea 27 gallon tank so maybe 350 range. In reality proably 10-12 off road so less than 300 miles. Your LC even at 15mpg x 18 gallons has 270 miles of range. Maybe the driver just isn't very efficient??? Pickups slurp far more gas but that huge tank solves that problem. Sounds like you needed a fuel rig anyway.
Go put out the fires please while you are up there...or are they on the other side of the bay?

Driver doesn't feel like being efficient. Driver wants to have fun.

 

[Sugarloafer80]

Then driver becomes bear food.....

 

[Nor Cal Cruiser]

On flat highways at sea level running on original 20 inch OEM wheels and crossbar roof rack, I consistently get 28 MPG at 1,500 RPMs and traveling 62 MPH.

On the highway, in my case I can induce a "super cruise" where the vehicle maintains 62 MPH with the engine idling for significant stretches of time.

By leveraging the battery, I can also get similar mileage in mixed use commuter driving. In many ways, the hybrid is even better at those conditions. If careful, it can go up to 15 MPH almost entirely on battery and maintain 30 MPH on battery indefinitely. Try it driving around and empty parking lot and you will see.

With a roof tent and bigger tires running at 1,500 RPMs, maybe your at 60 MPH and 25 MPGs or 55 MPH and 22 MPG or even 45 MPH and 20 MPG. You get the point so figure out your sweet spot.

If maximizing fuel consumption is the goal, this vehicle should ideally be driven by the tachometer and not the speedometer. I suggest you try to establish a baseline of what your configuration can get in flat highway cruise at 1,500 rpms and then adjust driving strategy and tactics from there.

One problem with driving by tachometer and not speedometer is that the focus is entirely in the wrong place. Roads are governed by speed limits, not tach readings or gas mileage goals. The focus should be on driving well and safely, and if good gas mileage results then great. But driving 62 to maximize gas mileage when the speed limit might be 65 or more is both unsafe and a nuisance.

 

[Doggman1525]

Coming Soon! 2024-Current Toyota Land Cruiser 250 Auxiliary Fuel Tank

NEW FEATURES: 100% designed and manufactured in the heart of Colorado Thicker 1/8" 5052 Aluminum with superior corrosion resistance 1 Gallon of capacity added totaling 18 gallons Sloped bottom allowing use of the residual 2.5 gallons of fuel Fuel pickup on side corner in case "Filling a friend"...

helivuedesign.com

 

[sweet5ltr]

My biggest disappointment in this vehicle is the range. WIth a rooftop tent and slightly upsized AT tires my fuel economy is about 14-15mpg. You can only put about 15 gal into the stupid thing so range can be as low as 210 miles and that is not leaving some reserve. I'm going on this trip with friends and I actually embarrased for this Land Cruiser that can't go even 250 miles between fuel stops.

As soon as I "sign in" to enter the backcountry at Matagami I won't even be able to make it the first (easiest) paved leg up the James Bay road to Relais Routier to "start" the trip as that is a 236 mile leg. I'll need to get into a fuel jug before we even reach the first stop.

View attachment 44428


Then after visiting Hudson Bay and Radison I can't make it from Radison to the next remote fuel stop which I understand is a pretty informal/remote place about half way out the Trans Tiaga.

View attachment 44429

From there at MINIMUM i want to get to the end of the road and back to this same place for fuel. That is AT LEAST 382 miles not counting side trips or exploring the remote road south from the end of the Trans Tiaga. I need close to DOUBLE the range of the vehicle. And we want to go exploring on side quests etc so the situation is actually far worse.


View attachment 44430

This problem can't be solved by 1 or 2 or even 3 jerry cans. I think I need to carry at minimum 4x5gal cans and even then I will need to keep a close eye on things. Luckily one of my buddies is doing the trip in a pickup and he said I can throw fuel in the truck bed. I think I'm just going to get a 4-pack of VP Racing fuel jugs. If it were not for my buddy carrying the fuel for me I'm not sure I would be making this trip in this supposed "Land Cruiser."

I think the range is almost a deal breaker for me. I will admit I had not considerd it fully when purchasing the vehicle. I wish I could have gotten the diesel and forget the hybrid. Though I will admit that I like the integrated high output inverter.

Not an issue that came out of nowhere. Fuel economy is going to be abysmal off road regardless of whatever you drive, 110l vs 150l fuel tank wouldn't really change that. RTT can drastically cut MPG's, that alone is going to hit hard. I'd do a lot of highway testing beforehand to figure out the best MPH/RPM combination. If driving a bit slower equates to 2-3 MPG increase, that's substantial with a small tank and not-so-great economy. That can easily equate to 30-45 miles additional range.

You really need a rear tire carrier and have another aux tank built/installed for more 'expedition' style travel.

 

[l00semarble]

Coming Soon! 2024-Current Toyota Land Cruiser 250 Auxiliary Fuel Tank

NEW FEATURES: 100% designed and manufactured in the heart of Colorado Thicker 1/8" 5052 Aluminum with superior corrosion resistance 1 Gallon of capacity added totaling 18 gallons Sloped bottom allowing use of the residual 2.5 gallons of fuel Fuel pickup on side corner in case "Filling a friend"...

helivuedesign.com

Interesting but loose the spare. I was considering moving the spare and trying a couple of these:

6 gallon x2 fits in place of spare

 

[RideWithYanu]

Interesting but loose the spare. I was considering moving the spare and trying a couple of these:

6 gallon x2 fits in place of spare

Long Range America is also developing an auxiliary tank for the J250 - they have a great track record as well.

LC250 - Long Range Fuel Tank | Long Range America

Please use the sign up page below to add your preferences for the LC250 Long range fuel tank. The two options below include a saddle tank that would sit opposite your factory tank and will have a capacity of +- 16 gallons. this will allow you to keep your spare tire in place but will require...

longrangeamerica.com

 

[Bedawson]

I'm getting about 19-21 mpgs on my 285/70/17's. I dont do much if any spirited driving in her tho, other toys for that.

On a sidenote, does the LC have a low fuel notification? I got back from a trip with about 30 miles (obc) left. By the time I fueled her up, obc was reading 17 miles. I was expecting some sort of alert, but nothing.

 

[EOD Guy]

I'm getting about 19-21 mpgs on my 285/70/17's. I dont do much if any spirited driving in her tho, other toys for that.

On a sidenote, does the LC have a low fuel notification? I got back from a trip with about 30 miles (obc) left. By the time I fueled her up, obc was reading 17 miles. I was expecting some sort of alert, but nothing.

It does have an idiot light, If I remember correctly it comes on around 10-15 left to empty. I have started to use the 1/8 tank gage, it's kind of different as I haven't had to look at the actual gage in a bit, I always waited till the orange glow appeared........

 

[Viktorv1961]

Yes. I "brimmed" the tank. I manually ran the pump into auto cutoff about 10x. I pumped until it overflowed.

Pretty dumb thing to do..

 

[Alpha Puppy]

Pretty dumb thing to do..

Did you get up on the wrong side of the bed or something? Your reply to the Op is not only rude but also redundant and unhelpful.
The reason I like this forum is because most members are mature, polite and helpful. Please learn from that example in your future interactions in the forum.

 

[Viktorv1961]

Did you get up on the wrong side of the bed or something? Your reply to the Op is not only rude but also redundant and unhelpful.
The reason I like this forum is because most members are mature, polite and helpful. Please learn from that example in your future interactions in the forum.

Repeatedly "brimming" or topping off your gas tank can lead to issues with your vehicle's evaporative emissions system.
Educate yourself, AlphaPuppy from Santa Clara, and stop yipping on a wrong tree. You are not in a position to tell me that I cannot call dumb action "dumb". I have been to Santa Clara on a business trip in late 90th and still remember how porter warn me not a light up a cigarette while walking in the park, because one can get a fine for doing so!

 

[Doggman1525]

 

[RideWithYanu]

Did you get up on the wrong side of the bed or something? Your reply to the Op is not only rude but also redundant and unhelpful.
The reason I like this forum is because most members are mature, polite and helpful. Please learn from that example in your future interactions in the forum.

Since they don’t have the maturity to accept critique hopefully they’ll just be ignored.

 

[Sugarloafer80]

It has been many many years since I read a report anywhere of a Charcoal canister failure. That was a problem back in their infancy when by design many were placed too low. Been filling cars AS NEEDED for the past 40years and never an issue.

 

[basicxj]

I don’t look at things like emissions components being harmed by topping off the fuel tank as something that will result in immediate failure, more like diminishing the component’s long term life expectancy (and potentially costing money better used elsewhere once out of warranty).

Vehicles, emissions and emissions-related components have changed quite a bit since I first started driving. I got on the interwebz around 1998 and joined online forums specific to what I was driving at a given time shortly thereafter. You will find there are one-off complaints for certain vehicles/components, and floods of complaints for others. I am usually reluctant to take the one-offs as gospel. The only emissions component on my first car was a PCV valve, and I could squeeze $4-5 more fuel into that car after the shut off clicked on the pump.

With that said, I have been trying to un-learn some of my behaviours as the years tick by and vehicles get a little more sensitive to certain things. My work vehicle never balks if you put another gallon in after it shuts off. My last personal vehicle had a rather sensitive system that could cost you $700 to replace the damaged evaporative emissions bits if they became soaked in liquid fuel and would throw CELs pretty regularly if topped off too much even if it wasn’t damaged (yet). Being a cheap guy by nature, I’ll limit the amount of fuel I top off on this Land Cruiser too. No sense in poking the bear.

 

[EOD Guy]

Not trying to offend anyone's knowledge, if you know, then you know.......... Think of the charcoal canister like a last ditch effort to prevent raw fuel particles/vapor from venting into the atmosphere, the canister/purge system can only handle so much before it becomes clogged/saturated and can no longer perform it's job. It was designed to handle vapors not liquid, it's not going to suddenly fail if you overfill the tank but repeatedly it's not good for it either and if at every fill up, one stuffs the system it will, overtime, prematurely fail and throw a CEL. So for those that want to stuff their tank, I say go for it, as it's your vehicle do with it what you wish.

Bad advice is just that...............

 

[brianz]

I think range anxiety is just something this car can create, but it’s not that much effort to carry extra fuel. It is annoying though. I read ARB has a long range tank in the works.

My longest crossing between fuel stations was 450+ miles - Simpson Desert. It was a turbo diesel 105 series with 2 fuel tanks (switch on dash). I still brought 3 Jerry cans to be safe and maybe help somebody else out. It doesn’t matter what you drive when you push what manufactures build against.

 

[basicxj]

Not trying to offend anyone's knowledge, if you know, then you know.......... Think of the charcoal canister like a last ditch effort to prevent raw fuel particles/vapor from venting into the atmosphere, the canister/purge system can only handle so much before it becomes clogged/saturated and can no longer perform it's job. It was designed to handle vapors not liquid, it's not going to suddenly fail if you overfill the tank but repeatedly it's not good for it either and if at every fill up, one stuffs the system it will, overtime, prematurely fail and throw a CEL. So for those that want to stuff their tank, I say go for it, as it's your vehicle do with it what you wish.

Bad advice is just that...............

^^ well said

Larger fuel capacity would certainly be a plus, in the form of a larger main tank or by adding an auxiliary tank. Trying to squeeze extra fuel into the existing small tank by loading up the filler neck carries risks for small, even token gains.

I look at it this way- my pig of a Jeep had a marginally bigger gas tank, but worse mileage and less range than the Land Cruiser. We are talking 345 km range in a Jeep with a full tank vs. 480 km in a LC with the same. That is an upgrade for me. If I was venturing into back country (won’t happen on these city tires and 20” rims, hopefully addressed in coming months) before some of these products clear development and are actually available/tested, I’d rig up some Rotopax mounts to carry some extra fuel.

Go too crazy on tires, and that range gets diminished. Go too crazy on armour and extra weight, and it gets worse from there. As much as I can appreciate a fully kitted-out overlanding machine, there is much to be said for moderation the farther off the beaten path you venture on the regular.