Real World MPG with 5th Gen? - Page 4 - Toyota 4Runner Forum

SeattleMike · 10-22-2010, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snooperstyle

Thanks for that. Here is one such link I just found. Tire Size Calculator

Looks like for every 100,000 miles, stock 265/70s are turning about 1075 more miles than 275/70s...a very minimal difference. I think that would equate to a difference in MPG of about 3/10ths of a MPG...

Based on this, and the fact that other people with heavy E-rated tires are still getting good MPGs, looks like the Baja Rack is the bigger culprit!

I took a big hit when I added my rack. My summertime mileage (running the AC, E-rated Duratracs, Perkins rack with wind deflector, fully loaded with gear) on the highway was in the 18/19 mpg range and the city mileage was deplorable. Storing the rack added 2 mpg, turning off the AC added another 1 mpg, and unloading the gear added another. I'm going to experiment with a new deflector and see if it helps any.

ssmathis · 10-22-2010, 11:25 AM

I've been averaging around 18.5 in mixed driving all over 6k' feet in elevation too. Not to mention our freeways are 75mph as well.

Scott

simple06 · 10-22-2010, 11:36 AM

I just put on some BFG KM2's 265/70/17 which of course are stock size. With a combo of city/highway driving it looks like I may have lost about 1 MPG. I was usually in the mid 19's before. I'm taking a long road trip soon so it will be interesting to see what effect the heavier tires will have on straight highway driving. In the past with stock tires I got 22 MPG or just a little lower.

iDRiVaT4R · 10-22-2010, 01:53 PM

I remember when I had my stock tires, I was using a GPS and the speedometer on the 4Runner was at least 2 mph faster than actual at 60 mph. IMO stock tires are under size to help make you think your getting better mileage than you actually are. Smaller tires also give the vehicle better acceleration times. Remember this is just MY OPINION, not proven or anything.

I had my scangaugeII in my 2008 Tacoma, had 285/70R17 KM2's, Short tube headers, Flowmaster, AFE intake, Budbuilt Skids, etc and the scangauge was dead accurate, I was averaging 13-14 mpg. So my 4Runner averaging 15-16 on the on-board computer doesn't seem too far off.

Quentin · 10-22-2010, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iDRiVaT4R

I remember when I had my stock tires, I was using a GPS and the speedometer on the 4Runner was at least 2 mph faster than actual at 60 mph. IMO stock tires are under size to help make you think your getting better mileage than you actually are. Smaller tires also give the vehicle better acceleration times. Remember this is just MY OPINION, not proven or anything.

I had my scangaugeII in my 2008 Tacoma, had 285/70R17 KM2's, Short tube headers, Flowmaster, AFE intake, Budbuilt Skids, etc and the scangauge was dead accurate, I was averaging 13-14 mpg. So my 4Runner averaging 15-16 on the on-board computer doesn't seem too far off.

Speedo is commonly incorrect. Almost every manufacturer reads higher than you are actually going. They would be open to a lawsuit if they undersized the tires versus what the odometer read, though, because your promised warranty coverage is based on mileage.

Froglips · 10-23-2010, 04:36 PM

Have right at 10,000 on my 2WD SR5 now. Overall mpg (total miles/total gas) is 22.0 mpg with estimated 75 to 80% highway. Recent 3,600 mile road trip (Atlanta to Aspen via Nebraska and Denver) yielded 23.8 mpg overall. High was a remarkable 27.0 (65 on cruise) and a low of 21.8 (in a strong cross wind going across Kansas all calculated. I reset the mpg computer at the start of the trip and left it to run until back home. It amazed me that it agreed with the calculated 23.8 within a tenth of a mile per gallon.

Fuzzylogic · 10-23-2010, 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Froglips

Have right at 10,000 on my 2WD SR5 now. Overall mpg (total miles/total gas) is 22.0 mpg with estimated 75 to 80% highway. Recent 3,600 mile road trip (Atlanta to Aspen via Nebraska and Denver) yielded 23.8 mpg overall. High was a remarkable 27.0 (65 on cruise) and a low of 21.8 (in a strong cross wind going across Kansas all calculated. I reset the mpg computer at the start of the trip and left it to run until back home. It amazed me that it agreed with the calculated 23.8 within a tenth of a mile per gallon.

Yes. It is actually pretty accurate. I also calculate at every take and have found the computer to be very close.

I drive a lot of highway miles as well. My average is in the 20s. I've never had a tank average below 19. But...I rarely drive a lot of stop light to stop light, in town routes.

I'm a happy guy. My Titan never got BETTER than 14.75 blended...I got "thank you" letter from OPEC.

EDIT. Error...I did have one tank average of 15.5 on a trip to the Florida Keys. My wife was driving. She is genetically incapable of exceeding 65 mph.

Fuzzylogic · 10-23-2010, 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Froglips

Have right at 10,000 on my 2WD SR5 now. Overall mpg (total miles/total gas) is 22.0 mpg with estimated 75 to 80% highway. Recent 3,600 mile road trip (Atlanta to Aspen via Nebraska and Denver) yielded 23.8 mpg overall. High was a remarkable 27.0 (65 on cruise) and a low of 21.8 (in a strong cross wind going across Kansas all calculated. I reset the mpg computer at the start of the trip and left it to run until back home. It amazed me that it agreed with the calculated 23.8 within a tenth of a mile per gallon.

Yes. It is actually pretty accurate. I also calculate at every take and have found the computer to be very close.

I drive a lot of highway miles as well. My average is in the 20s. I've never had a tank average below 19. But...I rarely drive a lot of stop light to stop light, in town routes.

I'm a happy guy. My Titan never got BETTER than 14.75 blended...I got "thank you" letter from OPEC.

wrong way ron · 10-24-2010, 06:50 PM

18.1 city and hwy

iDRiVaT4R · 11-12-2010, 03:10 PM

Thought I'd update my stats after having my new tires for about a month now. I reset the mileage computer and it show's I'm averaging 14 mpg. Of course its not accurate since I'm running 285/70R17's but I don't think it's too far off.

My gas gauge never stops moving now unfortunately. Before it would stay in a spot for at least a little while, now it's always moving. kinda sucks but Oh Well!

Maybe it's due to the weather, it's been colder than usual the last few weeks in So-Cal. I know my 4Runner always seems to run best when the ambient temp outside is in the 80's-90's and lately it's been in the 60-70's.

sandcrawler · 11-12-2010, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sandcrawler

currently averaging ~18.0 @5k miles and almost entirely city driving. this is with the heavier E load range Duratracs (stock size) and a decidedly non-aerodynamic thule rack (not using a fairing currently).

i'm happy enough, but hope it will continue to improve. i didn't buy it for the fuel economy, but given that i gave up the 4G's V8 i would like to see a marked improvement nonetheless.

my update: nearly constant 18.3 mpg at 7000 miles, so it's climbed only slightly. figure a fairing will (still) help, but surely the extra oomph necessary to get the 44 lb. Duratracs (vs. the 39 lb. Dunlop stockers) rolling in stop-and-go driving is having an effect.

tblackj · 11-12-2010, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iDRiVaT4R

Thought I'd update my stats after having my new tires for about a month now. I reset the mileage computer and it show's I'm averaging 14 mpg. Of course its not accurate since I'm running 285/70R17's but I don't think it's too far off.

My gas gauge never stops moving now unfortunately. Before it would stay in a spot for at least a little while, now it's always moving. kinda sucks but Oh Well!

Maybe it's due to the weather, it's been colder than usual the last few weeks in So-Cal. I know my 4Runner always seems to run best when the ambient temp outside is in the 80's-90's and lately it's been in the 60-70's.

I'm right there with you. I'm running the Gobi Rack and the 285 MTR's and I got a little under 16mpg on my last road trip. But the funny thing is, I get about 15mpg around town! Not much difference at all. The aerodynamics on the truck suck when the mods start.

snow&surf · 11-12-2010, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tblackj

The aerodynamics on the truck suck when the mods start.

This! Was averaging 18.4 combined prior to lift and tires, now 16.1 combined.

iDRiVaT4R · 11-12-2010, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xiao Yue

That sucks! Are you still on 17" diameter wheels?

I just did some math. Assuming you're on 8.5" radius wheels and that you've increased from a tire sidewall height of 7.44" to 7.854", the circumference of your wheel has changed by 2.6%, which means that instead of 14, you're actually getting 14.4 mpg. There's a big difference in the friction losses 'cause of the wider tire. Ouch! I feel your pain =(. Hope it was worth it!

Well, IMO my 4Runner looks better with the larger tires and the new wheels. So far its worth it. These mpg figures are pretty much city driving. Most of the time I'll arrive at my destination before the engine is even at operating temp. The last descent length drive I had was on the way to Glendale to pick up the new wheels and tires. I don't think I can really blame the rack much since It's mostly city driving I've been doing.

simple06 · 11-12-2010, 06:30 PM

I was averaging 19 mpg city/highway and 21 mpg highway. I put on BFG KM2's and kept the stock size. I lost 2 mpg on both my averages.

Site Navigation