FJ Cruiser Premium Fuel vs. 4Runner Premuim Fuel

[JB.]

So one DOES get a 3 hp boost by using premium. Better than a kick in the teeth!

Well we don't know because it's comparing the 4Runner to the FJ. We'd need to know what the 2009 FJ got on 87. Personally, I'd guess the difference was a bit more than 3hp.

My numbers came from a Toyota FJ pdf. The wikipedia page is interesting but I wouldn't hang my hat on the absolute accuracy since it ignores specific vehicle implementation and, of course, it's wikipedia.

 

[truckmike26]

So what would be your guess percentage wise on these truck stock? I still think nowhere the sticker HP. Manufacturers throw out HP numbers because the average person has no idea where those numbers really come from.

My guess would be more around 165-180 but maybe the drivetrain is efficient and is higher as you guess. I disagree about ratings, though; I think because of the aftermarket, dynos and the web, manufacturers need to be pretty accurate or face the wrath of the media (that is, overstating output).

Well we don't know because it's comparing the 4Runner to the FJ. We'd need to know what the 2009 FJ got on 87. Personally, I'd guess the difference was a bit more than 3hp.

My numbers came from a Toyota FJ pdf. The wikipedia page is interesting but I wouldn't hang my hat on the absolute accuracy since it ignores specific vehicle implementation and, of course, it's wikipedia.

Holy crap I stand corrected, from wikipedia; "An updated version of this engine features Dual VVT-i, increasing output to 254 hp (189 kW) and 270 lb·ft (366 N·m) on 87 octane and 285 hp (213 kW) and 289 lb·ft (392 N·m) on 91 octane."

If I owned a Gen 5 I'd be running 91 for sure but since I own a Gen 4 3 HP is not that exciting of a HP gain.

On '09 and '10-up GRs, 4R or FJ, 91 still offers a nice bump in torque and that's more important in everyday driving. Also, I'll speak for myself, I've noticed a bump in fuel efficiency (at least 1L/100 km).

 

[Madakira]

My guess would be more around 165-180 but maybe the drivetrain is efficient and is higher as you guess. I disagree about ratings, though; I think because of the aftermarket, dynos and the web, manufacturers need to be pretty accurate or face the wrath of the media (that is, overstating output).

Actually, 165-180 sounds about right. I just didn't want to let anyone on this board down who thinks their truck is pushing out 230rwhp:crybaby:. And what I meant about the rating is that I am sure they are accurate, but it looks much better on the sticker when they put out the hp numbers from the crank, rather than the rwhp:thumb3:

 

[truckmike26]

I hear you, but so many vehicles are offered with different final drive ratios, tire sizes and transmission options, manufacturers would need to publish wheel output for all the combos.

A half-ton truck brochure would have two pages just for wheel output ratings!