What kind of gas mileage do you get?

[p nut]

that so not true. You should read this short article
I use premium grade fuel and see noticeable difference in performance and fuel economy

High Octane Fuel

With all due respect, I really doubt that you are seeing that much difference between regular and premium (if any) in your V8.

That article does list some good points and good facts (such as pre-detonation), but does not really apply to us (meaning Toyota SUV people). Detonation/pinging/knocking usually happens on high-compression/high-revving cars, which is why they require a higher octane fuel. Higher octane fuel resist ignition more than a lower-octane fuel.

But, given a truck engine that usually performs at a lower RPM range and given the fact that the compression ratio is not that high (especially in the non-VVTi V8's), premium is a waste of money and won't net any increase in performance or efficiency. Both premium and regular gas have about the same BTU's. If pre-detonation/pinging is not is a factor, which is the case with the 4.7L V8 or 4.0L V6's, then it really doesn't matter which gas we use. I don't know about you, but I'll keep my money with me.

Remember, the manual calls for regular gas. If premium would increase performance and efficiency, any manuf. would specify that in the manual and their brochures.

 

[Mabuse]

2006
v-6
87 Octane

I've been keeping detailed records based on actual fuel used vs. miles driven for the last 12 months. The little computer that gives you your mpg is not accurate. All these calculations are based on stock 265/65/17 tires. I just added 265/70/17's 20 days ago and I am experiencing different mgp readings. But all figures below are based on stock tires.

When I do 100% in-town urban stop and go driving I get 17.5 mpg
When I do a 50-50 mix of in-town and highway I get 18.75 mpg
When I do 100% highway driving I do 20.5
My overall mpg since I started calculating one year ago is precisely 17.66

My mpg computer has never been reset since the day I bought it. It reads 18.8 mpg. It is clearly wrong.

 

[davem]

about 14 mpg around town and work, about 21-22 on the highway.

 

[Mtn.Rush]

2008 V8 and I am getting 14-14.6 around town. No road trips yet so I cant comment on highway MPG.

 

[montanaT4R]

I used to average, according to the computer 17ish...about 18 using the old fashioned method, now w/ the heavy bigger bfgs I'm at around 14 measured the old fashioned way...plus I also like to juice that V8 every now and then.

 

[gqr1c3boi]

I just got my 08 V6 about a month ago. The first few hundred miles came out to be aroudn 18 - 19 MPG, not it's coming out to be 20-21 MPG.(a pretty even mix of city and highway driving) I'm impressed seeing as how my 91 3.0L V6 only managed a measly 13-15, depending on how I drove it.

 

[TC3racerM11]

With my pops 06 v6 2wd and no mods. I've seen as much as 23+ mpg highway driving with varying speed in 65-70. Pretty good mileage. Range at fill up was around 420 +

 

[73Euro911S]

2006 4X4
42,xxx miles

Freeway driving averaging in the mid 70MPH range yelds about 22.5 mpg

all around driving averaging about 21-21.5, way better than my 02' X5 3.0 which averaged 17 mpg all around.

Not bad.

 

[ric]

2004 V8 mostly city driving I get right at 18MPG..

You want to run the lowest octane you can without knocking/pinging. In 4Runners, whether it be V6 or V8, regular is more than adequate. At the higher elevation here (~4600 ft. above sea level), regular is 85, which has yet to cause any problems. If you run anything higher, all you're doing is wasting money and potentially doing harm to your engine. People ASSUME just because the higher octane is more expensive, it's better for your engine. It's not.

got any facts/proof ? not that Im doubting you, Ive heard that a few times, (from people I trust) but havent seen any proof, just hearsay, Id really like to see some stats, data, etc. but have no idea where to look and I dont want to spend hours looking for it, lol

 

[p nut]

got any facts/proof ? not that Im doubting you, Ive heard that a few times, (from people I trust) but havent seen any proof, just hearsay, Id really like to see some stats, data, etc. but have no idea where to look and I dont want to spend hours looking for it, lol

Well, I don

 

[ric]

Well, I don

 

[portfoliobldr]

Hi,
I am new to this and this is my 1st post, so forgive me if my post etiquette isnt up to par.
1st a little history.
My 1998 has 142k miles on it, purchased with 40k miles in 2002.
I consistantly get 16 mpg mixed driving and 21 straight highway.
My wifes 1997 with 135k, purchased with 90k, also in 2002, consistanly gets 17mpg mixed and 22 straight highway.
I never understood that, but thats another issue.
My 98 is currently for sale as I just purchased a 2003 v8 Limited with 100k in perfect condition for $10k.
I stumbled upon this deal and couldnt afford not to buy it.
Now heres my dilemma.
Im 40 and not red light racer.
The dash computer lies and tells me Im getting 14 to 16 mpg in mixed driving.
Ive filled the tank 3 times with regular and checked the old fashioned way.
The 1st time my calc was 12.5 mpg.
The 2nd time my calc was 11.8 mpg.

Is it normal for the computer to be this far off?
Is this mpg as good as it gets?

Thanks.

 

[p nut]

Hi,
I am new to this and this is my 1st post, so forgive me if my post etiquette isnt up to par.
1st a little history.
My 1998 has 142k miles on it, purchased with 40k miles in 2002.
I consistantly get 16 mpg mixed driving and 21 straight highway.
My wifes 1997 with 135k, purchased with 90k, also in 2002, consistanly gets 17mpg mixed and 22 straight highway.
I never understood that, but thats another issue.
My 98 is currently for sale as I just purchased a 2003 v8 Limited with 100k in perfect condition for $10k.
I stumbled upon this deal and couldnt afford not to buy it.
Now heres my dilemma.
Im 40 and not red light racer.
The dash computer lies and tells me Im getting 14 to 16 mpg in mixed driving.
Ive filled the tank 3 times with regular and checked the old fashioned way.
The 1st time my calc was 12.5 mpg.
The 2nd time my calc was 11.8 mpg.

Is it normal for the computer to be this far off?
Is this mpg as good as it gets?

Thanks.

That seems too low. Could be many different things. Bad O2 sensor, air filter, etc. Did you do a fresh tune up after you got it? Also, 90k is the timing belt change requirement. Was it done?

 

[portfoliobldr]

With OBDII wouldnt a bad O2 sensor throw a check engine light?
Air filter is new.
Did not tune up the engine specifically.
However the trans and power steering were power flushed,
front and rear differentials drained and refilled,
transfer case drained and refilled.
Engine oil drained and refilled with Mobil 1 EP 5w30 and a factory filter.
The timing belt has not been done but would not effect mpg.
Ive owned it for about 1k miles now and it doesnt miss a beat, runs smooth & strong, no ping, no miss.
Im in PA and its chilly so Im sure its running the choke with alot of cold starts but i didnt expect the mpg to be this piss poor.

And should any of this effect the computer miscalculating my mpg?

BTW my 98 with 142k on it has never had the belt done either, not to get off track.

Thanks for engaging me in my banter.

 

[CJ3Flyr]

With OBDII wouldnt a bad O2 sensor throw a check engine light?
Air filter is new.
Did not tune up the engine specifically.
However the trans and power steering were power flushed,
front and rear differentials drained and refilled,
transfer case drained and refilled.
Engine oil drained and refilled with Mobil 1 EP 5w30 and a factory filter.
The timing belt has not been done but would not effect mpg.
Ive owned it for about 1k miles now and it doesnt miss a beat, runs smooth & strong, no ping, no miss.
Im in PA and its chilly so Im sure its running the choke with alot of cold starts but i didnt expect the mpg to be this piss poor.

And should any of this effect the computer miscalculating my mpg?

BTW my 98 with 142k on it has never had the belt done either, not to get off track.

Thanks for engaging me in my banter.

OBD-II/O2 sensor throwing a light- Maybe, maybe not. As the O2 sensor approaches the end of its life it'll work well enough to keep the CEL light out but not well enough to provide optimal mpg.

Are you missing some mpg with poor tire inflation? Another fav (in addition to O2 sensors) is the MAF sensor in the intake. It needs to be removed and cleaned periodically. Here's a blurb on MAF cleaning.

The onboard computers seem to be fairly inaccurate as a rule especially with lots of short trips.

:cheers:

 

[Schmatt]

Any difference in mileage between the early V8's and the later ones?

I thought someone once told me that the VVTIIST(etc)IR...got less than the early 235 horse V8's...

 

[CAD-Man]

I have a 2008 SR5 V8 and have averaged 20.84 MPG across 41 fill ups. See MPG Data for my MPG results, running 86 Octane fuel. This is a combination of local town driving and highway driving anywhere from 5400 to 9700 feet above sea level.

Bruce

 

[motion732]

2006 v6 se 4x4

my avg according to the truck is telling me around 18 combined city and highway.

why is it that v8's are getting better than v6's and there is so much variation btwn the same truck??

what can you do to get better mpg? anything?

 

[portfoliobldr]

Thanks to CJ3Flyr.

In Order:

O2 Sensor

Pre 1995 vehicles were OBD1 and had wider operating parameters to trigger a CEL.
The O2 Sensor, or any other monitored part, could fall out of its efficient rage of operation and not trigger the CEL because it was still operating within the OBD1 acceptable range.

Hence the mandated improvement to OBD2 in 1996 and newer vehicles.

OBD2 has much tighter operating parameters and will trigger a CEL when the O2 Sensor fails to operate within its efficient range.
Short story, in a pre 95 vehicle the O2 Sensor could be bad and not trip the CEL.
In a 96 and newer vehicle if the CEL isn

 

[CJ3Flyr]

Thanks to CJ3Flyr.

O2 Sensor

Pre 1995 vehicles were OBD1 and had wider operating parameters to trigger a CEL.
The O2 Sensor, or any other monitored part, could fall out of its efficient rage of operation and not trigger the CEL because it was still operating within the OBD1 acceptable range.

Hence the mandated improvement to OBD2 in 1996 and newer vehicles.

OBD2 has much tighter operating parameters and will trigger a CEL when the O2 Sensor fails to operate within its efficient range.
Short story, in a pre 95 vehicle the O2 Sensor could be bad and not trip the CEL.
In a 96 and newer vehicle if the CEL isn