[Sheikshifter]

I posted this issue earlier.... As the speedo is about 10% out, it makes sense that the distance is also 10% out and in turn the fuel consumption reads high! That is, if I travel for an hour @ 121km (real speed) speedo shows 110km/hour working out I've travelled 110km . Thus the fuel consumption of the computer would based only over 110km of travel. But to make matters worse, even if you measure the fill back to a full tank at the bowser and use the dash measured distance, then 'real' economy works out to be way better than the comp (sometimes 3-4 ltr/100 better on Highway and 5-8 better on an around town tank)

The odometer and trip meter are accurate to about 1%, I have checked them a bunch of times against the satellite. The speedo is deliberately out (reads high on purpose), but the computer knows exactly how fast you are really going and how far you have actually traveled.

 

[bullo]

Well I filled ours up yesterday at the local Caltex, and with 753.1km's on the trip meter (total of 784 on the car) it went through 101.88L, so by my calculations that is 13.53L/100km. Which I don't think is too bad at all considering I have fanged it a "little bit" (gee it goes well hehehe). 500km of the trip was highway and the other 250km was town. There are no accessories on the vehicle at the moment but that will change in the next couple of weeks.

I am with you, I still can't believe a vehicle weighing 2.7 tons is so powerful and economical. I used 13.2l/100 on my last fill 25%city and 75% country running although only around 100-110 on the speedo as it is a windy road home. Love it!!!!

 

[timo_ed]

Actual 17L per 100 trip, about 27-30L/100 round town

Finally someone who doesn't bullshyt their fuel use. It makes for a refreshing change on the forum. Shows a man who is at peace with his vehicle instead of trying to justify to everyone else. Props Luke.[emoji122]

 

[timo_ed]

Then you see them having to go thru all the mental gymnastics about live axles or something to have to justify why they payed so much money for something that has an upscaled 1999 Yaris interior. That small pleasure is really the only use for the economy calc!

What about the fact it looks as gay as a Yaris?

 

[Sheikshifter]

What about the fact it looks as gay as a Yaris?

Crusiers dont look that gay, they look kinda tough, in a sorta 90s way. Looks that are as old hat as 4.5 l diesel that only makes 650nm when everyone else is cracking 800+ from that capacity.

 

[timo_ed]

Crusiers dont look that gay, they look kinda tough, in a sorta 90s way. Looks that are as old hat as 4.5 l diesel that only makes 650nm when everyone else is cracking 800+ from that capacity.

Agree the cruisers don't look anywhere near as gay as the y62.

In fairness to their old 4.5l donk, the y62 5.6l is a bit "old hat" too. Especially considering Nissans own VQ38 is producing 440kw and 652nm from a comparatively tiny 3.8l v6.

 

[Sheikshifter]

Agree the cruisers don't look anywhere near as gay as the y62.

In fairness to their old 4.5l donk, the y62 5.6l is a bit "old hat" too. Especially considering Nissans own VQ38 is producing 440kw and 652nm from a comparatively tiny 3.8l v6.

What are you like 14 years old or something? Since when does anyone say gay anymore? I was thinking you were being tounge in cheek, had no idea you actually might mean what you said. Sorry to have engaged with you!

 

[timo_ed]

What are you like 14 years old or something? Or in the closet? Since when does anyone say gay anymore? I was thinking you were being tounge in cheek, had no idea you actually might mean what you said. Sorry to have engaged with you!

The adjective 'gay' is commonly applied to all manner of inanimate objects. For example a pair of pink mens running shoes could be described as gay. Or wearing a scarf on a mild winters day in a Sydney is considered gay. It's NOT a literal definition of the sexual preference of that object. So in the context of the y62, when it's said to be gay, it means the appearance and presence of the y62 is soft, effeminate, inner city metro, and a bit dowdy.

 

[Sheikshifter]

The adjective 'gay' is commonly applied to all manner of inanimate objects. For example a pair of pink mens running shoes could be described as gay. Or wearing a scarf on a mild winters day in a Sydney is considered gay. It's NOT a literal definition of the sexual preference of that object. So in the context of the y62, when it's said to be gay, it means the appearance and presence of the y62 is soft, effeminate, inner city metro, and a bit dowdy.

Like I said, sorry to have engaged with you.

 

[Trav_Patrol]

The odometer and trip meter are accurate to about 1%, I have checked them a bunch of times against the satellite. The speedo is deliberately out (reads high on purpose), but the computer knows exactly how fast you are really going and how far you have actually traveled.

this would explain why the scanguage speedo is very accurate, i use that to set my cruise control.

Like I said, sorry to have engaged with you.

anyone would be, has the attitude of a 14 year old that's for sure, bad troll is bad, most of us are reporting good fuel use using the correct method, km travelled vs fuel used when we fill up etc, we got good results, including Luke until recently, but he takes lukes poor figures (which have only come recently...) and says he's the only one telling the truth lol
as i said, bad troll is bad.
I've been anything but soft on my car i tell you right now, it's got more bush stripes and scratches underneath and on the underside of the rear bar than 90% of the GU's i've seen up here let alone 200 series cruisers...
My new wheels and tyres arrived at the old man's place today too, a month until i'm in Perth next and can't wait to chuck them on and go even harder.

 

[timo_ed]

anyone would be, has the attitude of a 14 year old that's for sure, bad troll is bad, most of us are reporting good fuel use using the correct method, km travelled vs fuel used when we fill up etc, we got good results, including Luke until recently, but he takes lukes poor figures (which have only come recently...) and says he's the only one telling the truth lol

as i said, bad troll is bad.

.

Too funny, you all accuse landcruiser owners of bullshyting their economy but when the shoe is on the other foot it's trolling. Hypocrisy.

This article was an interesting read. I guess you'll accuse the author of being on Toyotas payroll too when the numbers match Lukes. All I see here are half a dozen owners trying to talk it up to prop up the resale of their y62s.

http://www.caravanworld.com.au/tow-...ehicle-reviews/1306/y62-patrol-vs-200-series-landcruiser-tow-vehicles-compared/

 

[joohnooo]

Hi Timo

I do lots of caravan towing.And at caravan parks where i stop i make a point of quizzing L C owners about their usage numbers with the advantage that I can actually see their vans and loads.

Openness reveals quite different numbers often to those reported on forums. And they are often only a few litres different to my usage.

Figures I quote are from over 40 000 km towing with my y62. So that's what data I use. I think every type of vehicle will have a range of usage rates depending on many factors.

But as has been repeated endlessly. ..fuel is only one of many elements to consider when judging a vehicles value.

John b

 

[Sheikshifter]

anyone would be, has the attitude of a 14 year old that's for sure, bad troll is bad, most of us are reporting good fuel use using the correct method, km travelled vs fuel used when we fill up etc, we got good results, including Luke until recently, but he takes lukes poor figures (which have only come recently...) and says he's the only one telling the truth lol
as i said, bad troll is bad.

Yeah, he isn't smart enough to actually look at the data. Even if the Patrol averaged 20l/100 it's still would be neither here nor there - see below.

 

[timo_ed]

Yeah, he isn't smart enough to actually look at the data. Even if the Patrol averaged 20l/100 it's still would be neither here nor there - see below.

Personal insults again..clever.

In any case, what does this little spreadsheet have to do with the validity of the fuel consumption claims presented here?

 

[gregs]

All I see here are half a dozen owners trying to talk it up to prop up the resale of their y62s.

Timo ed, Just want to clarify what you are meaning by the above statement...are you saying all the figures presented in this thread are bull s h i t?

 

[timo_ed]

All I see here are half a dozen owners trying to talk it up to prop up the resale of their y62s.



Timo ed, Just want to clarify what you are meaning by the above statement...are you saying all the figures presented in this thread are bull s h i t?

Mate all I'm saying is why do y62 owners feel the need to start a new fuel economy thread every 2 days. And the same 5-6 people starting quoting the same numbers again and start whining about how unfair it is that people prefer diesels, then claim that all consumption figures from other owners are fabricated. It's almost as if the y62 product team from Nissan Aust are sitting on the forum pedalling out the propaganda to convince prospective buyers that the y62 is the better choice.

It does concern me that all these numbers are at odds with what the broader media are reporting. For those of us who have been around a while we've seen this happen before. When the 4.8 came out there were people saying it was the end of diesel, yes it was a big improvement over the 4.5 in power and economy but it was still a long way short of Toyotas 4.2 turbo diesel. Maybe the 5.6 has closed the gap a bit, too early to tell, but reports like that caravan review I linked to suggest not. They say it still hunts thru the gears and works harder then the toyota tdv8. Neither engines are cutting edge by the way. It's no surprise that owners who have made a significant personal investment will campaign to improve the reputation, even if it means only talking about the good stuff online. Its a similar behaviour to gamblers who only talk about the wins.

The truth is that no one really cares. There has always been that small percentage of 4wders that have preferred petrol over diesel and those guys appear to have found home in the y62. In the next few years as some owners move onto the next best thing and become comfortable talking about the shortfalls of their ex well start to get a more well rounded and balanced insight into the upsides and downsides of owning one of these things.

For me personally, I don't like the look of them nor the dimensions, so economy isn't the main detractor. The fact is they won't ever be a serious contender for the cruiser until they're fitted with an equivalent of the rangie tdv8 like the cummins 5.0tdv8.

 

[Sheikshifter]

Too funny, you all accuse landcruiser owners of bullshyting their economy but when the shoe is on the other foot it's trolling. Hypocrisy.

This article was an interesting read. I guess you'll accuse the author of being on Toyotas payroll too when the numbers match Lukes. All I see here are half a dozen owners trying to talk it up to prop up the resale of their y62s.

Y62 PATROL vs 200 SERIES LANDCRUISER TOW VEHICLES COMPARED | Caravan World Australia

Have a look at the power curves. Its clear that the diesels dont have a flat torque curve - they have a flat power curve. They also make good power over a much smaller rev range, the cruiser is only making above 180kw for about 1000 rpm (3100-4100), whereas the Patrol engine makes above 180 kw for a whopping 3000 rpm (3200 to 6200) - triple the usable powerband.

Its easy to see why the Patrol is the best tow car. At 2000 RPM it has 30% less power / tq than the diesels. But it only needs to downshift 1 gear and get another 500 rpm higher and it is making the same. Its not like you need to be doing 5000 rpm to keep up with the diesels. At 3000 rpm its still 10% behind, but again add 500 rpm and you are ahead. At 3500-4000 the diesels are all done and need to upshift, in the next higher gear the diesels go back to making 150 kw or so @2500 whereas the patrol would be doing 4500 or so and has a stunning 100kw advantage, and still has 2000 rpm to go if you need it. (the landy with the 8 speed would have closer gears and would be better off than the other diesels). Patrol is making more power at 4000 rpm than the cruiser does at peak. Upshift at just 5200 in the patrol and the next gear puts you back at 3800 or so, at which point you are making 60kw more than the diesels after their upshift and you are in the next postcode before they get back to peak power.

This is partially why the patrol uses so much more fuel in the tow tests I have seen on line – they produce sooo much more power than the comparable diesel, therefore they are going much faster up the hills than the diesel. That power aint free.

 

[joohnooo]

Timo

Maybe if your keen to get a more modern vehicle where fuel usage is talked about regularly check out the jeep forum. And the L C looks like a guzzler.

All the best

John b

 

[gregs]

Mate all I'm saying is why do y62 owners feel the need to start a new fuel economy thread every 2 days. These things are comparatively new to Australia compared to the 200 series cruiser and I reckon if you go back to the beginning when they came out there would have been numerous threads about fuel consumption, I don't think people would have complained back then (maybe they did) but this is what forums are about, getting info and filtering out what you want and don't want. And the same 5-6 people starting quoting the same numbers again and start whining about how unfair it is that people prefer diesels, then claim that all consumption figures from other owners are fabricated Sorry mate I can't help with this one, but to say we are all passionate about our vehicles, regardless of which make, model or colour we drive and I guess it comes with the territory.
It's almost as if the y62 product team from Nissan Aust are sitting on the forum pedalling out the propaganda to convince prospective buyers that the y62 is the better choice. Who knows with Nissan Australia..they walk their own line.

It does concern me that all these numbers are at odds with what the broader media are reporting. If we were to believe all the figures in these magazines then we would be in trouble, real world figures are what we need and forums are the place to get them. I put it this way would you believe a mag about a review (most likely paid for by the reviewed) or do your own test driving and see for yourself and ask on forums by those that have the said item.

For those of us who have been around a while we've seen this happen before. When the 4.8 came out there were people saying it was the end of diesel, yes it was a big improvement over the 4.5 in power and economy but it was still a long way short of Toyotas 4.2 turbo diesel. Cannot comment on this one as I have no first hand experience or knowledge of the 2 petrol patrol engines, but will say there are a lot of 4.2L turbo diesel cruisers out there and are still going strong.

Maybe the 5.6 has closed the gap a bit, too early to tell, but reports like that caravan review I linked to suggest not. This review in my opinion was a crock of s h i t. If you compare an apple with a pear there will always be a different result, no if's no buts. If they compared a petrol 200 series cruiser to the patrol then the outcome may have been different

They say it still hunts thru the gears and works harder then the toyota tdv8. Can't comment on this bit just yet as I haven't got the towbar fitted.

Neither engines are cutting edge by the way. It's no surprise that owners who have made a significant personal investment will campaign to improve the reputation, even if it means only talking about the good stuff online. With forums, we take the good and the bad, I filter out the stuff I don't want, keep the stuff I do want and just keep moving forward.

Its a similar behaviour to gamblers who only talk about the wins. I know the way these work as I have a couple in my family!!

The truth is that no one really cares. I think that people do care otherwise we wouldn't be posting on here.
There has always been that small percentage of 4wders that have preferred petrol over diesel and those guys appear to have found home in the y62. In the next few years as some owners move onto the next best thing and become comfortable talking about the shortfalls of their ex well start to get a more well rounded and balanced insight into the upsides and downsides of owning one of these things. Yep only time will tell on the Y62 but we will continue to post figures as that gives us a history of how the vehicle is going, and gives others the info to make an informed decision on whether they wish to buy one or not.

For me personally, I don't like the look of them nor the dimensions, so economy isn't the main detractor. Timo ed, mate that is your choice and by me that is fine. If we all chose the same thing the world be a boring place (and probably go broke). You either like it or you don't, I don't like the cruisers interior, it's outdated and for a vehicle of it's cost it should be better, and yes I have been in a couple.

The fact is they won't ever be a serious contender for the cruiser until they're fitted with an equivalent of the rangie tdv8 like the cummins 5.0tdv8. This is where I differ on the opinion, yes it would be nice to get a thumping big V8 diesel under the bonnet of this Y62 patrol but what are we really gaining! apart from an extra cost (unknown at this point), a bit better fuel consumption, a bit better towing ability (but can still only tow 3.5 ton)

Sorry this all took so long I am not a very fast typist...Bit like my GU, not very fast but I do get there hahahaha

 

[notorious_benny]

I struggle to take the Caravan world towing article very seriously when they can't even get the GCM figure right!!

The patrol is not restricted to a GCM of 6000kg. It is basically 7000kg minus ball weight.

3.5t GVM + 3.5t Tow cap.

GVM is reduced with towball weights above 250kg and only by a maximum of 130kg with a ball weight at the maximum 350kg.

You would think a caravanning magazine / reviewer could at least get that much right!