The forward facing snorkel are designed to force clean air in.
Also a snorkel is meant to increase fuel efficiency.
Printable View
The forward facing snorkel are designed to force clean air in.
Also a snorkel is meant to increase fuel efficiency.
No that's around 12 litres per 100 by my calculationQuote:
Originally Posted by 7mmwsm
Hey bro, mines 2018, manual transmission. Hasn’t got the bullbar etc I’m running some 17” alloys and AT tyres with upgraded suspension.
I commute 30 mins each way for work, half 100kmh half 50kmh zones. Any away trips are mostly open road stuff.
Currently sitting on 10 L flat. Used to be 10.5 L with the old steelie rims.
Indeed.Quote:
Originally Posted by zeropak
I think we need to also get a bit of a reality check going here.
Measuring fuel consumption is a relatively exact science. As I mentioned earlier and as mentioned by @hotbarrels above, just going on the dashboard readout it can be highly misleading.
A calibrated OBD2 scanner readout is the only way to get an accurate number that gives you not just reliable consumption but reliable range. Trust me on that, having relied on one to get me from one remote outback bowser to the other in the absolute back of beyond, you need to know that it is telling you the truth. Or else you are in deep shit.
In many instances of casually quoted figures of fuel consumption, you can find a hole in the way the guy has come up with the number. So when we are comparing numbers we are definitely not comparing apples to apples. Some fellas can’t even do the sum right (no offence).
Then there is the issue of pages and pages and pages of fleet data for a large number of vehicles (hundreds), over a long period of time. The data does not lie. You can tell the difference between different drivers of the same vehicle, when one driver was rostered on for two weeks and the other was rostered off. The heavy right foot syndrome of the one stands out like dogs balls, no matter that he’s driving in exactly the same conditions on exactly the same route day after day. Some of the numbers that get quoted for certain vehicles are simply unbelievable when compared to fleet data that calculates an average over the service life of the vehicle. There’s been a couple of those in this thread so far.
It’s a take it or leave it thing, I guess my point is don’t pull your hair out over a problem you might not have in the first place.
Toyota motors in utility vehicles have never been the most fuel efficient, in fact they’re usually at the top of the thirsty list. But no matter what the freaks might claim, they have always been the most reliable, across the widest range of applications, for the longest period, fact. And that is because in stock form they are detuned for longevity and reliability, and matched to very sturdy drivetrains and chassis.
What you lose at bowser in the form of a relatively small percentage of higher fuel consumption needs to be considered over the life of the vehicle in your ownership. If you have just coughed up thousands in bling (understandably), then clearly there is going to be a weight and aerodynamic penalty, the flipside being you are now tooled up to go and do some really cool shit in even cooler places. I say it is a reasonable trade off.
Final point. I do not recommend an ECU remap (and for fuck‘s sake never a chip) if you want to maintain that legendary longevity.
(and now cue the owners of ancient rust bucket wagons to tell us how their old bangers are clearly better options especially now they are going up in value… for every one of those stories against the modern common rail engines I have the experience and fleet data that demonstrates routine achievement of 300 - 400,000 km in three years by bog standard Hilux in Outback iron ore mining conditions that make NZ look like Wiltshire.)
Thanks for all the input so far. Interesting to see the numbers from others. Honestly i’m not convinced that 13L to 100 is to be expected. I fully understand that it will be a chunk more due to the mods but I really can’t rationalise it being that much. I know of a few other trucks with mates very similar with bullbars winches snorkels and big muds etc that don’t run this thirsty. Talking to my mate today who has a lifted amarok with winch, bullbar, snorkel, 33” big mud terrain tyres and when I told him what I was getting his jaw dropped as he’s on 10.2L… It’s early days and maybe it needs to be really run in and get some hard working km on the clock. 11 - 12 I can accept as an increase over the stated 7.9 in specifications but shit 13.. should have just bought a landcruiser hahah
I was told when i brought a new vehicle that it won't settle down and free up till around 20,000km and then fuel economy should improve.Quote:
Originally Posted by stagstalker
Sent from my CPH2145 using Tapatalk
Or better still a RangerQuote:
Originally Posted by stagstalker
Sent from my CPH2145 using Tapatalk
I’ll let you know what my 4.5 ltr landcruiser figures are tomorrow. :thumbsup:
The GPS on my work Hilux has the speedo out by 10km so that would push things out as far as consumption is concerned. Either way >12+/L isn’t flash I’d suggest regardless of a winch etc.
Biggest mistake you’re making @stagstalker is comparing other makes to yours. That’s a complete non-starter. Totally different engines in many respects.
A snorkel is designed to keep water out of your engine when you are wading in deep water. As a bonus, in dusty conditions at reasonable speed, they will reduce the dust intake. They are restrictive to air flow and if added to a stock engine with no other mods to counter their restrictive nature, will pull back horsepower and reduce economy.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbear
For sure. Another good mate has a 2019 hilux built practically identical to mine but with BP-51 suspension instead. Last we spoke his was 10 point something but I need to follow up with him again to see if that’s still accurate. I think he had a tune done though to be fair. But yea hence why Im wondering if maybe it does need to be looked at or just get some more km on the clock.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyblown
Curiosity got the better of me, went upstairs and checked what my 4.5 ltr V8 drinks and it’s all bad news for you Hilux drivers.
An economical 13.8 Litres per 100km and that’s in shitty Auckland traffic with the boot up it when given a chance.
Attachment 200389
Mate just sent me a photo. As mentioned his is practically identical to mine and it’s on 10.9L with not the most efficient type of driving. But yeah his has been tuned too I think.
You'll need to put stock tyres back on it to see if there's a problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by stagstalker
Shouldn't be too hard to do. Someone will have some.
Huge variations in tyre / fuel relationship. Rubber compounds can vary from batch to batch within the same brand.
Process of elimination will get you there.
Your gonna piss people off at that speed,Quote:
Originally Posted by 7mmwsm
well them people can just "piss off" themselves...... not overly hard to pass someone who is consistantly sitting 10kmph below where you want to sit.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Maca49
Before you go digging to deep into potential issues I would get a scan gauge to give you accurate readings. I have one in my ranger and gives quite different readings to the inbuilt computer. Simple and easy to install yourself.
https://www.stahlcar.nz/scangauge
Mine is similar set up to yours. Steel Rims and same size and brand of tyres as yours. Bull bar but no winch or snorkel. Hard lid instead of canopy. Getting about 10.5 without the off road kms. Stock engine with no tune.Quote:
Originally Posted by stagstalker
Run it in and check again I’d say
An LC200 I drive uses about 15L/100km, it has full steel ARB bar and winch, wrap around steel running boards, stock wheels but has a lift, about 100kg of kit in it and normally 4 guys.
Makes me cringe at the pump, I reckon it uses close on double what my RC Colorado uses, They do sound nice though.
Don’t worry, soon enough the only place you’ll be allowed to drive at 90km/h is the expressway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maca49
All other two lane highways will be 80… And our fuel consumption woes will be solved, right there!
So much to look forward to.
Actually I'm telling porkies now that I think about it. I had DPS do a whatever thing they do to the computer. They gave me a print off of how many more horses and newtons of torque it improved. Really I struggled to see the improvement in the real world though. I think the 3.2 turbo was pretty much maxed from factory so couldn't be asked to get much more. I've put in an order for the PX4 V6 Ranger which might be here around October. See how that goes.Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwijames
FYI All our fleet have GPS with traffic cop installed. If you go too fast for too long you get a reminder. To be honest it's made driving more relaxed so I seldom go anything more than the speed limit which should reflect in my fuel economy. Across our entire business I think getting the GPS installed saved around 10% in fuel bills which in today's world is a fair chunk of cash. Slow down if you want to save some coin.
Ive noticed that my Ranger's economy is very sensitive to the weight of the load. Even just adding my winter recovery stuff like the high lift jack, spade etc makes a difference.
That gear, a passenger and hunting stuff for a week adds about .8litre/100 onto my trips down south compared to just me and some day hunting stuff.
tyre presssure is one of the biggest things,and often over looked (guilty your honour) the 5lb the left front is down makes a huge difference,run the car on 32psi and the 4wd on 35-38psi its noticable with the smaller engines....
my older brother had a lat model falcon and noticed fuel economy had gone to crap,didnt matter how he drove it was crap,checked tyres,yip were down,pumped them up again and straight away the fuel economy was back where it should be.
and roof racks,even bare ones with nothing on them....our old 1600 escort would drop 5-10kmph with them fitted straight away.... didnt look at fuel usage back then...
Fuel consumption issues have nothing on the NZ economy, inflation and supply issues.
The NZ dollar has dropped to $0.62 US today, It's dropped 4 cents in a couple of weeks which will make the next tanker load of imported refined fuel more expensive. It's only going up in price so wait until Xmas/early next year when Europe's in winter and the Russian gas is turned off.
The pump price of diesel in most places is approx $3.00 per litre, some places higher than this. if you have a fuel card you can get as much as 16 cents off per litre, if you have heavy machinery and get diesel delivered by mini tankers you can shave approx 60 cents per litre off the pump price.
Those 1000 litre ICB plastic tanks can be sourced for around $70, mini tanker fill, drill a small hole approx 4mm dia in the top of the large plastic cap and place some electrical tape over it to act as a vent etc.
Most of you farming folk will have it sorted with you own above ground tankage but other rural people could save some dosh, townies I guess will have a storage problem.
Just a tip to try and save some people a few dollars.
Don't think you'll get the plastic tank filled by on farm or rural fuel deliveries, the ones I know have fairly strict delivery container terms.Quote:
Originally Posted by 300winmag
And yet those IBC's get freighted from overseas with all sorts of toxic hydrocarbons inside them....
Get two of them. Put one on a trailer, go to Gull during their 12 cents/L off the already cheapest price in town, fill in the middle of the night, drive home and decant into the other one you have (most people won't have the forklift capacity to lift them full off the back of the trailer).
Expensive fuel won't be half as inconvenient as no fuel available whatsoever when, for whatever reason a ship can't get here.
300winmag may correct me, but diesel will keep for years. Petrol in full steel 205's will also keep for ages. My quads, 2 wheelers and chainsaws are all running on a 2.5 year old drum I just opened. Makes me wince just thinking how cheap it was when it was filled...
See an odd one already getting filled at Gull. Another problem many rural people may have is a spare $3000 to fill one. Also you may have to pay someone to guard it. Used to hear some sad stories from logging contractors loosing large amounts of fuel over the weekend, this was when diesel was under 70 cents a liter. One guy used to place the 5000l tank down a gully well clear of the road, reckoned the thieves used his log loader to cart the tank up to the road, emptied it over the weekend and returned it to the gully.Quote:
Originally Posted by XR500
Yes, that sort of carry on will only increase when times get tough.:XD:
MOW in Twizel 45yrs -50yrs ago in the dam building days used to put coloured dy in their fuel tanks.If you stole petrol or diesel.You soon got found out.DCM with no union back up.
My brother has a 2015 ranger which is stock standard and I bought a new ranger in 2020 for my work vehicle. I was very shocked to find out how much more thirsty my new ute was compared to his. My ute has all the extras, wheels, steel bullbars, side bars, running boards, canopy, roof racks & couple of hundred kgs of tools in the back. From memory my brother was getting about 350 km's more out of each tank of fuel than me.
I went back into Ford after I'd had my ute for about a month and questioned them about the fuel my ute seemed to be using, they just said it would get better once the engine wears in. It has never got any better though that I've noticed.
I have a new hilux hopefully arriving in a couple of weeks so will be interesting to compare the two.
Well at least it's better than my 94 pajero 2.8
Had the fuel pump and injectors done last year and it didnt change a thing.
Still get about 640ks till the fuel light comes.on from a theoretical 85l tank.
Got 87-88 in it before.
Think it equates to about 21-22 mpg
Think that's about 14 or 15L per 100ks but havent looked it up.
Be happier with a later model petrol at the same mileage as it would have shit tons more get up and go and probably do way better than that on average.
That is considering a vehicle in my price bracket
When I was a kid farmers didn't pay any tax on their farm petrol. Petrol that was bulk delivered to the farm was dyed (blue I think) to ensure that it was only used for farm use. Late 1950'sQuote:
Originally Posted by Trout
Now a days you claim the tax back off petrol consumed on the farm.
how would the dye help if the engine burns the fuel to run?Quote:
Originally Posted by Trout
They can sample the tank or container.Quote:
Originally Posted by Russian 22.
Think Britain has similar
Tell me more please.?Quote:
Originally Posted by hotbarrels
I had a snorkel fitted when I bought mine, before I drove it away, mine was more for dusty roads than water, but...
What other mods should I be considering.?
What i don't get is some snorkel brands advertise more fuel efficiency by adding a snorkelQuote:
Originally Posted by jakewire
The biggest problem the OP has is he is expecting to get at or near the manufacturers quoted consumption figures.
The quoted consumption figures for hwy city or combined are how the vehicle performed in a standardised test that has nothing to do with real world driving.
The tests are standardised to enable the consumer to compare apples with apples when researching the fuel usage of a prospective vehicle.
They in no way indicate that the vehicle should achieve said figures in real world driving and it (any vehicle) probably wont unless you drive slow enough to get shit thrown out the window at you.
Know of a cocky who was having problems with IRD, they wanted to place die in the farm tanks to see where the fuel was heading, this was approx. 20 years agoQuote:
Originally Posted by Tahr
