Think about the bow wave a boat creates. Now a road vehicle creates a similar bow wave in the air. Up to about 90kph (56mph) the bow wave isn't too bad, vehicles can slice through the air. Above that speed and that bow wave starts to grow and you have to push that air along, which uses fuel. As your speed increases above 90kph that bow wave increases exponentially so your fuel consumption does too.
Well explained mate. Back in the day I had a 1hz 100 series Cruiser, and when I told people that my economy was better around town than on the highway they used to look at me like I had 2 heads.
Definitely noted an increase in fuel consumption when I went from standard to off-road tyres, 1+l/100km. Fitted a 'half' bull bar - steel bumper bar with centre loop with driving lights- and it did bugger all to the fuel economy. No noticeable change at all.
You brought back memories of my 2000 AU ii Falcon as a young fella. Averaged 19-20l/100km around the suburbs. That was with E10 and yes I drove it like a “rocket ship”. On the highway though about 9-10l. It was pretty awesome getting over 800km out of a tank just cruising on the highways.
I've got a n70 1gfre. I travel an hour to and from work and I get around 15L per 100k moslty highway speed as I've kept the stocky tyres on it. Looks lame but I swear saves me bulk in fuel. Save the muddies for the weekend
Well said, I found this channel cause of my V6 Hilux, but I also own a Lexus RX450H Hybrid which does 7.0L/100km around the city, and having previously owned sedans which get better on the freeway, I was shocked to find the RX450H did 9.0L/100km at 110km/hr, which was due to it being a brick shape 2.2 tonne (even though its hybrid), same as what is explained in this video, again, well said.
Love the information man. I have a 2014 gx with a bull bar and 200k on the odometer… selling it to my parents 😅 I’m starting To regret it but I’m pretty sure I’ll buy a new Prado in a year or two. as I’m a city slicker and my parents are rural.. they will get the most out of that awesome car.
Great explanation Anthony I noticed this too while doing cross country trips in my old Prado. While I wanted to drive well over the speed limit to get to our destination faster, the fuel consumption outweighed the extra time not driving. The only car that actually makes sense to speed in, is a small aerodynamic car 😅
Yes finally someone who understands how fuel economy works. I need to show this video to customers that come in complaining about prado, hilux fuel economy and wonder why they get 12L/100 some people don’t think for themselves and don’t realise their heavy right foot could be the problem not the car… 😂
Interesting. 150 V6 Kakadu, Michelin Lattitude HT tyres, no bull bar, fully loaded for camping, no roof rack. @110k/hr, Ave 11.0 l/100 on highway. Around town 12.3 l/100. So a bit like the older type vehicle examples you referred to. But I'm happy with that. Drive it like rocket though and those numbers totally blow out.
Yeah I've got a petrol 120 and it goes pretty good on the highway... Wind drag is a huge factor. I always laugh when I see roof racks loaded up with massive gear (patrols usually haha) or roof top tents thinking how much extra juice they need just to push that stuff through the air on the highway. Don't get me started on huge muddies..
My 2012 Prado diesel on standard tyres only accesory is a towbar. Brisbane to Sydney loaded with wife and luggage. Cruise control set at 110 kph by a GPS around (113kph on the speedo) achieved 8.6 litres per 100km. Tank filled at the start and the economy calculated by the fuel used on at the servo at end of trip so dead accurate.
I get what you're saying mate, I definitely agree. My V6 petrol Pajero gets its best fuel economy at about 80km/h (about 12L/100km). 110km pushes it up only by a little bit to about 13.5L/100km. And my commodore was the exact opposite, the faster your average speed the lower the average consumption.
Spot on. N80 Hilux gentle stop start at 60 and constant 110kph highway, fuel consumption is the same. Probably due to the engine trying to push that brick through the the air....
My (nearly) old bloke thoughts on what adds to highway driving fuel consumption . Weight of modifications, and all ''have to haves" needed or might be needed to leave home today. Tents, so called swags and crap on the roof. Driving over 90kph --- not lifting the go go foot when needing to stop or even needing to just slow down --- hard braking!! Leaving the cruise control on when driving in hilly country. Being in a big hurry 'to get there' --- Driving when tired --- not having breaks As mentioned in the video; wide heavy treaded tyres .
My 1kz was like that. It used more on the highway then around town if I pushed it to 110. If I sat on 90k it would do less then the city driving. City driving it would be around 13L per 100. Freeway driving at 90 to 95k would be around 11 to 12. Sit on 110 and that was pushing it for the kz, it would jump to 15/16L per 100. My 3 V6 prados were more economical on the freeway then my diesel was at 110k
Got a 16, prado 2.8 diesel. Stock europe version( small fuel tank) getting 7.5 liter without aircon average, 8,5 liter with air con. Highway in belgium max speed is 120kmh. But evry 10km above 90 ads 1liter. Highway wit aircon at 120 does on average 9,5L
Yes you are right my pardo v6 150 series used for 7 years I noticed best economy is between 80-110 km/h speed and best when used 95 RON fuel 91 seems fine but 95 better
Your kinda right, just put more psi in your tires for highway runs, my prado 2023 last model, does 18klms per litre on the highway- i get 80litre of diesel 910kilmeters just from tire pressure- 28-29psi. Yap on 🤗😜👍
FJ Cruiser (so even more of a brick) 285/70R17 M/T, 2in lift, Bullbar, 2single rails and that's about it. 15-16l/100km around town driving normally (not sedately). 12-13l/100km highway. Add 1500-2000kg and it's goes to 18-19l/100km, but then that's it, highway or otherwise it needs 18l/100km. A set of daily tyres and wheels is on the list this tax time.
MY 2012 PRADO 3.0L KAKADU fuel consumption showing on display is average 9L/100KM but the true is not, i put 75L diesel in and only run 650KM but screen still showing up 9L/100KM , even i put 75L fuel in and screen showing 680km range, how is that possible
at highway speed, overcoming air resistance is the primary reason for fuel use - especially for warehouse shaped vehicles like prados!. all things being equal, If you double your speed you increase the air resistance by 4x. So air resistance is ~20% higher at 110km/h than it is at 100km/hr . In the same way, it is about 20% less at 90 than at 100. simple, slow down. :)
I know of a Company that insists in shutting off the vehicle when idling for more than 2 mins to save fuel. I wonder if it would be more economical to keep the vehicle running/idling for say 3mins then off to next stop compared to turning it off and start again then off to next stop?
Mates 2019 prado does 8L per 100 on a long trip 100-110kms. It is stock but. My 2018 ranger does around 9L per 100 at 100-110kms. Stock ranger also 3.2 vs the 2.7Ltr. People just need to put fuel in and stop sooking. Its not a NA 6cyl 80 series 🤣.
My LC 150 Prado diesel takes 1:10 with calm driving. Sometimes 1:9,5. Use a lot the manual gear to keep around 1700 revs as that is the most economical - gear/engine ratio. And around 90 to 100 km speed. Above - anything goes.
Speed is another issue some manufacturers seem to have the minimum allowance in tolerance so 100 on your speedometer isn’t its 96, I had a 2008 Hilux that @110 on gps was 121kms on the speedometer.
Great explanation. I don't know why some vehicle manufacturers insist of fitting small 4 pot twin turbo.. They want to "trick" drives by telling then a small 4 pot turbo engine will give you the same fuel economy as the bigger engined vehicles. Old school training was 4 pot engines need to work harder when towing or trying to keep their speed. Larger engines, I.e., 6 or 8 cylinder engines work less harder thus getting better fuel economy.
Go try a BiTurbo 2.0 Ford Ranger or Everest at highway speed and you’ll reconsider your opinion. Genuine 8.2 L/100 at 110-120kph over 3200kms with 4 adults and luggage. Not a great car in every way but the economy is amazing.
@@garrylalor1554 throw the same 10 speed transmission behind the 3.2 and I guarantee the 3.2 will get the same fuel figures and drive better. Gearing is an age old trick car manufacturers use to make smaller engines seem better than they are all so they can pass emissions laws
Best I get average is 12.9L/100 265/70/17 Two inch lift Arb bullbar Rhino rack slim lightbar onboard air single barrel Rear drawers Onboard 42L water WOULDNT CHANGE IT FOR THE WORLD.
My old 3.8 V6 Pajero was at 23l/100km on the school run, due to stop start driving. Loaded on the freeway at 110km/h the fuel use dropped to 12l/100km. My diesel Prado is so much better in overall fuel use, especially stop/start.
I'm sorry but I don't agree at all. Having driven Ba and au six cylinders for years down highways in central Vic doing 100kmph average I'd get 13l/100km across multiple cars. And I looked after these things immaculatelyband drove relatively conservatively. Currently driving a 2010 diesel bt-50 4x4 and it would still do about 11l/100km being a single cab with a three inch lift etc. And driving down basically the same roads.
There is something badly wrong with your rig. I have a Prado 120 V6 that’s pretty stock and I get about 650km per 90 litre tank in urban driving, and about 750km on the highway at 100km/h (as the guru says, if I speed up to 110 it drops to about 700, and at 120 I’m back at 650km per 90 litre tank).
@@gazzafloss 3.0 V6 diesel. I filled it up the first time and thought that can't be right. Great car to drive but I don't know if I'd have the guts to buy one!
I was driving the Nullarbor. Why do 110km, when you are eventually going to stop. I have a Nissan patrol y61 3d. Just sit on 90km. No one's on the road. Use common sense. It's not a race. Because it says 110km, no point doing faster speeds. You won't get to distination any quicker. Especially over 3000 km trip
Actually you do get to your destination quicker and in some ways safer as you'll be on the road less. The difference between driving 3000kms doing 90 and 110 is 6hrs which is huge when it comes to fatigue. Maybe if you're in holiday mode taking 3 weeks to do that trip its ok but for some people who aren't in holiday mode doing 90 will lengthen the trip by a significant amount. Also there's nothing unsafe with driving 110 in a modern car or faster. Australia's 110 limit is slow compared to Europe and the U.S (where 70mph is for the slow lane and most people drive at 80mph) and is a speed limit from a by-gone era when cars still had drum brakes and radial tuned suspension was considered fancy
