most fuel efficient mid-sized 4x4s?

[Guy]

You want a tip? If you're talking 4x4 and fuel economy, don't talk petrol Pajeros. Anybody who tells you otherwise is dreaming.

Even the pre-DiD diesels are not particularly fuel efficient. In your price range, if you seriously want fuel efficiency without going small, look at the LandRover Tdi - Disco or Defender.

Scott, My petrol paj NL 3.5 body 260,000 motor 60,000 Ks on a recent trip of about 800ks I was getting high 12's per 100Ks sitting on 115Kph ( GPS speed) Now for a 2.3 tonne vehicle I would say that is not bad. Running on LPG I am getting about 17 liters per 100... The motor has not been tuned at all since being installed, so I am confident I can get those figure down ( or drop the pace a little to say 105 .. I reckon you could easily knock those figures down a bit)

[-Scott-]

You want a tip? If you're talking 4x4 and fuel economy, don't talk petrol Pajeros. Anybody who tells you otherwise is dreaming.

Even the pre-DiD diesels are not particularly fuel efficient. In your price range, if you seriously want fuel efficiency without going small, look at the LandRover Tdi - Disco or Defender.

Scott, My petrol paj NL 3.5 body 260,000 motor 60,000 Ks on a recent trip of about 800ks I was getting high 12's per 100Ks sitting on 115Kph ( GPS speed) Now for a 2.3 tonne vehicle I would say that is not bad. Running on LPG I am getting about 17 liters per 100... The motor has not been tuned at all since being installed, so I am confident I can get those figure down ( or drop the pace a little to say 105 .. I reckon you could easily knock those figures down a bit)

I once returned 10.9l/100 cruising at 100km/h, in my current configuration. That doesn't mean I get it all the time, much less often. On a trip, I usually allow for 15l/100km on the black top, 20l/100km offroad (I do better than that - these figures give me margin for error, but not a lot.)

You've also quoted highway consumption figures. What do you return around town?

The Paj may be more economical than a Patrol or LandCruiser, but that's not saying much - and the OP was asking about economical mid-size 4wds, not inefficient land-barges. If fuel economy is an important consideration then I maintain that a petrol Pajero should NOT be high on the list.

[Loanrangie]

A discovery series 2 TD5 manual will return a little over 8l/100 in stock trim which would make it one of the most economical real mid sized 4wd's on the market- coils and live axles, none of this ifs crap.

[Guy]

A discovery series 2 TD5 manual will return a little over 8l/100 in stock trim which would make it one of the most economical real mid sized 4wd's on the market- coils and live axles, none of this ifs crap.

8 liters per 100 is not much chop if you have to stop in at every mechanical workshop you pass by to get something that has fallen off, snapped or plain just fizzled out fixed.

Off hiway I would be happy to take my IFS crap Pajero just about anywhere I have taken a series two disco, GU and GQ patrol, suzuki sierra, hilux, 80 series landcrusier etc ..

[Guy]

You've also quoted highway consumption figures. What do you return around town?

The Paj may be more economical than a Patrol or LandCruiser, but that's not saying much - and the OP was asking about economical mid-size 4wds, not inefficient land-barges. If fuel economy is an important consideration then I maintain that a petrol Pajero should NOT be high on the list.

I honestly do not know what my around town economy is .. I live in rural vic and better than 95% of my driving is highway ... I have read on the pajero club forum of several folks that claim to get 8's in there 3.5 pajero's.9 ( I am rather sceptical of these figures)
My petrol\LPG pajero on true 32's has lower running costs than the toyota camry it replaced did (when fuel was around 10-15 cents per litre less ).

So I don't think it should be discounted as a reasonably affordable, reasonably economical and reliable mid size 4x4.

[KiwiBacon]

So I don't think it should be discounted as a reasonably affordable, reasonably economical and reliable mid size 4x4.

How can any passenger vehicle using more than 10L/100km on the highway count as economical?

[Guy]

So I don't think it should be discounted as a reasonably affordable, reasonably economical and reliable mid size 4x4.

How can any passenger vehicle using more than 10L/100km on the highway count as economical?

As I said reasonably economial ..
Most mid to large passenger sedans and wagons would not get below 10 litres per 100.
Commadore, Falcon, Camry, Magna etc will do high 10's at best when driven @ 110 with load on board and far worse in stop go traffic.

Find me a decent reliable passanger vehicle that will seat 2 adults + 2 kids in car seats along with all the crap nessecary for weekend away in the $10/15,000 region that will do better and not have hideous "other" costs ... I can not afford to run, register and insure another "commuter car" so a vehicle that can do all of what I want and get 12's per hundred I find reasonable .. (and cheaper than running an extra vehicle)

My brother in laws turbo diesal BMW will do low 5s per 100 ... but a new set of brakes cost $2000 as some sensor needs to be replaced each time the brake pads are changed ..

[-Scott-]

Find me a decent reliable passanger vehicle that will seat 2 adults + 2 kids in car seats along with all the crap nessecary for weekend away in the $10/15,000 region that will do better and not have hideous "other" costs ...

Maybe I got lucky, but I had an auto VT Executive wagon as a company car which would return slightly better than 10l/100km cruising at 110km/h - but that was one up, with some tools & service gear.

[KiwiBacon]

So I don't think it should be discounted as a reasonably affordable, reasonably economical and reliable mid size 4x4.

How can any passenger vehicle using more than 10L/100km on the highway count as economical?

As I said reasonably economial ..
Most mid to large passenger sedans and wagons would not get below 10 litres per 100.
Commadore, Falcon, Camry, Magna etc will do high 10's at best when driven @ 110 with load on board and far worse in stop go traffic.

Find me a decent reliable passanger vehicle that will seat 2 adults + 2 kids in car seats along with all the crap nessecary for weekend away in the $10/15,000 region that will do better and not have hideous "other" costs ... I can not afford to run, register and insure another "commuter car" so a vehicle that can do all of what I want and get 12's per hundred I find reasonable .. (and cheaper than running an extra vehicle)

My brother in laws turbo diesal BMW will do low 5s per 100 ... but a new set of brakes cost $2000 as some sensor needs to be replaced each time the brake pads are changed ..

It's funny because you've just listed a lot of vehicles that I would never consider owning.
I have three vehicles and they all do 10km/l or better on a trip and have plenty of room.

Diesel rangerover. 10l/100km unless I'm towing something.
Nissan (similar to a bluebird) wagon, petrol 8/l average, 7l/100km on a good run.
Nissan/Mazda diesel work car. 4wd wagon (similar to a sunny) 7l/100km if I thrash it, under 6l/100km if I treat it nicely.

BTW, your claim about things falling off is rubbish.
I could pick up any old tdi disco and use between half and 2/3rds the fuel you are for far less money than a swb pajero. Better ride comfort, more room etc etc etc.

[built4thrashing]

stick with a newish GV, a Challenger or a new Kia sportage or sorento. We almost bought a sorento but the dealership stuffed us about with a test drive in a deisel. Build quality is alot better than in past years. And to add to your confusion any vehicle built before 2004 can go on gas but only certified cars after 2004 can. We came across several GV's on LPG and one owner said he was getting about 14l per 100km on gas and below 10l on petrol in his 2003 5door GV manual.


Our 2008 2.4ltr manual 5door GV is awsome on fuel but its trip computer is hard to work out the exact figures. Around town it does 9.5kms pef litre of fuel and up to 15 kms per litre out on the HWY. this is on RON91 fuel.

B4T

[KiwiBacon]

Look I found half the solution.

[Guy]

BTW, your claim about things falling off is rubbish.
I could pick up any old tdi disco and use between half and 2/3rds the fuel you are for far less money than a swb pajero. Better ride comfort, more room etc etc etc.

The things falling off was a sarcastic response to the equally ridiculous claim as IFS vehicles being no good off road.. In a similar setup, suspension, tyres etc most IFS\coil vehicles will go just about anywhere a live axle vehicle will go especially in relation to touring.
The vehicles listed in my previous posts are all vehicles I have spent significant time on and off road in .. so I feel my statement is an educated opinion other than blind loyalty to a brand\setup.

The ride comfort thing is subjective, I have spent quite a bit of time (about 10000 Ks) behind the wheel of a disco prior to owning and a Pajero ..
In the rough I agree the disco was comfortable ride wise (I hated the seats .. they were bloody awful).. on the road the pajero kills it .. I spend the bulk of the time on the road ( as do most family wagons).
I am also comparing wagons .. not SWB's so the space arguement etc is irrelevent. IE a disco seats 5 a LWB pajero seats 7 so the pajero is bigger etc.

Seeing as LPG $0.56 per litre is currently less than half the cost of diesal $1.26 per litre .. the half to 2/3rds arguement to me does not wash either. I can buy 2.25 litres of LPG for the same price as 1 litre of diesal. So the diesal at 8 to 11 litres per hundred is costing $10.00 to $13.75 to run VS the an LPG vehicle at 14 to 17 litres per hundred at $7.80 $9.50.

I work out my economy by running costs .. my worst case scenario 17l per 100 is still better than a diesals best case scenario of 8L per 100.

You may work them out differently, but it is horses for courses ..

[KiwiBacon]

I am also comparing wagons .. not SWB's so the space arguement etc is irrelevent. IE a disco seats 5 a LWB pajero seats 7 so the pajero is bigger etc.

Plenty of 7 seater discos around. Did they not get the 3rd row in Aus?

Seeing as LPG $0.56 per litre is currently less than half the cost of diesal $1.26 per litre .. the half to 2/3rds arguement to me does not wash either. I can buy 2.25 litres of LPG for the same price as 1 litre of diesal. So the diesal at 8 to 11 litres per hundred is costing $10.00 to $13.75 to run VS the an LPG vehicle at 14 to 17 litres per hundred at $7.80 $9.50.

I work out my economy by running costs .. my worst case scenario 17l per 100 is still better than a diesals best case scenario of 8L per 100.

You may work them out differently, but it is horses for courses ..

Where is your LPG tank, how big is it and what does the conversion cost?
Does it go underneath, rendering your vehicle dedicated LPG and giving a terribly short range or does it go inside, giving a little more range (but still less than diesel) and eating up cargo space?

56c is rather low, fuelwatch shows it varying a lot. How far do you get on a tank?

[Guy]

I am also comparing wagons .. not SWB's so the space arguement etc is irrelevent. IE a disco seats 5 a LWB pajero seats 7 so the pajero is bigger etc.

Plenty of 7 seater discos around. Did they not get the 3rd row in Aus?

Seeing as LPG $0.56 per litre is currently less than half the cost of diesal $1.26 per litre .. the half to 2/3rds arguement to me does not wash either. I can buy 2.25 litres of LPG for the same price as 1 litre of diesal. So the diesal at 8 to 11 litres per hundred is costing $10.00 to $13.75 to run VS the an LPG vehicle at 14 to 17 litres per hundred at $7.80 $9.50.

I work out my economy by running costs .. my worst case scenario 17l per 100 is still better than a diesals best case scenario of 8L per 100.

You may work them out differently, but it is horses for courses ..

Where is your LPG tank, how big is it and what does the conversion cost?
Does it go underneath, rendering your vehicle dedicated LPG and giving a terribly short range or does it go inside, giving a little more range (but still less than diesel) and eating up cargo space?

56c is rather low, fuelwatch shows it varying a lot. How far do you get on a tank?

Fuel prices taken from RACV (peak automotive group for victoria) website April averages for metro pricing .. regional was higher LPG was 59 cpl (what I pay day to day in rural Vic) and diesal in the very low 1.30's.
Conversion came with the vehicle (in my case) but there have been fedral gov rebates of 2K on LPG conversions in Aus for some time .. so conversion cost is negliagble..
If the tanks were underneath I could run 2 for about 130 litres useable .. based on a worst case of 20 liters per 100 that still gives me a range of 600ks with a 100K margin for error.
I normally get about 360 to 380 ks (depending on the gas mix, shell gas seems to get the best econimy for me ) ut of a tank of LPG. The tank does sit inside the vehcile.. which does me fine for most adventures ( Victorian high country) even with the tank in place I can readily fit enough gear for two small kids ( pram, porta cot, 400 changes of clothes for the kids etc ) and two adults camping gear food etc for a long weekend, without drawers in place. I also have the full sized petrol tank so can cayy another 95 liters of petrol giving me a range over 1000k's combined.

Interesting the vehicle seems toruqer (spelling) in low RPM\low speed stuff on LPG than on petrol.

[KiwiBacon]

I am also comparing wagons .. not SWB's so the space arguement etc is irrelevent. IE a disco seats 5 a LWB pajero seats 7 so the pajero is bigger etc.

Plenty of 7 seater discos around. Did they not get the 3rd row in Aus?

Seeing as LPG $0.56 per litre is currently less than half the cost of diesal $1.26 per litre .. the half to 2/3rds arguement to me does not wash either. I can buy 2.25 litres of LPG for the same price as 1 litre of diesal. So the diesal at 8 to 11 litres per hundred is costing $10.00 to $13.75 to run VS the an LPG vehicle at 14 to 17 litres per hundred at $7.80 $9.50.

I work out my economy by running costs .. my worst case scenario 17l per 100 is still better than a diesals best case scenario of 8L per 100.

You may work them out differently, but it is horses for courses ..

Where is your LPG tank, how big is it and what does the conversion cost?
Does it go underneath, rendering your vehicle dedicated LPG and giving a terribly short range or does it go inside, giving a little more range (but still less than diesel) and eating up cargo space?

56c is rather low, fuelwatch shows it varying a lot. How far do you get on a tank?

Fuel prices taken from RACV (peak automotive group for victoria) website April averages for metro pricing .. regional was higher LPG was 59 cpl (what I pay day to day in rural Vic) and diesal in the very low 1.30's.
Conversion came with the vehicle (in my case) but there have been fedral gov rebates of 2K on LPG conversions in Aus for some time .. so conversion cost is negliagble..
If the tanks were underneath I could run 2 for about 130 litres useable .. based on a worst case of 20 liters per 100 that still gives me a range of 600ks with a 100K margin for error.
I normally get about 360 to 380 ks (depending on the gas mix, shell gas seems to get the best econimy for me ) ut of a tank of LPG. The tank does sit inside the vehcile.. which does me fine for most adventures ( Victorian high country) even with the tank in place I can readily fit enough gear for two small kids ( pram, porta cot, 400 changes of clothes for the kids etc ) and two adults camping gear food etc for a long weekend, without drawers in place. I also have the full sized petrol tank so can cayy another 95 liters of petrol giving me a range over 1000k's combined.

Interesting the vehicle seems toruqer (spelling) in low RPM\low speed stuff on LPG than on petrol.

What sort of LPG conversion do you get for under $2k? A rough one with a really small tank?
Google estimates are $3-3.5k so they'll cost the owner about 1000-1500.
350-380km suggests about 80 litres. Equivalent to keeping over four oil bottles in the back of your wagon.

When using combined petrol and lpg, your supposed economy has gone completely out the window.

80 litres of LPG ($AU48 at 60c) and 95 litres of petrol ($114 at 120c) will cost a total of $162.
That same $162 spent on diesel (130c/l) would get you 124 litres which is 1500km on road in a diesel disco.
It'll get you over 1200km in an Isuzu powered landrover county.

Doesn't make sense to me. A thirsty vehicle on LPG is still a thirsty vehicle.

[Guy]

This is going nowhere .. I agree we disagree..

[-Scott-]

You should both buy a Nissan X-Trail.

It's fuel-efficient, and has an excellent power to weigh ratio. So it doesn't need low range.

[KiwiBacon]

You should both buy a Nissan X-Trail.

It's fuel-efficient, and has an excellent power to weigh ratio. So it doesn't need low range.

My work car is a nissan X-trail, just looks like a station wagon. Meaning, not quite as ugly

[Sammyboy]

Look I found half the solution.

That looks like quite a reasonable solution to the issue of fuel consumption.

Whilst everybody is arguing about power to weight, petrol or gas (quite entertaining), I go about my daily life driving my old intercooled 4D56 turbo diesel with a 146L long range tank which gives me a range of about 1300km city driving. My worst ever fuel consumption on record was driving my car like I stole it, into a strong headwind on the open highway at 105-110kmh, and that was 11.8 L/100km, and my best ever recorded fuel consumption was 8.4 L/100km when I was taking it real easy on the back roads. In a recent trip up to Brisbane, my Paj was fully loaded with heaps of luggage, 4WD recovery gear, a dog and 4 passengers, and it sat on 10.2 L/100km. On a trip over to Kangaroo Island SA, my car chewed through 9.7 L/100km, etc, etc.

[Jeeps]

If you drive a diesel hard all day they definately don't have such a large increase in fuel usage as petrols. My old diesel dual cab used to get 12L/100klm on a good run and if you flogged it you'd get maybe 14-15L/100klm. It was very consistent.

The jeep on the other hand gets 22L/100klm+ if i drive forcefully but since my new exhaust i've recently had it down around 11.2L/100klm when taking it easy.

cheers

[Guy]

worst fuel economy I ever did flogging a GU with a 4.5 in it was something in like 65 to 67litres per 100Ks ... 2nd and 3rd low range foot welded to the firewall.
She was loaded to the roof on dry sand racing the tide ... never looked like stopping though ..

Turbo diesal dudlux didnt use much .. it just overheated anytime it felt it was being put inder the pump. (things like a hill on a hiway put it under the pump, or spat out turbo's or blew oil lines, or buggered up something else)

[jason tincey]

i know its not a small 4x4 but what about 60 series with a 12ht turbo diesel engine doesn't get bellow 10lt/100km but they get close, with a manual and a 3" exhaust they can get down to 11lt/100km. not bad for a big 4x4 and the torque they put out is amazing.
that's what i did at least.
if not what about a Subaru forester manual they have high and low range and with a bit of modding they are sick. i used to have one before my landcruise with 3" lift and 29" tiers and it went very well.
just my 2c

[Moph]

Most mid to large passenger sedans and wagons would not get below 10 litres per 100.
Commadore, Falcon, Camry, Magna etc will do high 10's at best when driven @ 110 with load on board and far worse in stop go traffic.

Nup, disagree with that. I had an EL Fairmont Ghia with the (very slightly tweaked) Tickford 4.0L. Return trip from Adelaide to Falls Creek with 4 adults, snow gear for 2 weeks, roof racks with skis averaged 9.1L/100km on 91RON. More up the mountain obviously, but well sub-10 on the trip.

With 2 people at 110kph often saw 8's as well. Best I ever got was 7.9L/100km but that was treating it ever so gently.

Was cheaper on ULP in the country than gas ... gas it would still go through 13+L/100km and was more expensive in the country.

[Guy]

Most mid to large passenger sedans and wagons would not get below 10 litres per 100.
Commadore, Falcon, Camry, Magna etc will do high 10's at best when driven @ 110 with load on board and far worse in stop go traffic.

Nup, disagree with that. I had an EL Fairmont Ghia with the (very slightly tweaked) Tickford 4.0L. Return trip from Adelaide to Falls Creek with 4 adults, snow gear for 2 weeks, roof racks with skis averaged 9.1L/100km on 91RON. More up the mountain obviously, but well sub-10 on the trip.

With 2 people at 110kph often saw 8's as well. Best I ever got was 7.9L/100km but that was treating it ever so gently.

Was cheaper on ULP in the country than gas ... gas it would still go through 13+L/100km and was more expensive in the country.

I am using our fleet of 20 or so mixed late model (all less than 3 years old) falcons, commadores, avalons etc and their trip meters, fuel card data and log books with mixed staff driving them ( most drivers will be well over 30 years old) plenty of open road running etc. Not a sample of one.

[-Scott-]

I am using our fleet of 20 or so mixed late model (all less than 3 years old) falcons, commadores, avalons etc and their trip meters, fuel card data and log books with mixed staff driving them ( most drivers will be well over 30 years old) plenty of open road running etc. Not a sample of one.

That's a nice data source to have at your fingertips.

Any figures on tyres? Brand/model & typical tyre life?

[zagan]

Hyundai Serento are really good.

I know a guy who can has petrol and can go from bris to sydney or a bit past on 1 tank.

Diesel is really great as well but you need to keep it serviced and tuned.

[KiwiBacon]

Diesel is really great as well but you need to keep it serviced and tuned.

Right.
So petrols don't need serviced and diesels go out of tune?

[Guy]

I am using our fleet of 20 or so mixed late model (all less than 3 years old) falcons, commadores, avalons etc and their trip meters, fuel card data and log books with mixed staff driving them ( most drivers will be well over 30 years old) plenty of open road running etc. Not a sample of one.

That's a nice data source to have at your fingertips.

Any figures on tyres? Brand/model & typical tyre life?

Unfortuanetly I only have access to the fuel data .. (caltex cards for fuel only.. must log odo at the time of fuel purchase .. the odometers are physically checked once a fortnight and make sure they tally with other recipts for fuel use ... ie not filling up a jerry can once a week)
The other $$ for tyres etc comes from individual budget area's .. But if it is in the system I will see what I can dig out.

[Loanrangie]

Hyundai Serento are really good.

I know a guy who can has petrol and can go from bris to sydney or a bit past on 1 tank.

Diesel is really great as well but you need to keep it serviced and tuned.

Didnt know hyundai made the Serento for Kia, good for landfill thats about all.

[KiwiBacon]

Hyundai Serento are really good.

I know a guy who can has petrol and can go from bris to sydney or a bit past on 1 tank.

Diesel is really great as well but you need to keep it serviced and tuned.

Didnt know hyundai made the Serento for Kia, good for landfill thats about all.

Hyndai, Kia, same company.
I've been seriously impressed with the diesel i30 Hyundai I've driven. I know people who own diesel Kia Sorentos and they're very happy.