Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

You can only really compare apples with apples. If the ADR of the Kluger is 11/100, yet you're getting 15/100, then I dare say that if you bought a Territory or CX9 (both have a higher ADR figure) then you would be getting even worse than 15/100. You can't talk to a CX9 driver and say "I'm getting 15/100 around the city' and have him/her reply, "my car does 13/100". They're quoting the ADR.

Here's something I've noticed twice now.........if I take it really easy in the first 20kms or so of a tank (when the consumption readout is quite variable), the overall consumption for that tank seems to be lower than if I flog it for the first 20kms or so. Some of you may read that and say "well of course Einstein, you're riding it hard for the first 20kms of the tank and that's why you have a higher figure". Sure, but the figure seems a lot less, less than I would have thought.......11.5 vs 14.5.

I wonder how accurate that consumption gauge is across the tank?

Cheers all

Posted (edited)

Hi Harold,

I would say that the economy shown is pretty accurate, unlike the distance remaining indicator :( . I did between 60 and 70 km after distance left was showing 0! :rolleyes:

As an example, I have had economy showing as 13 l/100km (suburban driving) and managed to get 539.4 km before filling up. I then put 70 litres into the 72 litre tank. 70 l / 13 l/100 = 538.5 km, so I have confidence that the economy shown is accurate.

Cheers,

Snowy68

Edited by Snowy68
Posted

As with most cars these days, the "low fuel light" usually comes on well before the needle is actually down to the empty mark.

I wonder if the Kluger works similar, so 0km left is actually the point where the "low-fuel" light would be - leaving in reality a reserve of fuel (approx 50-60km worth) ??

They may do this to promote people filling up their car before the fuel level gets too low and the crud at the bottom of the petrol tank gets sucked up and clogs the filter, causing problems ??

Just a thought...

Posted
As with most cars these days, the "low fuel light" usually comes on well before the needle is actually down to the empty mark.

I wonder if the Kluger works similar, so 0km left is actually the point where the "low-fuel" light would be - leaving in reality a reserve of fuel (approx 50-60km worth) ??

They may do this to promote people filling up their car before the fuel level gets too low and the crud at the bottom of the petrol tank gets sucked up and clogs the filter, causing problems ??

Just a thought...

I've found the low fuel light comes on with about 20-30km left according to the trip computer. I haven't pushed the boundaries too far yet to see how much extra beyond zero I can go.

Have a look at the last page of the Fuel consumption survey thread which gives other peoples experiences.


Posted
I've found the low fuel light comes on with about 20-30km left according to the trip computer. I haven't pushed the boundaries too far yet to see how much extra beyond zero I can go.

When you fill up, if you can put 70 litres in it then you've pushed it pretty much tot he limit. So when the fuel light comes on I'm pretty sure you would only be able to put about 60 litres in the tank at that point.

Posted

Filled up the car last night with around 4km left on the trip computer and the needle just above empty. It took around 58 litres before the bowser shut off. I never top off the fuel tank, so it probably would have taken 1-2 litres more.

Posted

I have traditionally been a lead foot being the first to take off from the lights and the first to get there. Then I bought the Kluger and having the active fuel consumption readout has certainly changed my driving habits.

My driving habits are as follows:

- Combined driving (250 country / 360 city kms) per tank (63lt) comes in at ie. 63lt/610km*100 = 10.3 (Readout says 10.1).

- When there is no country driving involved I average about 550kms per tank (63lt) 63/550*100 = 11.45 (Readout says 11.8)

- When I am away and my wife drives the car average is about 500 kms 63/480*100 = 13.1 (Readout says 14.2)

My conclusion is that my wife is a leadfoot, although the she does do a lot of stop/start runs to school and secondly the Readout is not exact.

I have tried different fuels ie. standard/premium (hi octane) unleaded and to my surprise they have no effect on the Kluger with the exception being E10 where economy diminishes by about 20%. i

Posted
I have traditionally been a lead foot being the first to take off from the lights and the first to get there. Then I bought the Kluger and having the active fuel consumption readout has certainly changed my driving habits.

My driving habits are as follows:

- Combined driving (250 country / 360 city kms) per tank (63lt) comes in at ie. 63lt/610km*100 = 10.3 (Readout says 10.1).

- When there is no country driving involved I average about 550kms per tank (63lt) 63/550*100 = 11.45 (Readout says 11.8)

- When I am away and my wife drives the car average is about 500 kms 63/480*100 = 13.1 (Readout says 14.2)

My conclusion is that my wife is a leadfoot, although the she does do a lot of stop/start runs to school and secondly the Readout is not exact.

I have tried different fuels ie. standard/premium (hi octane) unleaded and to my surprise they have no effect on the Kluger with the exception being E10 where economy diminishes by about 20%. i

The Drop and Go are the real killers because the car goes nowhere for over an hour a week with the engine going

Posted

Getting back into peak hour traffic recently, I've actually found my fuel economy has improved when in slow moving, stop/start traffic, compared to situations where I have a free run and need to stop at every red traffic light. Sitting constantly between 20-40kph compared with accelerating to 60kph then having to slow down to 0kph again at the lights.

Posted

i was getting my first service done today, and while i was waiting i wandered around the showroom floor, and low and behold i paid attention (for the first time in ages) to the fuel consumption stickers on the vehicle on display. The Kluger sticker actually states for pure urban driving to expect 15.8L/100mks, and the combined is 11.6 (Grande). Fair enough i thought, thats about what i get if i lead-foot it around town, but what i thought was funny, and mildly depressing was that the Landcruiser V8 sahara has better combined rating than the kluger! (DOH!)

how the heck does the V8 'Cruiser beat our 6cylinder for economy?!?

Posted (edited)
i was getting my first service done today, and while i was waiting i wandered around the showroom floor, and low and behold i paid attention (for the first time in ages) to the fuel consumption stickers on the vehicle on display. The Kluger sticker actually states for pure urban driving to expect 15.8L/100mks, and the combined is 11.6 (Grande). Fair enough i thought, thats about what i get if i lead-foot it around town, but what i thought was funny, and mildly depressing was that the Landcruiser V8 sahara has better combined rating than the kluger! (DOH!)

how the heck does the V8 'Cruiser beat our 6cylinder for economy?!?

Watch Top Gear UK.....Prius vers BMW M3, who get best fuel consumption figure when driven flat out in the PRIUS wjth the M3 TRAILING ALL THE WAY behind not even raising a sweet

Maybe the Kluger is the Prius in this case against the V8 Cruiser

Edited by PC XT
Posted

I see many of you guys are running tyres in high 30's (psi). So is the recommended tyre pressure 210kpa (31psi) too low?

Posted
I see many of you guys are running tyres in high 30's (psi). So is the recommended tyre pressure 210kpa (31psi) too low?

Plenty of threads already discussing this:

03 Kluger grande tyre pressure, optimum tyre pressure

Excessive wear front outside tires

FASTER THAN R50 V10 TWIN TURBO VW TOE RAG!!! (AWD KX-S Kluger)

tyre wear

The ultimate guide for rims & tyres Questions

Posted

To the OP, as everyone has been saying already about driving style as well as condition influence the quoted fuel consumption. Another thing you have to realise is that at the end of the day a kluger is a big and heavy car. Maybe someone should take a look into how these quoted fuel consumption of the car is obtained. Cause my general understanding was that you get the quoted combined fuel consumption and realistically add another 15-20% to it.

My dad just recently took delivery of one, and his average is about 16-17L/100km. If you think that is high, its mainly because he mostly does just goes to the local shops and local areas. No complaints from him because at the end of the day he didn't purchase the car simply because it had really good fuel economy.

Given the size of the car I think it acheives good fuel economy, you just can't really compare it to absolute numbers. My sportivo on a bad week will be doing 9L/100km and the best I've seen is 7.4L/100km.

Posted (edited)
NRMA on Fuel Consumption Figures

Interesting reading :)

Also http://www.unece.org/trans/main/wp29/wp29regs/r101r2e.pdf (around page 48) and http://www.unece.org/trans/main/wp29/wp29regs/r084_1e.pdf (starts around page 23) which are the specifications for the test

The testing is done windows up with no airconditioning or heating operating, and interestingly the fuel consumption is actually calculated based on the measured emissions of hydrocarbons, cabon dioxide and carbon monoxide, rather than a direct measurement of the fuel used.

Edited by Kesawi
Posted

So there we have it, cause I was too lazy to look it up.

Take those fuel consumption figures as guides between different vehicles and not promises.

Posted (edited)
My dad just recently took delivery of one, and his average is about 16-17L/100km. If you think that is high, its mainly because he mostly does just goes to the local shops and local areas. No complaints from him because at the end of the day he didn't purchase the car simply because it had really good fuel economy.

As some on this forum have pointed out, a brand new Kluger returns rather high fuel consumption figures, which will decrease once the engine loosens up over the new few hundred km.

Ken.

Edited by kbosward
  • 4 weeks later...
Posted

Just had my car serviced a little over two weeks ago and changed the oil to Mobil 1 Super Syn 0W-40. My fuel comsumption has gone from averaging 11-12L/100km to 12-13L/100km. Everything else such as driving style, fuel and tyres haven't changed. I was expecting the fuel consumption to improve, but the opposite has happened.

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

Just did a highway trip, mostly freeway on cruise control, mix of 80 km/h (learner driver) and 100-110 km/h. Showing 8.5 L/100 km after 700 km, cruising range showing 2 km so could easily have gone another 50 km or more. I'm stoked to think I could get 750 km on a single tank.

Ken.

  • 5 years later...
Posted

I have a Kluger 2009 Grande 4x4 and has done 122,000 kms. Was recently serviced and used Castrol Edge 5w 30. The fuel economy is around 20ltrs/100km. Before servicing, it was around 13ltrs/100kms. Can anybody suggest what is wrong?

  • 4 weeks later...
Posted

I have just bought a used 2011 Kluger Grande AWD with 45k kms and am averaging 21.4L/100km!

I have done 170km since I purchased it, and filled it up with BP Ultimate 98 off an empty tank.

I have also filled each tire to 40psi each.

Admittedly I haven't driven on any freeways since the first day and live in a hilly suburb, but

21.4L/100km! I don't drive hard or aggressively, so unfortunately I can't blame it on that.

That is 3X more fuel than my previous car consumed and is really holding me back from

feeling good about my purchase.

The car gets serviced by Toyota tomorrow, and I really hope they can sort this out.

I ordered a K & N Filter from the US, as I read they can help with fuel consumption also.

Will let you know how I go.

Posted (edited)

You should not have to resort to a k&n filter to improve that consumption as something is definitely not right.
AWD Klugers are thirsty beasts, but not to the extent you are reporting unless your driving is a lot of short trips with a lead foot? The 2wd version would return figures of less than half of what you are getting.
At 45,000k.. it would not hurt to rip the throttle body off and give it a good clean. easy & cheap to do.
Let us know if the dealer finds anything.

Edited by KX-R & ACV40R

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now




  • Join The Club

    Join the Toyota Owners Club and be part of the Community. It's FREE!

  • Latest Postings

    1. 9

      Android auto

    2. 9

      Android auto

    3. 1

      Turboed Corolla Overbuilt?

    4. 3

      Camry Touring 2010 Fuel consumption 15.2L/100km. Normal?

    5. 3

      Camry Touring 2010 Fuel consumption 15.2L/100km. Normal?

    6. 0

      Camry Touring 2010 A/C Issues.

    7. 18

      High idling on the 2zzge even when warm (solved!)

    8. 5

      High RPM Idle after the engine warm up.

    9. 0

      Tow bar

×
×
  • Create New...

Forums


News


Membership