Don't like the adverts?  Click here to remove them

80 vs 100 please help?

Overcruiser

New Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
28
Country Flag
uk
Hi guys names Alex used to own a hilux surf now I want a land cruiser, I've been researching various sources that state the MPG on the 4.2td can be around 23mpg depending on how heavy your foot is, now is that figure the same for 80 series and a 1998 100 series? Did the engines change much when the 100 came out?

Thanks
 
Hi Alex
Mate in the 80 series in Australia they cameout with both the 1HDT and the 1HD-FT.The 1HDT started in the 1990 and finished somewhere around 1995/6 when the 1HD-FT took over The 1HDT had the 12 valve head. The 1HD-FT had the 24 valve head and is very similar to the motor used in the 100 series landcruiser in Australia. The motor in the 100 series is called the 1HDFTE motor which has electronic injection where as the 1HD-FT has mechanical injection.

From what i can gather the the 1HDFTE motor is the most economical which started coming out in the 100 series as you say around 1998. On other Landcruiser forums i have seen people who change the turbos and chip the electronic injection and get very good power increase whilst still maintaining longevity and relability. If it was me i would be looking for a good condition 1HDFTE motor.:icon-cool::icon-cool:
 
Last edited:
Most economical Cruiser 24V manual,25-30 on a steady run. 100 auto low 20's even with the five spd auto you would be good to see 25 mpg. Probably a manual 100 would get over 25 but whats the point? 80 24V auto 25-28, 12V auto 20-24 12V manual 20-25. Petrol 4.5 15-20. Had em all, checked them all.
If fuel economy is a criteria in deciding which Cruiser to have a good petrol version is usually half the price of the equivalent diesel one giving a lot of change for the difference in fuel. Top and bottom of it, non of the 80/100 range are cheap to run.
Hope this helps.
 
Last edited:
It may also be worth bearing in mind that if you plan to run bigger or more aggressive tyres (i.e. mud terrains), do a suspension lift, add weight such with a winch bar/winch, and/or add a roof-tent, all these factors will reduce your mpg from the figures Andy has provided. It would seem that mpg for modified 80s tends to be more often around 18-20 mpg for the 12v and maybe an extra 1-3mpg for a 24v.

What do you intend to use the truck for...?
 
Last edited:
Very good point Lorin, all my experience has been on standard road trim. When I had the "Silver Phoenix" for a short time I didn't check the fuel economy, to start with, the wheels were a massive 60kg each and with winches etc I didn't see the point.
 
Neither did I Andy. I never went far enough to check it. It was more a case of tankfulls per trip.

Went to Devon last month and my 93 auto 12v returned just over 22 mpg. Took it to Scotland this weekend with roof rack, loaded pulling half a tonne of trailer and quad bike and it gave me just over 20 mpg. I can't complain at that.
 
Don't like the adverts?  Click here to remove them
Neither did I Andy. I never went far enough to check it. It was more a case of tankfulls per trip.
I never took it more than about 50miles each way but the amount if fuel more it used was definitely noticeable.

Went to Devon last month and my 93 auto 12v returned just over 22 mpg. Took it to Scotland this weekend with roof rack, loaded pulling half a tonne of trailer and quad bike and it gave me just over 20 mpg. I can't complain at that.

Sounds bang on those figs Chris, although I used to squeeze 26-27 out of A1ALL on family holidays down to Devon but I was aiming for a steady economy type run.
 
Back
Top