Colorado/Prado Fuel Consumption

G

Guest

Guest
Morning All,
I'm going to have to change my wife's car at some point this year and
we are looking for something capable of carrying 5+ children on school
runs and she can't stand the idea of a people carrier.
She keeps on muttering about a long wheel base Defender with the bench
seats. Whilst I know she fancies herself as a bit of a Lara Croft type
(she's always fancied an old landrover to potter around in) I'm not
keen on the idea for obvious reasons and also am not sure how baby
seats and child booster seats etc will work in the back.
The car will mainly be used for a 4 mile trip down narrow country lanes
including a very steep valley that ices up a lot in winter and you have
to be good at climbing the banks to let other cars past. Other than
that it will be used for 2-3 trips a week into Cirencester about 8
miles down the dual carriageway.
I don't really want her using my 80 because I don't want to have to
have the rear seats in so have been toying around getting a Colorado or
Prado.
So this brings me round about to my question, what is the
Colorado/Prado like for fuel consumption for the sort of driving above?
--
Regards,
Julian Voelcker
Mobile: 07971 540362
Cirencester, United Kingdom
1994 HDJ80, 2.5" OME Lift
 
G

Guest

Guest
Hi Julian,
The 1KZ-TE will use more fuel than than the 1HD-FT the newer common rail
engine will be much more fuel efficient.
Cheers,
Craig.
Julian Voelcker wrote:
Snip
 
G

Guest

Guest
Julian,
I never got my Colorado up to 30 MPG. Average was usually about
24/27, I will estimate your's at about 25.
Regards, Clive.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Eventing Craig,
But with the Colorado/Prado being lighter I would have thought that their
consumption would be better - obviously I am comparing standard vehicles as
opposed to tricked up ones like yours!
--
Regards,
Julian Voelcker
Mobile: 07971 540362
Cirencester, United Kingdom
1994 HDJ80, 2.5" OME Lift
 
Don't like the adverts? Remove them by becoming a supporting member.   Click here
G

Guest

Guest
Julian,
Celia has a SWB Colorado, 1997 vintage, I find it a lot better than the 80 on fuel, somewhere round the high 20's to 30. It has narrow little tyres 215 / 75's which help.
I also found my 4Runner better on fuel than the 80 but not as good as the Colorado.
As with all vehicles short runs drink the fuel.
Gareth Jones.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Hi Julian,
Toyota salesmen in NZ get quite grumpy when you point out to them that
their official figures show the 100 series turbo diesel using about 10+%
less fuel than the 1KZ-TE prado. It is a very thirsty engine because it
is indirect injection and was not one of Toyotas better efforts. It also
explains due to the poor thermal efficiency why the 1KZ-TE is hard on
cylinder heads.
Cheers,
Craig.
Julian Voelcker wrote:
>Eventing Craig,
>
>
>
>>The 1KZ-TE will use more fuel than than the 1HD-FT the newer common rail
>>engine will be much more fuel efficient.
>>
>>
>
>But with the Colorado/Prado being lighter I would have thought that their
>consumption would be better - obviously I am comparing standard vehicles as
>opposed to tricked up ones like yours!
>--
>Regards,
>
>Julian Voelcker
>Mobile: 07971 540362
>Cirencester, United Kingdom
>1994 HDJ80, 2.5" OME Lift
>
>
>--
>European Land Cruiser Owners Mailing List
>Further Info: http://www.landcruisers.info/lists/
>
>
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Hi Gareth,
That's the problem.
At least we would be running it on Biodiesel so saving a few pennies
that way.
--
Regards,
Julian Voelcker
Mobile: 07971 540362
Cirencester, United Kingdom
1994 HDJ80, 2.5" OME Lift
 
G

Guest

Guest
OK, it doesn't sound like a Colorado would be much better than an 80.
And a 100 series doesn't seem much different to an 80.
What about the fuel consumtion figures for the more modern 120 series?
Does anyone have any figures?
--
Regards,
Julian Voelcker
Mobile: 07971 540362
Cirencester, United Kingdom
1994 HDJ80, 2.5" OME Lift
 
G

Guest

Guest
Julian,
I think that has the same engine in as my Colorado, 2002 model,
3.0L D4-D engine. If so it will be similar.
I've got a 2.5 diesel Mitsubishi Delica sitting on the drive at
the moment, not mine but interesting. It is a Shogun with a mini-bus
body, selectable 4-wheel drive etc. Not quite a people carrier but in
the same league numbers wise.
Regards, Clive.
 
G

Guest

Guest
I borrowed a new shape LC4 recently and found it much more economical than
the older Colorado engine. Didn't do any sums, but I certainly drove it a
LOT further between fill ups and was smoother on the road with more nimble
handling, especially rebound damping over crests etc.
Very noisy engine installation, though. At first I thought it had done the
camshaft, it was that rattly, but you get used to it.
Regards,
Neill Watson
On 8/3/06 11:55 am, "Julian Voelcker" <[Email address removed]> wrote:
 
G

Guest

Guest
----- Original Message -----
From: "Julian Voelcker" <[Email address removed]>
To: <[Email address removed]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 9:30 AM
I get anywhere between 300 - 380 miles from a full tank, ?70.00 i don't know
what that works out as mpg?
I use my Colorado for work so the 300mile is when its loaded with tools and
with some minor towing, 380 empty with no towing.
Hope this helps.
Regards
Derek
 
G

Guest

Guest
Hi all I don't say much but
Who mentioned the wife fancying a LWB defender, been there done that,
Colorado much more user friendly, no steamy windows, good heater, no
tinkering every weekend, no oily patches wherever you park, quieter, more
comfortable for the kids, I wouldn't consider going back, and I have had
land rovers / range rovers on and off for best part of 30 years.
Fuel consumption another subject close to my heart Varies high teens when
Towing around 20 - 22 norm for work and around town 24 - 25 on long runs
when I can keep between 65 -75mph but generally doesn't make much difference
no matter how I drive. A friend has a relatively new D4D? gets nearer 30mpg
all the time.
Regards
John Nelson
Lancashire
1998 Automatic Colorado
 
G

Guest

Guest
Hi John,
We've been looking at all the vatrious options and think that we will go the
Colorado route - we will be doing a quarter the number of miles we currently do
in a frugal Volvo V40 diesel so overall will be cutting down the fuel bills.
Just as long as I can prevent my wife needing my 80 for shipping children
around with the 3rd row of seats in then I'll be happy ;-)
--
Regards,
Julian Voelcker
Mobile: 07971 540362
Cirencester, United Kingdom
1994 HDJ80, 2.5" OME Lift
 
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock    No Thanks