Hybrid fuel economy number spilled..

So on Canadian website Toyota has released some info about new Land Cruiser.

Here is a screenshot from there:



I think this is going to be 2024 Tacoma i-Force Max fuel economy too.

Here we have it:

8.7 L/100km = 27 MPG

Edited:

And Land Cruiser appears to be an AWD vehicle, so this number would correspond to Tacoma Limited trim. Regular 4WD numbers can be even better.

Cheers.

 

interesting.....It would be really nice to get close to 27.

 

Theres an asterisk there. Aint no way a big brick is going to get 27mpg combined.... sorry to burst your bubble.

 

Here, I have captured that for you:



Pretty much standard disclaimer.

 

I was guessing it would be 24. And I was happy with that. After the Grenadier shot down my hopes with 13mpg, I have a low bar to shoot for.

 

Thank god you have the American conversion there!

So I paid $41,647 for my 18.9 mpg Taco. Looking at it just from a fuel standpoint driving 100,000 miles at $3.45/gallon I would save $5,464 in gas. The truck will probably be at least $10,000 more so after 100k miles I'm still out $4,535 plus increased insurance premiums.

 

Tundra iforce max hybrid gets 20 city, 22 combined, 24 highway, which is no more highway mpg than the non hybrid. The 2.4L i4 hybrid setup found in the new LC as well as the tacoma are built on the same setup (and chassis) as the tundra with a small electric motor between engine and trans to supply some extra torque when needed.

If the LC is claiming 27mpg combined, that means that you are looking at something like 22 city and 32 highway.... which just aint no way thats going to happen in a 4-5k pound aerodynamic brick unless somehow someway toyota unlocked hidden alien technology to make an ICE motor like 80% efficient.

Im sticking with a real world 22city 26highway and a combined somewhere in between for the new tacoma and this new LC in the hybrid setup, non hybrid 2.4l 20 city / 26 highway and a combined 1mpg less than the hybrid.

 

No worries brother. I know how it feels to have different units all the time.

As for the money - I want to make a different point here. It is not only about how much you save right now or in 100 000 miles. If you or I can afford paying for the 18.9 MPG today, it does not mean that tomorrow will be the same story. With a hybrid I am paying the price upfront, when I can afford to pay, and it is presumably going to make it a bit easier for me in the future. Sort of an investment for a possible rainy day. Just my personal view.

 

Also to your point, there are added benefits to that motor. My truck struggles to pull a utility trailer with a rick of wood. the 465+ torque will handle that no problem.

 

Is that us gallons?

 

Come on! Spending 10k today to hedge the cost difference of 19 and 27 mpg in 10 years makes no financial sense. That’s an eye roller I’d expect a salesman to tell me.

Interest alone from taking that 10k and investing it at 5% will pay for the delta in gas. and you’d still have the 10k. Fine to just be honest and say “hey I want a newer car and spending money is worth it”.

 

Every review of the Tundra iForce-Max I've read mentioned that its real-world MPG came in much lower than its published MPG. While I'd be thrilled if the new Tacoma gets 27 MPG combined, it seems unlikely.

 

10K? Right. Can you provide a link to the price diff between same trim hybrid/non-hybrid models that you quoted. Because right now if you take Tundra it is nowhere near 10K.

Also, this is of course is off topic, but the way it goes your 5% would not even cover the inflation. Again, personal opinion.

 

4 cylinder turbo vs 6 cylinder twin turbo

 

Here is another test - 100 km (62.1 miles) on Ontario rural roads with surprising (to me) results:



If you do not want to watch the whole thing - at 6:43 he shows "computer" data, and at 7:58 the actual number calculated at a gas pump.

First number is 24 MPG and the second number to my surprise is 26 MPG.

Ideal conditions, but still, not bad at all.

 

I was responding to Hogleg above who wrote “The truck will probably be at least $10,000 more so” thinking they are referring to what it would cost them to change vehicles. Which I think it’s reasonable assumption, trading a used 3rd gen for a comparable 4th gen is going to cost you 10k out of pocket.

Sorry but there is literally no math that will have someone come out ahead if making the move for gas savings alone. And blowing that 10k today to hedge against the cost of fuel in 10 years is kind of roller coaster logic.

 

This is exciting!

 

It’s like you’re in my brain!

 

Correct. But its the same, small electric motor sandwiched between a non hybrid drivetrains engine and trans paired with a small battery... on THE SAME chassis platform. TNGA-F. While the tundra to tacoma/lc comparison is not apples to apples... the tundra to tundra hybrid is, and the fact that like stated the taco/lc is going to be pulled out of the same play book that we already see in the real world simply doesnt add up to extra crazy mpgs, it simply isnt going to happen on the taco / lc.