1. Welcome to Tacoma World!

    You are currently viewing as a guest! To get full-access, you need to register for a FREE account.

    As a registered member, you’ll be able to:
    • Participate in all Tacoma discussion topics
    • Communicate privately with other Tacoma owners from around the world
    • Post your own photos in our Members Gallery
    • Access all special features of the site

4 Bangin, Fuel Sippin, Full Tank Challenge!

Discussion in '4 Cylinder' started by 2TRunner, Aug 29, 2011.

  1. Apr 25, 2014 at 3:11 PM
    #1301
    ancient11

    ancient11 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2013
    Member:
    #119094
    Messages:
    166
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    robert
    tallahassee
    Vehicle:
    2014 4x4 tacoma
    6th tank in a 2014 sb 4x4.....22.2. It keeps getting better.
     
  2. Apr 26, 2014 at 6:36 PM
    #1302
    MikeCB600F

    MikeCB600F Reformed Jeep Owner

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2012
    Member:
    #84687
    Messages:
    395
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Mike
    Plainfield, IL.
    Vehicle:
    2012 Reg Cab 2.7L 4x4
    Extang Trifecta Tonneau cover
    Another 400 mile tank - 414 miles on 16.67 gallons. Almost 25MPG.
     
  3. Apr 29, 2014 at 12:27 PM
    #1303
    91r100gs

    91r100gs Understand the Voice Within

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2008
    Member:
    #6100
    Messages:
    653
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Dan
    Kansas City area
    Vehicle:
    '08 Impluse Red SR5 I-4
    Factory bed mat, TacomaWorld.com sticker, EGR In-Channel Vent Visors, AFE ProDryS drop in air filter
    Another all in-town tank. Lots of 3.5 miles trips back and forth to work. 328.4 miles / 16.5 gallons = 19.9 MPG

    Next tank will be better as I have a long highway trip planned tomorrow.
     
  4. Apr 29, 2014 at 4:44 PM
    #1304
    worthywads

    worthywads Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2011
    Member:
    #58841
    Messages:
    3,411
    Gender:
    Male
    Peoples Republic of Boulder
    Vehicle:
    05 5-lug access I4 Stick, 70 Challenger Vert
    The weather has shifted, it will only get better.

    562 miles on 19.164 gallons for 29.3 mpg.

    But the last tank took almost 2 months. 4 more tanks and it will be winter again!

    Except I have a trip to Yellowstone planned for June, should get some awesome tanks on that trip.
     
  5. May 2, 2014 at 1:36 PM
    #1305
    MikeCB600F

    MikeCB600F Reformed Jeep Owner

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2012
    Member:
    #84687
    Messages:
    395
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Mike
    Plainfield, IL.
    Vehicle:
    2012 Reg Cab 2.7L 4x4
    Extang Trifecta Tonneau cover
    403 miles on 17.25 gallon = 23.4MPG. That good MPG is coming to an end. For the last 5 weeks, I was working at another company facility that was 46 miles from my house. Out of 90+ miles a day, 80 miles were freeway.
     
  6. May 15, 2014 at 7:18 PM
    #1306
    worthywads

    worthywads Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2011
    Member:
    #58841
    Messages:
    3,411
    Gender:
    Male
    Peoples Republic of Boulder
    Vehicle:
    05 5-lug access I4 Stick, 70 Challenger Vert
    313.7 and half a tank, averaged 35+ mpg driving 110 miles for work round trip to Denver. Should be a great tank.

    [​IMG]
     
  7. May 15, 2014 at 10:23 PM
    #1307
    Rich91710

    Rich91710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2012
    Member:
    #73470
    Messages:
    16,496
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Rich
    Los Angeles
    Vehicle:
    08 Base
    Satoshi with FJ badge, factory cruise, factory intermittent wipers, Redline Tuning hood-lift struts, Hellwig Swaybar, Rosen DVD-Nav
    Awesome man.

    I was at 27 when I got to work this morning.

    Sadly, the euphoria was gone by the time I got home.
    Thursday traffic is the worst day of the week.
    This week has been the worst week this year.

    By the time I got home, the Ultragauge was at 23.6. I averaged less than 19 for the trip home today.
     
  8. May 16, 2014 at 11:22 AM
    #1308
    bhd1223

    bhd1223 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    Member:
    #25008
    Messages:
    54
    Gender:
    Male
    Connecticut
    Vehicle:
    Totaled 05, 07 Frontier CC V6 6-spd
    05 Totaled. Dead: Pulled elbow off airbox, MAF Cal, DT Header, Towing stuff, URD short shifter, hoping to supercharge in the somewhat near future Now: 07 Frontier suspension planned, short shift on the way, tires, toys, etc.
    So with my 05 2TR I never got great mileage in my area and on my typical drives. I was guessing this was due to the hilly terrain which required extra throttle and even downshifts at times. After my Taco was totaled back in March I recently acquired an 07 Frontier Crew Cab 6' bed (big and heavy guy) w/ the V6 and 6-spd.

    I've netted equal and better mileage with this Frontier than I was getting in the Taco. Maybe it's just that I don't have to push it as hard. Sadly I don't expect to ever see 27 in this like I did driving across the plains of Canada in the Taco. I still have some testing to do on higher octane, this is 87 to 87 at the moment. It's possible that may yield even higher mileage due to tuning but the question will be if the % gain is greater than the % increase in per gallon cost.
     
  9. May 16, 2014 at 6:25 PM
    #1309
    wgreenlee1021

    wgreenlee1021 Off the Meds Again...

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2014
    Member:
    #128340
    Messages:
    571
    Gender:
    Male
    Higher octanes are for higher compression engines to prevent advance fire...
    ...or something to that effect.

    :thumbsup:
     
  10. May 16, 2014 at 8:06 PM
    #1310
    bhd1223

    bhd1223 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    Member:
    #25008
    Messages:
    54
    Gender:
    Male
    Connecticut
    Vehicle:
    Totaled 05, 07 Frontier CC V6 6-spd
    05 Totaled. Dead: Pulled elbow off airbox, MAF Cal, DT Header, Towing stuff, URD short shifter, hoping to supercharge in the somewhat near future Now: 07 Frontier suspension planned, short shift on the way, tires, toys, etc.

    Yes, but the detuning for lower octane in vehicles designed for higher but able to run on lower usually results in lower mpg in addition to less power.
     
  11. May 17, 2014 at 5:07 AM
    #1311
    Rackster

    Rackster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2012
    Member:
    #78628
    Messages:
    381
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Kevin
    Connecticut
    Vehicle:
    '04 E/cab 4x4 2.7 Auto SR5
    Use what is recommended by the manufacturer.

    Folks use higher octane believing that it's better (performance and maintenance). But this isn't the case in most instances especially in unmodified engines). Save your money and use 87 if that's what's stated in your owners manual. Also, using lower octane in higher compression engines over the long term can lead to engine damage. Again, read your owners manual for details.

    Tons of factors impact FE so drivers need to be aware of their own driving habits, typical and unique conditions, and state of the vehicle. Worthy and Rich (along with others here) are worth tapping for input on factors and FE driving tips. Some of the extreme hypermiler techniques may not suit folks, but the Tacoma 4 cylinders put up respectable MPGs when driven with FE in mind.

    I had a little Ranger a couple years back. It would compete with the 5 lug Tacomas. Most comparable trucks will produce comparable numbers. The question becomes more so which truck suits you better (features and style)? Enjoy what you drive. For me, the Tacoma beats my Ranger on those points despite both trucks having distinct advantages over each other.
     
  12. May 17, 2014 at 8:15 AM
    #1312
    wgreenlee1021

    wgreenlee1021 Off the Meds Again...

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2014
    Member:
    #128340
    Messages:
    571
    Gender:
    Male
  13. May 17, 2014 at 1:42 PM
    #1313
    bhd1223

    bhd1223 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    Member:
    #25008
    Messages:
    54
    Gender:
    Male
    Connecticut
    Vehicle:
    Totaled 05, 07 Frontier CC V6 6-spd
    05 Totaled. Dead: Pulled elbow off airbox, MAF Cal, DT Header, Towing stuff, URD short shifter, hoping to supercharge in the somewhat near future Now: 07 Frontier suspension planned, short shift on the way, tires, toys, etc.
    You are clearly missing what I'm saying. Trust me, I know everything I need to know about octane and its influence on the running of an engine. Many years ago I spent a lot of time researching the topic, I won't learn anything new from this thread.

    Both the Toyota and Nissan V6s are designed and recommended to run on 91+. It's also stated they will run on 87. What happens is the computer recognizes this and detunes the timing, etc to prevent harm with the lower octane. From everyone I've known with V6 Tacomas not only did they lose power they also lost fuel efficiency when running on the lower octane due to this detune.

    I didn't want to clog up this thread with this, I was simply hoping to interject the fact that oddly I'm getting equal if not better fuel mileage in my V6 Frontier than I was in the 05 2TR Taco, may it RIP. Again, I speculate that due to the nature of terrain in my area the 4 required generous throttle and downshifts at time while with the V6 I can just ride most stuff out. On flat terrain I'm sure the old Taco would beat the Frontier any day of the week but around me that just doesn't seem to be the case. I found this curious, maybe other people have similar experiences. I'm sure a good flogging on this V6 will use up a lot more than a good flogging on the 2TR did though.
     
  14. May 17, 2014 at 4:33 PM
    #1314
    Rich91710

    Rich91710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2012
    Member:
    #73470
    Messages:
    16,496
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Rich
    Los Angeles
    Vehicle:
    08 Base
    Satoshi with FJ badge, factory cruise, factory intermittent wipers, Redline Tuning hood-lift struts, Hellwig Swaybar, Rosen DVD-Nav
    Bingo...

    But this is the "4-bangin fuel sippin" thread.
    The Toyota 2.7 does not detune for 87 and gains nothing from 91.

    Is your Nissan V6 getting 24 consistently?

    VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
     
  15. May 17, 2014 at 5:07 PM
    #1315
    bhd1223

    bhd1223 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    Member:
    #25008
    Messages:
    54
    Gender:
    Male
    Connecticut
    Vehicle:
    Totaled 05, 07 Frontier CC V6 6-spd
    05 Totaled. Dead: Pulled elbow off airbox, MAF Cal, DT Header, Towing stuff, URD short shifter, hoping to supercharge in the somewhat near future Now: 07 Frontier suspension planned, short shift on the way, tires, toys, etc.
    Negative, about 20-20.5 consistently, which is better than my Toyota 2.7 was getting before someone decided to crash into it a few weeks ago. As I said, I was checking back in here to see if anyone has any experience to compare their 2TR (first part of 2.7L 2005+ Tacoma engine code, 2TR-FE) mileage to a similar vehicle with a V6 to see if it's normal that I'm getting equal if not better mileage in this new rig. This is 87 to 87 as well. It's possible I may yield even better mileage with this V6 running higher octane due to the detuning discussed. I still need to test this though.

    As previously mentioned, I'm thinking the terrain in my area required driving the 2TR harder which hurt my mileage in it. Perhaps I'm able to take it easy on the V6 due to the power (torque) which translates to similar or better mileage. Thoughts?

    For reference, my best mileage ever was with under 5k miles on the Taco driving through the plains of Canada (think central to west). I was seeing 25-27 there while loaded up with about 1500 lbs of cargo. After spending a few years in Alaska, then Nevada and then in CT where I am now, I was lucky if I ever saw over 21 (hot in Nevada) which had recently (since CT) turned to lucky if over 20 and normally around 18-19.

    Original Post about this, somehow it turned into the craziness of the last few posts which I had no desire to have happen:
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2014
  16. May 17, 2014 at 5:44 PM
    #1316
    Rich91710

    Rich91710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2012
    Member:
    #73470
    Messages:
    16,496
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Rich
    Los Angeles
    Vehicle:
    08 Base
    Satoshi with FJ badge, factory cruise, factory intermittent wipers, Redline Tuning hood-lift struts, Hellwig Swaybar, Rosen DVD-Nav
    Fair enough.

    On the V6 being better than your 2TR, I think it's not so much that the V6 is that good, but that your particular 2TR was "bad"... based on your driving conditions.

    But that's not inconsistent with what some are reporting for their 4wd (and generally with oversized tires).
    The thing is that Toyota gears tall. It's good for highway economy at a conservative speed, but absolutely sucks for in-town driving, hilly terrain, and speeds above 65.
    Adding taller tires just compounds the issues.
    I normally run 24-25.
    If I refuel, reset the gauges, and spend the weekend shopping with my wife, I'll be looking at 15-17 on the ultragauge when I get in the truck to leave for work Monday.
     
  17. May 17, 2014 at 11:37 PM
    #1317
    worthywads

    worthywads Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2011
    Member:
    #58841
    Messages:
    3,411
    Gender:
    Male
    Peoples Republic of Boulder
    Vehicle:
    05 5-lug access I4 Stick, 70 Challenger Vert
    I drive at a mile plus above sea level and I enjoy all of the benefits of high altitude. Of course an I4 will do better than a V6 in the same tacoma.
     
    Last edited: May 18, 2014
  18. May 18, 2014 at 5:25 AM
    #1318
    Rackster

    Rackster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2012
    Member:
    #78628
    Messages:
    381
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Kevin
    Connecticut
    Vehicle:
    '04 E/cab 4x4 2.7 Auto SR5
    BHD - no problem. I hadn't realized your Frontier requires the higher octane (assumed incorrectly).

    My MDX requires the higher octane but as the manual states, using 89 is an option if temporary and used sparingly (emergency-like). 91 or better and seems to give the best FE on 91 (20-24 hwy, 18-21 cty). Not bad for a 7 seater with 300 ponies.

    As you know, the winter here was dreadful; MPGs tanked on my Tacoma dragging down the FE from 22.6 to around 21.1. I had two tanks where I was under 20 MPGs avg (I used 4-wheel a couple of times each for those tankfulls). My commute takes me from the shore up through the valley to Glastonbury so there are plenty of hills but not as significant as the NE and NW corners. I believe you are in one or the other. For the 4 cylinder, I would expect more downshifting (MT or AT) so more spikes and reduced MPGs. I would expect that I'd have tanks where the MPGs were below 19 and with more regularity with my configuration.

    As for the better torque assisting your FE given the terrain, maybe. I do notice differences between where the Tacoma will downshift compared to the MDX. But the MDX has a 5 speed AT and programming on shift points different. I see between a 1-2 MPGs advantage though with the Tacoma I4. That said, I'm better tuned into my Tacoma than the MDX (5-10%).
     
  19. May 27, 2014 at 8:54 AM
    #1319
    worthywads

    worthywads Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2011
    Member:
    #58841
    Messages:
    3,411
    Gender:
    Male
    Peoples Republic of Boulder
    Vehicle:
    05 5-lug access I4 Stick, 70 Challenger Vert
    Minor panic yesterday, started the truck and the scangauge display flipped out and showed only the arrows on the sides with no data and no response to any button pushes.

    Got home and unplugged at the obdii and plugged her back on and everything back to normal.

    I don't want to imagine driving without my scangauge! :eek:
     
  20. May 27, 2014 at 2:22 PM
    #1320
    worthywads

    worthywads Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2011
    Member:
    #58841
    Messages:
    3,411
    Gender:
    Male
    Peoples Republic of Boulder
    Vehicle:
    05 5-lug access I4 Stick, 70 Challenger Vert
    Damn, acted up again, if it keeps up I think I'll contact Scangauge and see if they can't upgrade me from old model to SGII.
     
To Top