Post Your MPG Here

[Madmountainman]

2006 Navara Outlaw King Cab. MPG is around 31+ fully loaded with mixed motorway and country roads. Worst consumption was 28mpg when slogging up to north Devon (lots of hills) fully loaded, water and all. Normal everyday motoring unloaded gives me 37+ , and a long run unloaded up to 40mpg.

Normal motorway speed is kept to 58mph (about 2000 revs) loaded or unloaded and I use the cruise control extensively. I also drive well within all other speed limits, I'm in no hurry and hate to waste fuel

My driving style is similar to yours, on the motorway and on a run, so that's a good figure you've reported back. My car's combined mpg is listed at 58mpg and i'm getting between 58-60mpg on the trip computer. My concern with buying a pick-up/demountable combo was that I'd be getting 50% less fuel economy, which is a major cost, but losing a third is a much more acceptable figure.
The Navara's reported as being one of the thirstier trucks on the market, so you're doing really well to get that return and, that kind of mpg does allow a little leeway to hoof it on occasion! Besides, if I want to go anywhere quickly, i've always got the bike.

[Madmountainman]

I took the current Ford Ranger 2.2 XLT out for a thorough test drive today. Devon to Cambridge and back, via the A303, M3, M25, A40 into the North Circular (with the tube on strike) for an errand, then up the A1M. Back home via mixed roads through Milton Keynes, Oxford and Swindon, finishing off with a motorway run the rest of the way back. I just did my normal drive, which isn't Ari Vatanen, nor is it Miss Daisy, with cruise on the open roads - running at an indicated 65mph and a smidge under 2000rpm (satnav said 60mph) - and at the end of the day I saw 35mpg on the readout.
That's very close to Ford's quoted figure on the combined and should get better as the engine beds in. With both the new Ranger and Hi-Lux quoting between 10% and 20% more fuel economy. i'm going to wait until the end of the year and have a very good look at them. On interior spec, the Toyota is top choice, but the Ford isn't very far behind.
If you've not seen the new Toyota yet, there's a linky on the new pick-ups thread.

[zildjian]

How do the two pickups stack up performance-wise, is there much in it?
I've never looked a ranger over in actual fact although there are a few here so they must be good enough

[Madmountainman]

I had the 2.2 150ps for 24hrs, sneakily used to pick up a couple of sofa's i'd bought on ebay, so killed the old proverbial two birds!
Overall I found it quite relaxing to drive, but had one or two small niggles which i'm hoping will be sorted on the new one. First was a lack of reach adjustment on the steering, leaving me a bit too straight armed. Second was a very short throw on the gear lever, which sometimes left you feeling it hadn't 'gone in' properly. Overtaking on A roads felt similar to my 1.4 D4D Corolla, so a bit of planning and whoosh by. I can't compare to anything else, as i've not driven them but, from memory, they all seem to run out of puff in the lower gears just when you try to hoof it past someone. As I mentioned, a bit of forward planning and it's fine. The new Toyota's coming with a 2.4 and a 2.8, of which the 2.8 six speed has caught my eye. The new Ford's got a revised 2.2 with 160ps, both coming late October, early November, so only a few months to wait...

[Mike]

Just filled up 1st tank of fuel 275 miles ~ 39ltrs works out 31MPG very happy this was without demountable mix of round town and a longer journey last weekend plus quite a bit of idling whilst I changed the antifreeze and haf to do a lot of air lock removals! !

[Madmountainman]

I had an introductory drive in the new L200 t'other day and, in ten miles, the fuel trip computer had me up to 38mpg. I reckon a couple of hours test drive will easily see it over 40. Quoted figures for the Series 5 are 43mpg. Will update once i've had a back to back test next year, once the new Hi-Lux is available.

[Madmountainman]

New Hilux Invincible X, 3.0 Manual - 37mpg on the trip, 36mpg calculated by me, on a steady 500 mile, mainly motorway run.
This should improve as it beds in and, of note, when running between 30 and 50, I was in the low 40's indicated. Like all the trucks i've been out test driving, go over 50 and your consumption starts to increase, head over 70 and it really starts to tumble.
Apparently, using a Steinbauer Performance Chip also increases your efficiency, but don't believe the hype on improved mpg when running a canopy or tub top. I did a round trip to pick my top up and got the same fuel return on the way up, without a top, as coming back with.

[Gary W]

, but don't believe the hype on improved mpg when running a canopy or tub top. I did a round trip to pick my top up and got the same fuel return on the way up, without a top, as coming back with.

It's a point. Back in my student days I was taught that aerodynamics don't really come into play until around 60mph but beyond that drag increases almost exponentially. Also back in days of yonder I had to make numerous visits to a little town near Wurzburg where they produced a certain little demountable. I often killed two birds with one stone and used our little Caddy for the trip. I don't remember anything about the mpg but the top speed on the autobahns was significantly improved if we dropped the tail gate off. Those petrol Caddys had a 4 speed box with an overdrive 4th gear so the battle between power and drag was a constant struggle. With the tailgate up drag just had the winning hand, but with it down not so much so.
As we'd never be able to travel any distance here at those speeds anyway, even if we wanted and were allowed to, that little snippet is of little or no consequence really. It does explain the myth though.

Another observation we've made over the years is the accuracy, or rather inaccuracy, of truck speedo/odometers. On both our recent L200 and HiLux we fitted 16" instead of the standard 15" rims. We also fitted much higher profile BFG tyres (both were extra cabs which have 15" wheels standard).
To avoid embarrassment we took care to check our speedo accuracy after the changes. In both cases the speedos were virtually 100% accurate after the change.

It's simply not possible to be accurate before and after such a massive change so they must have been significantly over reading before. As the on board trip computers use the same data it's reasonable to assume that the in dash readouts are not entirely accurate. Another little snippet of little or no consequence!

Best wishes

Gary

[Madmountainman]

I do rather like the Ozark 15"ers that came on the Limited Edition Invincible 200's. I'd quite like to have a set of those with BFG's on, for winter and camper driving, leaving my nice 17"ers for day to day usage with standard tyres on.
What profile AT's go on the 15"s Gary?

[Mike]

Latest was 34mpg mix of local and medium runs pretty happy with that . Ran a few tanks of injector cleaner through so may have helped a bit as well. Will be interesting to see what it does with the camper on the back when we finally get some time to go away