4Runner v Land Cruiser Fuel Grade

I've read in a couple of places the recommended fuel grade for 2025 Land Cruiser is premium. It looks like to me a 4Runner with the same engine i-FORCE MAX 2.4L turbocharged hybrid doesn't have the same requirement for premium? Is that correct and if so why not if its the same engine?

 

The new LC runs on Regular.

 

Documentation says the new LC and GX require premium.

Tuning is likely different, similar to how the outgoing GX 460 required/recommended premium fuel but the 4.6L in other applications also took regular.

Some folks run their GX 460 on regular, could you get away with regular on the LC? Maybe. I would want to side-step the whole debate personally but I did think about it when shopping a while back.

Or it could be a luxury, fuel economy thing. I'm sure it's gotten some discussion elsewhere.

 

If you fast forward to the 21min mark on this video, the guy (an engineer) explains that premium gas is not necessary in vehicles that "suggest or require" it.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUxfNrhGzpw&t=1389s

 

What is your location? I know some European standards are slightly different

 

That’s not entirely true. While it’s true that most engines that are tuned for premium is for performance gain and regular can be used even though manufacturer recommends premium, it’s different if the engine requires premium.
If you put regular on an engine that requires premium, the engine is not going to explode and you don’t need to flush the gas, but if you do get knocking and ignore it by keep putting regular then you could have real engine issues over time

 

Owners manual is the best place.

2025 Land cruiser & GX550 needs 91 oct fuel vs 2025 4Runner requires 87 Oct fuel.

 

That’s not true. What if the engine knocks on low octane fuel?

 

You may be right. But this is a moot point for me, because I would never buy the shitty Toyota Land Cruiser.

 

It's very interesting the more expensive Land Cruiser have a smaller fuel tank than 2025 4runner.

 

Yeah, the LC has many strikes against it:

1) Underpowered/Under whelming engine.
2) Smaller gas tank.
3) Higher price.
4) It "requires" premium fuel.

 

The non-hybrid 4R 4x4 trims are rated at 19/25 mpg city/hwy by the EPA. The Land Cruiser is 22/25 mpg city/hwy. It'll be interesting to see if the hybrid 4R models get the smaller fuel tank.

Interestingly, the 2024 4R is rated at 16/19 mpg. So the least efficient 2025 4R configuration gets the same city mpg as the 2024 4R on the hwy.

 

Loco, I don't know who you are but some of your takes are misinformed. The LC 250 is not underpowered. Have you driven it? Well I have and it's amazing compared to the 5th Gen 4runner which I've owned 5 of them. Also the vehicle delivers over 300 mile range so basically the same as most of the toyotas I've owned.

 

Professional reviewers have show the LC250 is quite a bit slower to 60 than the 5th gen. Numbers don't care about your 'feels'.

My Crown Victoria feels FAST with its initial push off the line but it doesn't change the fact that I will have a hard time keeping up with any manual economy car on the on-ramps.

 

I have both vehicles, the difference between acceleration anywhere is night and day difference compared to the 5th Gen. I don't care what the numbers say, again, have you driven the 4 turbo hybrid?

 

Okay then.

I have. It's fine but noisy and rougher than previous LC engines.

 

Apparently you missed what I said in post #9; so I'll copy and paste it for you:






I don't give a shit how you "feel" about the new Land Cruiser. I really don't. But feel free to keep trying to convince me I'm wrong if you want. Your words will continue to fall on deaf ears.

 

I think DeMuro said it best. With all the newly minted "LC" buyers out there, those of us who know, know.

 

I'm not trying to convince anyone! I'm trying to let folks know that some of these comments and utube videos are misleading which is a majority of the problems on social media.

 

Exactly. The new LC might be okay for those whom this is their first LC ever. But anyone that has driven or owned a J200 knows how much of a joke this new LC really is

 

That’s funny. My 5th gen can get 400 miles on a tank.

 

It doesn’t matter

 

Do you enjoy wasting time at the gas station?

 

I don’t waste my time

 

If you crank one out in the Costco line it’s not wasted time!

 

According to Motor Trend, and Car and Driver, the two are neck and neck 0 to 60. Where are you seeing significantly slower times on the lc250?

 

Here's a guy who knows how to multi-task!

 

Motor Trend and Car & Driver often use "estimates" and what they get from the manufacturer.

Check youtube motor week tests on a real track, they tested both the 24 4R Pro(which is identical to other trims driveline wise) and 24 LC250. They clocked 8.1 s for the LC250 and 7.7s for the 5th gen. They've been at it a lot more consistently than the high turnover crowd at Motor Trend and C&D.

Now I understand some will say "that 2/5 of a second is inconsequential" and that's fine. But going backwards in performance in a 60-80k vehicle seems...backward.

 

Between the "300 mile per tank" bench mark and the "night and day difference" I'm starting to wonder...