2025 TRD off road Mpg Question

The speed limit being 80 MPH is not very common country-wide and I don't think that should be seen as the default or expected. 70 is much more common and C&D does their highway test at 75 MPH which I prefer. (and definitely don't visit Virginia with that attitude! )

I also would expect 23 MPG at 80 MPH from my previous Sorento, which was much more efficient vehicle than the 4Runner. (complete with a teeny air-dam too and coincidentally also rated 21/26 city/highway.)

Even then, it wasn't necessarily guaranteed so I think expecting a consistent 23 MPG from the new 4Runner at 80 is a stretch.

EPA ratings usually have been pretty close for my experience but they can aim high for some trucks, low for some lighter vehicles but of course it's a standard test cycle, also subject to what the manufacturer does as the EPA isn't the one doing the bulk of testing. (See: Hyundai/Kia lawsuit and settlement over inflated fuel economy ratings)

Heck, I doubt I can hit the 19 MPG estimate today at 80 MPH.

 

According to Fuelly 24 & 25 LC250 owners are reporting ~18.5mpg. I don't know how you arrived at the "significantly better mpgs" part but real world owners of the iforce max 4 cylinder don't seem to draw that conclusion.

https://www.fuelly.com/car/toyota/land_cruiser

to put it into context, that's about 1 mpg better than the later 5th gen 4runner

https://www.fuelly.com/car/toyota/4runner


And being more refined than the base 2.4T is a very, very low bar. I guess to some buyers that 1 mpg is worth the turbo'ed DI I4 with a hybrid system with the battery hump in the cargo area and slower acceleration than the 5th gen.

 

It’s not because the speed limit is 80 it’s because the average speed that people drive is around that. It’s time to update the mpg test to reflect how people actually use their vehicles today not 20 years ago.

 

Isn’t the electric motor in these supposed to be for more power and not for more fuel efficiency? So the hybrid 4Runner shouldn’t get much better mpgs. It could even be worse due to that heavy battery.

 

@Ronorion9 , what speed are you cruising at on the freeway?

16 definitely sounds bad, compared to the estimated fuel economy. I'd expect to see some improvement after a few thousand miles. But, it will depend greatly on your driving habits.

 

That's what some of the comments I've read would suggest.

 

Toyota's U.S. website says your 4Runner weighs 4,850 lbs. That's 950 lbs. more than my old '79 Chevy Impala.

 

Yall are expecting 25mpg at 80mph in a truck?

Rofl

 

The LC250 has been consistently tested to be no faster or even slower than the 5th gen 4R, and it's not just motorweek, car and driver too

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a61557962/2024-toyota-land-cruiser-first-edition-test/

60 mph: 7.7 sec
1/4-Mile: 16.2 sec @ 86 mph

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a38696388/2022-toyota-4runner-trd-pro-by-the-numbers/

60 mph: 7.7 sec
1/4-Mile: 16.0 sec @ 86 mph

Considering the LC250 is mechanically identical to the hybrid 6th gen it seems a good enough stand-in, unless they nerfed the LC250 but not the 6th gen 4R for some reason.

 

Are you talking about the 2024? Motortrend has the (mfr) weight reported at 5,450 lb. on the 2025. I'm thinking when we ran our 2020 on the scale it was around 4,750 lbs., either way, non lightweights. Our 1st mileage was kind of low, around the 16 mpg, after break-in, sometimes 18-21, different days, different driving. The yearly avg. is 18.9. BTW, I like the 70's Impalas.... smooth.

 

That looks to be with the hybrid option. Subtract 600-ish lbs. without. Note: my 2010 reg. cab, short box 4WD Tundra with the 5.7L weighed 5,080 lbs.

 

Welcome OP.
And my experiences with turbos, mostly DSM JDMs, boost is mpg killer. And at 80 ( which TX does have that as a speed limit in my area) you're pushing that even without boost into cruising at 2500 or so rpms. Which will kill mpgs also.

So as long as you understand that have fun and don't bank too much on controlled factory tests for the epa ratings.

 

You are correct Sir! It is the hybrid option, after looking more closely at the article. Not lightweights though.

 

It appears the OP has dipped his toe in the 4runners.com water (twice, 2 different threads), and might not like the temperature...no comebacks yet.

 

Our LC250 getting 17.1
Not much different from our 16mpg GX we sold

 

The brain trust on the internet has been saying recently that Toyota magically defied physics and made the 2.4T more efficient than every other turbo motor on the market such that it doesn't use significantly more fuel under boost.

 

Sounds like OP bought into the Youtube/IG/Tiktok "Toyota Stealth Wealth Bulletproof reliability" influencer talk and ended up spending close to 70k counting T&L on his first 4runner for...reasons, now getting oddly low mpg on a brand spanking new powertrain that's supposed to leapfrog the "ancient and outdated" 1GR(if he even knows what that is), only to finding not everyone is giving unconditional fanboy attaboys may cause some to not like what they hear.

 

That’s terrible. They should have just put a big V8 in there.

 

That seems to be a common theme with the 6th gen owners. They don’t stick around.

 

Why would they? Every 6th gen thread turns into a dumpster fire.

 

This place seems pretty civil to me, it's their problem if they can't handle the lack of total sycophancy.

 

Yeah but that would be "ancient, outdated" way of doing things. The sophisticated, urbane and discerning buyers won't like that.

 

OP stop worrying about MPG and just enjoy your new truck. You will not get decent MPG from this 6th Gen. or any other 4Runner... enter stage left "Simple Aerodynamics". I'm getting roughly the same MPGs as I did on my 5th Gen. If you find yourself consistently staring at the MPG's on the dash you're in the wrong vehicle. Turn it off, roll down the windows, and hit the trail.
Also I like dumpster fires... they keep me warm

 

More power certainly takes more fuel. New regulations are pushing for target lamda of 1 under WOT. Gone are the days of 10:1 AFR under boost. Some engines will lean it out even further under partial boost.

As you guys mentioned, no way you'll see 23mpg at 80mph. Probably around 72mph though.

 

I was excited going from 2nd gen Tacoma to 3rd gen thinking I was gonna get better mpg with the "new" Atkinson cycle engine. As it turned out, I got worse mpg at 80mph, as it dropped to 4th gear a lot more often. Not sure why.

That has me tempering my expectations when it comes to moving from my current 5th gen to 6th gen 4Runner. Not that I care that much about mpg. I really don't.

It's just that it seems like expectations with each new gen are "better mpg", and in the real world, that might not be the case.

 

It’s not just expectations. The manufacturer and EPA are telling us they get better mpgs. That’s the problem I have. The lying and false advertising.

 

When you feel bad bout the mpg, just disconnect the battery n start over…it really works

 

I woulda thought a 4 Cylinder would get better MPG then the 4.0 6CYL 5th GEN. As we get about 16-18 street ,19-22 highway. I have the bigger offroad tires. 31.6 OD. I also have a pedal commander it helps a little.

 

Well it’s also a sample size of one in this thread and it’s computer-calculated so we’ll have to see how it does in aggregate.

 

Welcome and congrats on the new G6.

I have seen a lot of early long term review LC250 mention that the driving experience and how the powertrain fuels and behave changes drastically after the 1st oil change… 16 seem awful low though god damn