8 ms·

What kind of fuel consumption do you get on that? I've been considering getting an older vehicles exactly for that reason (and you can easily tinker with it), b

by fy20 4y ago

What kind of fuel consumption do you get on that? I've been considering getting an older vehicles exactly for that reason (and you can easily tinker with it), but I'd imagine the fuel consumption is a lot higher than a modern vehicle, to the point where you are not saving anything by being able to fix it yourself.

justinator 4y ago
More "Earth Fucker" than, "Land Cruiser" when it comes to MPG.
- mox1 4y ago
  These older vehicles emit roughly as much as current (gas powered) small gas engines (aka lawnmowers, leaf blowers, etc). So unless your household (or your maintenance crew) is 100% electrified, your part of the problem. https://www.pressherald.com/2022/03/31/our-sustainable-city-lawnmowers-emit-as-much-pollution-as-a-car/ https://www.pressherald.com/2022/03/31/our-sustainable-city-...
  - lazide 4y ago
    What I love about the “movement” (just like in CAlifornian Politics!) is that everyone is terrible if they try to actually do anything useful, but everyone is great if they do random stuff that wastes time and effort without accomplishing it’s stated goals - as long as it seems futurist and green. It’s basically the now is unacceptable, and the future is impossible.
  - justinator 4y ago
    Personally no lawn, no lawnmower, no leaf blower. No car either, to be honest.
- hef19898 4y ago
  Having one of those, from England and not Japan, they are less bad for the environment than one might think. You just don't drive them as much, gas milleage takes care of that. Being classics, you don't drive in winter with salt on the road. And you keep them on the road far longer than they were intended, no new car is a net positive.
  - lmm 4y ago
    Well obviously the less you use a car the less environmental damage it does, but if you're not driving it half the year then it's probably not displacing a new car purchase.
  - justinator 4y ago
    >no new car is a net positive. But you're saying you're required to own an addition car?
    - hef19898 4y ago
      In that case? Yes, because for it is used for I don't have an alternative. And new ones capable of doing the same thing used to be unaffordable.
toast0 4y ago
Would depend on the size of the engine I'd think. Old SUVs are going to have big engines and eat gas. My '78 Scout II had a 345 (5.6L?) v8 and did 12 mpg when it was running well. But if you get a smaller car with a smaller engine, you can get better mileage. My wife's '86 Civic doesn't fit the no engine electronics ideal (and it did have electronics problems that required replacing the engine control module (module sourced from a junkyard worked fine though)), but it did around 40 mpg in normal driving, 60 for cross country highway driving with A/C off. No modern safety equipment isn't great if you get in an accident, but curb weight is a lot less. If you get an early Civic or VW Bug, you're going to get pretty good mileage as long as the engine is well adjusted.
- lazide 4y ago
  The issue with smaller vehicles, if you do actually go off-road or tow things, is they get destroyed in short order with very few exceptions. I ended up having to get a proper truck because I kept breaking suspension components in my Forester shrug. And for all the climate sin folks, it’s to manage 90 acres of previously overgrown timberland which was a huge fire danger and would have gone up in smoke in short order otherwise. It’s now happily sitting there sequestering far more carbon than the truck will ever release.
adamdevigili 4y ago
My 1997 LX450 (4.5L I6) with armor (front/rear bumpers, sliders), a roof rack, other random accessories with a 2.5" lift and 33" tires gets about 11 MPG highway, and maybe 7-9 city. I take it off-road often, and on trails I get maybe...4-6? It does come with the territory though, and anyone owning an 80 (and probably a 100 series) at this point isn't doing it really to "save money" imo. That being said, the recently outgoing 200 series LC didn't really do all that much better[1], and neither does the new 300 series.[2] [1] https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2021_Toyota_Land_Cruiser.shtml https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2021_Toyota_Land_Cru... [2] https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/45010.shtml https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/45010.shtml
- zaken 4y ago
  Do people ever give you grief about the climate impact of owning a vehicle like that? I don't mean to judge and am genuinely curious -- I have a fairly fuel inefficient vehicle as well and it weighs on me sometimes that I maybe should try different, more climate friendly hobbies (like, stopping overlanding and pick up knitting or something...)
  - yohannparis 4y ago
    I mean, the environment impact on buying a vehicle that polute less might not be worth running this one to the ground. Same argument I have with aquaintainces that switch their cars to an electric ones... it's worse at the end if your previous car was in working order.
    - sokoloff 4y ago
      Presumably that car goes to someone else who will use it rather than being scrapped (a la Cash-for-Clunkers), right? I've argued* that, because we drive our second car so little per year, that it makes more sense for us to buy an inexpensive, relatively gas-guzzling used car rather than a more economical hybrid. Reasoning being that someone is going to drive the gas guzzler and someone is going to drive that hybrid and better the hybrid go to someone driving a typical amount and we drive the worse one only 2-3K miles/year. * - so far unsuccessfully, but the crazy used car market has made that moot for now.
atourgates 4y ago
This is the achilles heel of the FJ80 we get in the US with a gas engine. The official EPA rating on my 1995 is 12MPG city, and 14MPG highway. Real world, I'm more often in the 10-12 MPG range. If you add heavy offroad accessories, expect that to drop further. The Diesel engine you can get in other parts of the world can get 20+ MPG in the same vehicle.
coconut_crab 4y ago
I get around 12.5 l/100 km (19 mpg?) if I got easy on the throttle, and around 18L/100 km (13 mpg) on a rough road. There is no feedback loop since it uses on carb, so as long as I keep the throttle steady it isn't that bad. Of course it can't compare with modern SUVs but not too terrible either. Economically wise, a 2 years old mid sized SUV here costs around 40000 USD, meanwhile I bought my FZJ80 with 6000 USD (with 200000 km on the ODO). Even if I drive 1000 km a month it will take me more than 30 years of driving to start losing money compare to buying a modern one.

by fy20 4y ago

justinator 4y ago

More "Earth Fucker" than, "Land Cruiser" when it comes to MPG.

mox1 4y ago
These older vehicles emit roughly as much as current (gas powered) small gas engines (aka lawnmowers, leaf blowers, etc). So unless your household (or your maintenance crew) is 100% electrified, your part of the problem. https://www.pressherald.com/2022/03/31/our-sustainable-city-lawnmowers-emit-as-much-pollution-as-a-car/ https://www.pressherald.com/2022/03/31/our-sustainable-city-...
- lazide 4y ago
  What I love about the “movement” (just like in CAlifornian Politics!) is that everyone is terrible if they try to actually do anything useful, but everyone is great if they do random stuff that wastes time and effort without accomplishing it’s stated goals - as long as it seems futurist and green. It’s basically the now is unacceptable, and the future is impossible.
- justinator 4y ago
  Personally no lawn, no lawnmower, no leaf blower. No car either, to be honest.
hef19898 4y ago
Having one of those, from England and not Japan, they are less bad for the environment than one might think. You just don't drive them as much, gas milleage takes care of that. Being classics, you don't drive in winter with salt on the road. And you keep them on the road far longer than they were intended, no new car is a net positive.
- lmm 4y ago
  Well obviously the less you use a car the less environmental damage it does, but if you're not driving it half the year then it's probably not displacing a new car purchase.
- justinator 4y ago
  >no new car is a net positive. But you're saying you're required to own an addition car?
  - hef19898 4y ago
    In that case? Yes, because for it is used for I don't have an alternative. And new ones capable of doing the same thing used to be unaffordable.

toast0 4y ago

Would depend on the size of the engine I'd think. Old SUVs are going to have big engines and eat gas. My '78 Scout II had a 345 (5.6L?) v8 and did 12 mpg when it was running well. But if you get a smaller car with a smaller engine, you can get better mileage. My wife's '86 Civic doesn't fit the no engine electronics ideal (and it did have electronics problems that required replacing the engine control module (module sourced from a junkyard worked fine though)), but it did around 40 mpg in normal driving, 60 for cross country highway driving with A/C off. No modern safety equipment isn't great if you get in an accident, but curb weight is a lot less. If you get an early Civic or VW Bug, you're going to get pretty good mileage as long as the engine is well adjusted.

lazide 4y ago
The issue with smaller vehicles, if you do actually go off-road or tow things, is they get destroyed in short order with very few exceptions. I ended up having to get a proper truck because I kept breaking suspension components in my Forester shrug. And for all the climate sin folks, it’s to manage 90 acres of previously overgrown timberland which was a huge fire danger and would have gone up in smoke in short order otherwise. It’s now happily sitting there sequestering far more carbon than the truck will ever release.

adamdevigili 4y ago

My 1997 LX450 (4.5L I6) with armor (front/rear bumpers, sliders), a roof rack, other random accessories with a 2.5" lift and 33" tires gets about 11 MPG highway, and maybe 7-9 city. I take it off-road often, and on trails I get maybe...4-6? It does come with the territory though, and anyone owning an 80 (and probably a 100 series) at this point isn't doing it really to "save money" imo. That being said, the recently outgoing 200 series LC didn't really do all that much better[1], and neither does the new 300 series.[2] [1] https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2021_Toyota_Land_Cruiser.shtml https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2021_Toyota_Land_Cru... [2] https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/45010.shtml https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/45010.shtml

zaken 4y ago
Do people ever give you grief about the climate impact of owning a vehicle like that? I don't mean to judge and am genuinely curious -- I have a fairly fuel inefficient vehicle as well and it weighs on me sometimes that I maybe should try different, more climate friendly hobbies (like, stopping overlanding and pick up knitting or something...)
- yohannparis 4y ago
  I mean, the environment impact on buying a vehicle that polute less might not be worth running this one to the ground. Same argument I have with aquaintainces that switch their cars to an electric ones... it's worse at the end if your previous car was in working order.
  - sokoloff 4y ago
    Presumably that car goes to someone else who will use it rather than being scrapped (a la Cash-for-Clunkers), right? I've argued* that, because we drive our second car so little per year, that it makes more sense for us to buy an inexpensive, relatively gas-guzzling used car rather than a more economical hybrid. Reasoning being that someone is going to drive the gas guzzler and someone is going to drive that hybrid and better the hybrid go to someone driving a typical amount and we drive the worse one only 2-3K miles/year. * - so far unsuccessfully, but the crazy used car market has made that moot for now.

atourgates 4y ago

This is the achilles heel of the FJ80 we get in the US with a gas engine. The official EPA rating on my 1995 is 12MPG city, and 14MPG highway. Real world, I'm more often in the 10-12 MPG range. If you add heavy offroad accessories, expect that to drop further. The Diesel engine you can get in other parts of the world can get 20+ MPG in the same vehicle.

coconut_crab 4y ago

I get around 12.5 l/100 km (19 mpg?) if I got easy on the throttle, and around 18L/100 km (13 mpg) on a rough road. There is no feedback loop since it uses on carb, so as long as I keep the throttle steady it isn't that bad. Of course it can't compare with modern SUVs but not too terrible either. Economically wise, a 2 years old mid sized SUV here costs around 40000 USD, meanwhile I bought my FZJ80 with 6000 USD (with 200000 km on the ODO). Even if I drive 1000 km a month it will take me more than 30 years of driving to start losing money compare to buying a modern one.