Fuel Consumption Of Recent Pick-up Models?

[Lannig]

I am the (now) unfortunate owner of a Mistubishi Strada (old 2.5l atmospheric model) which I bought second-hand almost 2 years ago because it was cheap, in good condition and well equipped. Of course as some of you may know the thing gobbles fuel like hel_l and that's becoming a real concern these days with the litre of diesel soon to hit 30b... Even using a light right foot, I get a fuel consumption within 8.0-8.8 litre/100km (mostly road, no city). Quite a lot. I used to have an old Isuzu TFR before that, the locally-produced station-wagon variant, quite sober (6.7-7.4 l/100km) but noisy as hel_l (both engine and body) and the body falling apart due to rust, as could be expected from a locally-produced variant with no proper anti-rust treatment, cheap paint etc.

The Mitsubishi has a quiet and smooth engine, but I'm finding it increasingly hard to stand the pain when hitting the pump

Stil,l I've learned to like Mitsubishi, because apart from its unreasonable fuel consumption it's comfortable, reliable and has good control. I'm considering a replacement. I really dislike the D-Max: it's ugly, relatively noisy as well for a newer generation pick-up and overpriced. Same goes for the Colorado sister model (just a little bit less ugly). I know it's the most fuel-effective brand now (or so they say), but I'm wondering about the Toyota Vigo and the new Mitsubishi Triton, as well as other less popular brands (Ford, Mazda, Nissan).

- how do they compare in terms of fuel consumption? what is your real-life experience?(we europeans usually express this in litres/100km, but I can use a calculator to make a conversion -- just avoid using gallons please ;-)

- comments about reliability, comfort, noise? (especially noise, I'm very sensitive)

- how do they compare on the 2nd hand market? (I can't afford a new one, although for the Triton I don't expect to find many on the 2nd hand market yet)

- any specific good/bad experience to share?

Oh yes, about the noise: I can't really consider a gasoline engine. I drive a lot and I need a pick-up.

Thanks for any input,

--Lannig

[Gary A]

It's hard to get any exact fuel economy figures off this board for some reason. Ford is touting the new Durotorque 2.5 liter turbo as having an improvement of 25 percent better economy and 15 percent on the 3.0 liter turbo. Since I don't know how they did before it doesn't tell me much but I will try to keep tabs on the new 2007 models. I'd like to replace my 2002 Toyota four wheel drive with something that does better.

[JimmyGreaves]

Would be really good if we could have a source to find out the MPG (Miles Per Gallon) or MPL or KPG or KPL (Kilometres per Litre) of the various available models in English. I'm on the lookout!

[sbkpeterpan]

I previously had a Strada, same experince, drinks fuel and worse, it was sadly gutless. Got a Vigo 6 months ago, Fuel economy is way better, about the same tank size but go at least 30% further and it makes good power. I really don't know what it does in KM/L but can nearly get me to Phuket from BKK on a tank full (2000Baht at todays prices) but if I ramp the speed up to cruise at 140 instead of my usual 120, ecomony (naturally) drops away. Can't speak highly enough of the Vigo, sure beats the crap out of my previous 2.8L POS Strada.

[monty]

I would say between 11.5 and 12.5 km/liter is pretty good economy for a pick-up.

Don't forget these are quite heavy cars with a not so good windresistance coefficient!

A rough calculation on the consumption of sbkpeterpan's Vigo (70 liter for 870 km) will learn that his also burns roughly 8 liters/100 km! (or 12.5km/lit)

Of course the Vigo is much more powerfull and fun to drive...

If you really want to drive economically, buy a Vigo with the petrol engine (really powerfull) and get it converted to either NGV or LPG. LPG installation will cost you between 15000 and 20000 Baht, but you'll save at least 2 quarters of the price per km... (e.g. if you fill up 1000 Baht fuel now, you'll fill up 350-400 Baht of LPG to cover the same distance)

NGV is even more cheap to run, but more expensive to install (40000) and hardly any fuelstations out of Bangkok. LPG is almost everywhere in Bangkok and most of the bigger cities... (and if you know how, you can always fill up a bit from the gas cooking containers )

[John 1]

I have a 2800cc Strada4x4 and get 9km per ltr average, I would say most 4x4 the same it's no good saying you get so many km out of a tank of gas, The new strada looks good it's a shame they don't make 2 wheel drive with LSD and then you don't really need 4x4, unless you are a serious offroader and if you were serious you wouldn't but a pickup, you would buy a jeep.

[bdenner]

My 3 yo Dmax - 3.0 litre Turbo Automatic averages 32 MPG (Imperial Gallon) or 8.9 Litres per 100KM. Not bad for an Auto and I don’t piss around when travelling.

I wouldn’t touch a Mitsubishi if it was given to me. – Here or AUS.

[MaiChai]

Dont think you can compare last generation pickups against the latest offerings. The biggest improvement is common rail fuel injection and computerised engine management not to mention more car like cabin/handling. I just got a new 2500cc Mitsu Triton and they claim is 22% more fuel efficient than the old model and comparable in fuel consumption to an Isuzu. They said if I did not like the performance I could improve it via tweaking the engine control system (but with worse fuel consumption). Need to do more mileage to get an idea of consumption, but cant think it would be as bad as your Strada or my other pickup (Isuzu Rodeo 2800cc DI)! I went for a small engine because I am sure fuel will remain expensive.

Been doing pickup shopping and found Isuzu to be noisy, even though they say they have a new 2500cc engine. Toyota Vigo is the best, but I found Mitsu Triton offers better value and more powerful engine than Vigo in the 2500cc size. Mazda/Ford has most powerful 2500cc because they use an intercooler, but ugly body, antiquated hand brake and small space in the back in the Open Cab put me off.

If you are concerned about fuel economy then get a 2500cc engine; the Mitsu one has more power than my old Isuzu 2800, so thats good enough for me!

I got a 4 door Mitsu Triton for 600,000B, with alloy wheels, electric windows all round/mirrors, MP3 player, underbody coated, chrome mirrors, car like cabin, rear liner, free car insurance, free car registration, film on the windows. Cheaper than a high spec Honda Jazz? Isuzu told me I could have similar, but would have to specify electric windows/alloys as options while the Mitsu was a standard model (apart from the MP3 player which I got free)...

[sbkpeterpan]

Dont think you can compare last generation pickups against the latest offerings. The biggest improvement is common rail fuel injection and computerised engine management not to mention more car like cabin/handling. I just got a new 2500cc Mitsu Triton and they claim is 22% more fuel efficient than the old model and comparable in fuel consumption to an Isuzu. They said if I did not like the performance I could improve it via tweaking the engine control system (but with worse fuel consumption). Need to do more mileage to get an idea of consumption, but cant think it would be as bad as your Strada or my other pickup (Isuzu Rodeo 2800cc DI)! I went for a small engine because I am sure fuel will remain expensive.

Been doing pickup shopping and found Isuzu to be noisy, even though they say they have a new 2500cc engine. Toyota Vigo is the best, but I found Mitsu Triton offers better value and more powerful engine than Vigo in the 2500cc size. Mazda/Ford has most powerful 2500cc because they use an intercooler, but ugly body, antiquated hand brake and small space in the back in the Open Cab put me off.

If you are concerned about fuel economy then get a 2500cc engine; the Mitsu one has more power than my old Isuzu 2800, so thats good enough for me!

I got a 4 door Mitsu Triton for 600,000B, with alloy wheels, electric windows all round/mirrors, MP3 player, underbody coated, chrome mirrors, car like cabin, rear liner, free car insurance, free car registration, film on the windows. Cheaper than a high spec Honda Jazz? Isuzu told me I could have similar, but would have to specify electric windows/alloys as options while the Mitsu was a standard model (apart from the MP3 player which I got free)...

The Mitsui is probably good but the styling looks a bit gay doesn't it ?

[rcm]

Dont think you can compare last generation pickups against the latest offerings. The biggest improvement is common rail fuel injection and computerised engine management not to mention more car like cabin/handling. I just got a new 2500cc Mitsu Triton and they claim is 22% more fuel efficient than the old model and comparable in fuel consumption to an Isuzu. They said if I did not like the performance I could improve it via tweaking the engine control system (but with worse fuel consumption). Need to do more mileage to get an idea of consumption, but cant think it would be as bad as your Strada or my other pickup (Isuzu Rodeo 2800cc DI)! I went for a small engine because I am sure fuel will remain expensive.

Been doing pickup shopping and found Isuzu to be noisy, even though they say they have a new 2500cc engine. Toyota Vigo is the best, but I found Mitsu Triton offers better value and more powerful engine than Vigo in the 2500cc size. Mazda/Ford has most powerful 2500cc because they use an intercooler, but ugly body, antiquated hand brake and small space in the back in the Open Cab put me off.

If you are concerned about fuel economy then get a 2500cc engine; the Mitsu one has more power than my old Isuzu 2800, so thats good enough for me!

I got a 4 door Mitsu Triton for 600,000B, with alloy wheels, electric windows all round/mirrors, MP3 player, underbody coated, chrome mirrors, car like cabin, rear liner, free car insurance, free car registration, film on the windows. Cheaper than a high spec Honda Jazz? Isuzu told me I could have similar, but would have to specify electric windows/alloys as options while the Mitsu was a standard model (apart from the MP3 player which I got free)...

The Mitsui is probably good but the styling looks a bit gay doesn't it ?

The Style of the Triton is different and i did add some extras to it ...makes it look great.

wouldn't want any other Pick up...the fuel economy is great and 12,5 km /litre is even to achieve with the 2,5 ltr Automatic version- aircon on(4 people seating) and driven regular .... the manual is even better in fuel economy though.

rcm

[Gary A]

The last time I posted and tried to compare fuel economy resulted in a pissing contest questioning my numbers. I have two pickup trucks. If you don't believe my numbers suit yourself. One is a four door four wheel drive 2002 Toyota. The other is a 2004 Nissan two door king cab two wheel drive. Both are NON turbo 3.0 liter diesels. I regularly drive from Loei to Jomtien so these numbers are based on many trips. The Toyota hasn't made that many trips because of the fuel consumption. The last trip it averaged 10.6 kilometers per liter. The Nissan got 15.4 going down and 14.6 coming back the last trip. Keep in mind that driving habits make a big difference. Going down the weather was cool so no air con was needed. I drove the speed limit (90 KMH). Coming back I used the air con and drove faster.

I really am interested in fuel economy and would like to replace the Toyota with something more economical. The four wheel drive Toyota is very handy here in the boonies where many roads are still mud. I need two vehicles like I need another hole in my head but putting fuel in the Toyota gets on my nerves. It is also underpowered. The Nissan has a lot more power and is also smoother.

[johnh101]

My 3 yo Dmax - 3.0 litre Turbo Automatic averages 32 MPG (Imperial Gallon) or 8.9 Litres per 100KM. Not bad for an Auto and I don’t piss around when travelling.

same same

[Lannig]

Gary, these are interesting figures, thanks.

It's good to know about the new Nissans. The older Nissans were really thirsty.

I happen to like the style of the Triton very much (does that make me gay?). It's an approach different from the tank-size style of the Vigo and the D-Max. At least the Vigo is kind of stylish though.

I've been told that A/T means (in my terms) 1 extra L/100km, so that means that I could expect 7L/100km with the 2.5L Triton M/T when using smooth driving. Looks OK to me.

I wouldn't touch an A/T car even if it were given to me anyway

Thanks for your input guys. Let's have more please.

--Lannig

[nikster]

Gary, these are interesting figures, thanks.

It's good to know about the new Nissans. The older Nissans were really thirsty.

I happen to like the style of the Triton very much (does that make me gay?). It's an approach different from the tank-size style of the Vigo and the D-Max. At least the Vigo is kind of stylish though.

I've been told that A/T means (in my terms) 1 extra L/100km, so that means that I could expect 7L/100km with the 2.5L Triton M/T when using smooth driving. Looks OK to me.

I wouldn't touch an A/T car even if it were given to me anyway

Second that. I don't know about expensive-car A/Ts but all the normal ones I have used to far completely suck on the mountain. They consistently manage to be in the wrong gear all the time.

I would think 4WD also affects fuel consumption. 4WD == worse. Don't know if it's because of the additional gears or because it's higher.

So if you say Vigo, please also say which model. Manual or AT, 4WD or 2WD, engine?

[MaiChai]

TV ad campain at the moment for the Triton is about fuel consumption. They claim 19.8km per litre (I think), which does sound impressive, but I wonder how realistic that figure is? Do you roll down the hills to get that figure?

[penzman]

We just put in an order for 4 Nissan Frontier King Cab 2WD along with our business partner ( 1 for us 3 for him). He's been on it for months and concluded this is the model best suited for our needs.

Type : 2.5 litre, DOHC, 16-valve, 4-Cylinder, Turbo Intercoole

Fuel system : ECCS, electric fuel injection control (VE type)

Combustion System: M-Fire DID (Direct Injection Diesel)

Gross vehicle weight (kg.) : 2570

I' ll post in a few weeks about the fuel consumption. The Nissan website does not mention it (or I missed it )but the Nissan catalog I have here claims 33.1 kms per litre.

[rcm]

The Nissan website does not mention it (or I missed it )but the Nissan catalog I have here claims 33.1 kms per litre.

Is this a typing mistake? A Nissan Frontier 2,5 ltr does 33.1km per litre ? I don't think this is anywhere close to what the frontier actually uses.

My in Laws have the 3.0 ltr version (older model w Canopy) goes 10km / ltr.

rcm

[penzman]

Could be that the engine's been totally redesigned with much improvement from the older model. Mind you, KFC is also allowed to show you a bucket overflowing with chicken on their menu when it's one quarter full once it's handed to you.

[Maigo6]

On a run from Loei to Pattaya taking it easy I managed 12.8 Kms per Litre, yesterdays run not taking it easy (585 Kms in 6 Hours and 50 Minutes from Phu Kradung to stopping in Carrefour car park) returned 10.6 Kms per Litre.

Toyota Fortuner Diesel 3.0

[Gary A]

My 2004 3.0 liter NON turbo Nissan gets up to 15 kilometers per liter and there are people on the board who questioned that figure. I have a standing offer that for a small wager anyone is welcome to take the trip from Loei to Jomtien with me to confirm that figure.

Mine is also "Nissan Frontier King Cab 2WD".

[penzman]

Khun wife has mentioned that she did read on a Thai forum that the Nissan Frontier can do up to 33km/litre because of it's new engine design.

[PeaceBlondie]

Aside from onboard computers that probably know better, I only trust mileage figures based on measuring consumption between fill-ups.

For example, let's say you fill it up when the odometer reads 31,198. Next time at the petrol station, you fill it up and the odo reads 31,742. You've gone 544 km, and the second fill-up takes 17 liters. You've averaged about 30 km per liter. You must have gone downhill all the way, or your Honda CBR150 has a 20-liter tank.

[tracker]

maybe interesting for folks here: I have a ford 2500 4x4 pickup (2000). Doing a 9 to 10 km/l dependent on city or long trips. I add,since about 8 months, 1cc of acetone for 1000cc diesel. consumption went down to 11 km/l. That is at least a 10% improvement.

For all your math-heads: that is 50cc acetone per fill-up (of about 50ltr diesel). Works also for gasoline cars. actually, reports on those seem even to get better results.

acetone lowers surface-tension, whatever the hel_l that means... anyway it works, but took a couple of fillups before the economy-boost was noticable.

[Plus]

Hmmm, where did my last post go?

Anyway, Nissan Malaysia gives new Nissan 2.5 l engine 9.1l per 100 km, or 10.98km per liter.

Nowhere near 33 km/l, or even 15 km/l.

"Cruising distant at 120 km/h (Full fuel tank; 75 litres) - 694km"

That's 9.2 km/l.

You could say these are official figures.

[penzman]

Slow down from 120 to 90 km/hr and see the difference.

[Plus]

That's how they get 10.98km/l, I suppose. At 120km/h it's only 9.2 km/l.

I'm pretty sure I posted these numbers earlier, on the first page, with links.

Edited July 8, 2006 by Plus

[Sakeopete]

I have the Vigo double cab 4X4 A/T love it loads of power and nice ride. If I remember my tank holds 76 liters and I get around 650 kms/tank so about 9 km/l and that is @ 120 km/h or more. The 4x4 is for show only I admit but they have an excellent resale value and I like the view from a tall vehicle. We have a Yaris also for a daily run about so the Vigo is used for long trips.

[Gary A]

Well Plus, my Nissan is a 3.0 liter ZDi so it gets less than the 2.5, right? Why don't you put your money where your mouth is and make me a little wager. I'm about ready for another trip anyways. The engine is 100% stock and has only been serviced. Nothing else has ever changed.

Edited July 9, 2006 by Gary A

[Plus]

I have never driven a Nissan pickup and have no idea how much fuel Nissan engines consume - I just quote from their official website.

You claim that your bigger and older engine is 30% more fuel efficient and consider Nissan quoted numbers an affront to your PERSONAL reputation. No one is going to get off the Internet and drive with you half way around Thailand to protect your bruised ego, take it easy.

People quote 10-11 km/l for a pickup from their driving experience, mine is similar. Some get 9, some get 12, or even 13. Yours 15 is the record claim. As in any experiment some numbers will be unexplicably way outside the average range. It's up to people to decide whether to count these results in or not.

[chanchao]

> Ford is touting the new Durotorque 2.5 liter turbo as having an

> improvement of 25 percent better economy and 15 percent on the 3.0 liter

> turbo. Since I don't know how they did before

They did atrocious. Remarkable power for a 2.5 liter, but at a price. (Lousy torque in the low range too, and around 10 km/liter. Worst ever was driving in Bangkok (dropped below 9 I think), best ever around Chiang Mai in the cool season (no aircon) and not driving over 60. Got it up to 12.5 km per liter. Now in just about any Isuzu ever built you can go up mountains and not even try to be economical but get better mileage than that.