Real fuel consumption and economy logo

Toyota Previa fuel consumption

Of all Toyota Previa modifications produced from 2000 to 2005 real fuel consumption according to user ratings is approximately 4% higher compared to advertised consumption. For petrol engines real consumption is similar to manufacturer's stated consumption, but for diesel engines is approximately 7% higher. Starting from 2000 Toyota Previa average difference between actual owner-reported fuel consumption and stated consumption was similar to average, at 2002 difference between owner-reported and advertised fuel economy became less than industry average. For more details, see the table below.

Year-to-year deviations of actual owner-reported average fuel consumption from advertised values

YearGasoline carsDiesel cars
All carmakersToyota PreviaAll carmakersToyota Previa
2000+4%+4% +5%-
Show all years
2001+5%+4% +6%+4%
2002+6%+4% +7%+4%
2003+6%insignificant+8%+7%
2004+7%insignificant+9%+10%
2005+8%insignificant+10%+10%

See below for the actual consumption of generations and versions of Toyota Previa.

2003 - 2005

Toyota Previa 2003 fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines23.3 MPG
10.1 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines24.0 MPG
9.8 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *insignificant
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines32.7 MPG
7.2 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines29.8 MPG
7.9 l/100km
Average real diesel consumption difference *+10%

According to advertised fuel consumption, a Toyota Previa 2003 with automatic transmission consumes on average 1.4 liters per 100 km or 15% more fuel than similar versions with manual gearbox. Based on user-reported real-world fuel consumption, this generation Toyota Previa with automatic transmission consumes around 1.2 litres per 100 km or 13% more fuel than a version with the same engine but a manual gearbox.

Compared to similar cars from other manufacturers, the Toyota Previa fuel economy is slightly worse than average. The best fuel economy in its class of all the modifications has one with 2.4 petrol engine and manual transmission (Toyota Previa 2003 2.4 16v VVT-i 156 HP).

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
2.0 liter diesel engine
Toyota Previa 2003 2.0 D4-D 116 HP manual 32.7 MPG
7.2 l/100km
29.8 MPG
7.9 l/100km+10%
2.4 liter petrol engine
Toyota Previa 2003 2.4 16v VVT-i 156 HP manual 25.0 MPG
9.4 l/100km
25.6 MPG
9.2 l/100km-2%
Toyota Previa 2003 2.4 16v VVT-i Automatic 156 HP automatic 21.8 MPG
10.8 l/100km
20.6 MPG
11.4 l/100km+6%
2000 - 2003

Toyota Previa 2000 fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines23.2 MPG
10.2 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines23.8 MPG
9.9 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *+4%
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines32.7 MPG
7.2 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines31.4 MPG
7.5 l/100km
Average real diesel consumption difference *+4%

According to advertised fuel consumption, a Toyota Previa 2000 with automatic transmission consumes on average 1.3 liters per 100 km or 14% more fuel than similar versions with manual gearbox.

Compared to similar cars from other manufacturers, the Toyota Previa fuel economy is slightly worse than average. Of all modifications the best advertised fuel economy in its class has Toyota Previa with 2.4 petrol engine and manual transmission (Toyota Previa 2000 2.4 16v VVT-i 156 HP).

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
2.0 liter diesel engine
Toyota Previa 2001 2.0 D4-D 116 HP manual 32.7 MPG
7.2 l/100km
31.4 MPG
7.5 l/100km+4%
2.4 liter petrol engine
Toyota Previa 2000 2.4 16v VVT-i 156 HP manual 24.8 MPG
9.5 l/100km
23.8 MPG
9.9 l/100km+4%
Toyota Previa 2000 2.4 16v VVT-i Automatic 156 HP automatic 21.8 MPG
10.8 l/100km

* - Difference between advertised and user reported fuel economy has been calculated taking into account only those car versions for which information is available both on the fuel consumption specified by the manufacturer and reported by users.

User-reported fuel consumption may not accurately represent all users' experiences due to variables such as driving conditions, driving style, technical condition of the vehicle, and other circumstances. Thus, it should not be relied upon as a representative indicator.