Real fuel consumption and economy logo

Toyota Land Cruiser 1990 fuel consumption

Toyota Land Cruiser from 1990 to 1998 real fuel consumption according to user reports is approximately 11% higher compared to advertised fuel consumption. For petrol engines real consumption is in average 4% higher, but for diesel engines is approximately 18% higher. Since 1995 the Toyota Land Cruiser average difference between owner-reported real-world fuel consumption and declared fuel economy has been similar to average.

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

YearDiesel cars
All carmakersToyota Land Cruiser
1995+2%+13%
Show all years
1996+2%+13%
1997+3%+13%
1998+4%+13%

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

1990 - 1998

Toyota Land Cruiser 1990 80 fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines14.9 MPG
15.8 l/100km
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines18.7 MPG
12.6 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines18.7 MPG
12.6 l/100km
Average real diesel consumption difference *+13%
ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
4.0 liter petrol engine
Toyota Land Cruiser 1990 4.0 (FJ80) 156 HP 4x4 manual 15.1 MPG
15.6 l/100km
4.2 liter diesel engine
Toyota Land Cruiser 1990 Customwagon 4.2 D 131 HP 4x4 manual 16.6 MPG
14.2 l/100km
Toyota Land Cruiser 1990 Customwagon 4.2 TD 160 Hp 160 HP 4x4 manual 19.0 MPG
12.4 l/100km
Toyota Land Cruiser 1995 Customwagon 4.2 TD 170 Hp 170 HP 4x4 manual 21.0 MPG
11.2 l/100km
18.7 MPG
12.6 l/100km+13%
4.5 liter petrol engine
Toyota Land Cruiser 1995 Customwagon 4.5i 24V 205 HP 4x4 automatic 16.8 MPG
14.0 l/100km
Toyota Land Cruiser 1992 4.5 24V 4WD 215 HP automatic 13.2 MPG
17.8 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.