You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
SequoiaGeneral discussion forum for the second generation 2008 and later Toyota Sequoia.
This is a discussion thread titled "Gas Mileage for 08 Sequoia", within the Sequoia forum, part of the SUV Forums category.
Can you provide some comparison between your computer and your own calculations. My meter is wayyyy accurate, seems strange that yours would be way off. It's a pretty simple calculation, the efi has to know exactly how much fuel it is spraying into the engine and the odometer should be very accurate as well. For the calculation to be way off either your fuel injectors are spraying more fuel than they think they are (which result in very rich fueling) or your odometer is way off. Now Toyota odometers are know for being off, but even if the odometer is not accurate, it's the same odometer you use when calculating the mileage yourself so that wouldn't explain the inconsistency either.
Odd.
Despite what I perceive to be a rather condescending tone - I'll play along. What you claim to be so 'simple' i don't believe is ~ but I'm not going to lose sleep over it.
I don't track my computer MPG. I do track my actual miles/gals/cost per gal and cost per fill up. Last time I checked the computer - and thus reported on this very form - the computer said 17.x and actual was 14.x. After 3 fill-ups with computer miles off, I quit looking at it. What's the point? I'll start resetting it next time i fill up and I'll track it.
__________________ 1984 BMW 533i (Metric Mechanic 3.7l with lots of goodies) 2002 Sequoia Limited
Despite what I perceive to be a rather condescending tone - I'll play along. What you claim to be so 'simple' i don't believe is ~ but I'm not going to lose sleep over it.
I don't track my computer MPG. I do track my actual miles/gals/cost per gal and cost per fill up. Last time I checked the computer - and thus reported on this very form - the computer said 17.x and actual was 14.x. After 3 fill-ups with computer miles off, I quit looking at it. What's the point? I'll start resetting it next time i fill up and I'll track it.
I didn't mean to offend, I just copied your wayyyy to be funny but humor doesn't translate well to the internet half the time. I am really interested in the numbers and was only asking for them because I was wondering if something was wrong with the fueling of your truck. I'm a programmer by profession and in my off time like to play around with the cpu and fueling of my GMC Syclone so fueling calculations are something that interest me. It didn't surprise me that my numbers were accurate as it seemed simple to me, but the fact that your numbers are off make me think either there is another factor I'm not taking into account, or possibly something was wrong with your truck.
Just wanting more info is all. I'll keep tracking my mileage by the computer and odometer/fuel receipts. Maybe I just got lucky and mine will be way off next fill up. Hopefully other owners will chime in as well, if all of us except you get accurate numbers it may actually be something important and turn into a warranty issue. Not that the fuel mileage calculator is that important, but since it uses the fuel injector duty cycle for the calculation it may mean you have an injector that isn't spraying accurately (rare, but I've heard of it happening in the performance world, never oem though).
I have same issue with my '05 being off. Computer usually shows 15-16mpg, but when calculated with trusty pen and paper (miles between fill-ups divided by gallons pumped), i'm getting 13.5 to 14mpg. It's been that way since purchased 3 years ago, and yes I do reset the computer after each fill-up to compare properly.
Sounds funny, but being mine is off consistently I just subtract 1.5mpg from the computer reading and go with that! Each car is different, so yours may (will) vary.
I have same issue with my '05 being off. Computer usually shows 15-16mpg, but when calculated with trusty pen and paper (miles between fill-ups divided by gallons pumped), i'm getting 13.5 to 14mpg. It's been that way since purchased 3 years ago, and yes I do reset the computer after each fill-up to compare properly.
Sounds funny, but being mine is off consistently I just subtract 1.5mpg from the computer reading and go with that! Each car is different, so yours may (will) vary.
As long as you find a system that works. I wouldn't put it past Toyota to fudge the numbers on purpose. It appears they were doing that on their speedos a few years back and they're going through a class action lawsuit over it right now. I'm just trying to find out if it is an inconsistency, or something that is happening on all trucks. With the speedos on the older rigs it was on all vehicles, not a consistency issue, but it appears with the fuel computer at least some of us are getting accurate numbers, and others may not be.
This article mentions the Toyota they checked being off, but they are not the ones being sued. My 4runner was off by a fair amount, but the weird part was it wasn't a percentage off like you would expect if it was a tire sizing issue (plus I had new stock size tires on it). It was about 2% off except in the 55-65mph range where it went up to being over 5% off, then it went back down to about 2% off later on. When my 4runner said 40mph my gps said 39 when my 4runner said 65mph my gps said 61, and when my 4runner said 80mph my gps said 78. The error didn't increase linearly like I have seen in cars with non-factory size tires on it.
I must have read about the Honda lawsuit and confused it with Toyota since my Toyota speedo was so far off. Thanks for the correction.
This is the problem. You did not reset it, so there was no basis to use it for comparison.
Perhaps you didn't read my post clearly, or I wasn't clear. I stopped resetting it after 3 times because of its being off. (As I said - whats the point to resetting it?) So that's not the problem. However, I will track it for a period now just for kicks and giggles.
For immediate gratification, since I quit resetting the computer, it claims a cumulative average of 15.8 MPG. According to the hard numbers, my actual average is 13.64. With stock wheels.
As I stated in a previous post, I believe manufactures have a vested interest in having the computer provide optimistic numbers, as many owners will just rely on those numbers (perhaps also using your assumption that its so simple to figure).
My friends Durango has the same issue - optimistic computer readout vs actual number crunching. Most folks are to lazy to keep track this stuff themselves.
__________________ 1984 BMW 533i (Metric Mechanic 3.7l with lots of goodies) 2002 Sequoia Limited
my sequoia mpg computer is right on the money (yes i did fill up math with odo check) plus I upgraded my tires to a bit taller ones, and my speedometer is right on (checked against police radar ceveral times)
__________________
2006 Toyota Sequoia Limited 4x4 w/ lxr package, 7008 navi, rear entartaiment system, 20" x-sp enkei
2001 Toyota Tundra SR5 4x4 Supercharged w/ lots of miles on it!
my sequoia mpg computer is right on the money (yes i did fill up math with odo check) plus I upgraded my tires to a bit taller ones, and my speedometer is right on (checked against police radar ceveral times)
What size are you running again?
__________________ 1984 BMW 533i (Metric Mechanic 3.7l with lots of goodies) 2002 Sequoia Limited
i had 295/45vr20 and it was about 3 mph off
when i've installed 285/50vr20 in the beginning it was 1 mile over, and after 3,000 miles its exsactly perfect!
gene
__________________
2006 Toyota Sequoia Limited 4x4 w/ lxr package, 7008 navi, rear entartaiment system, 20" x-sp enkei
2001 Toyota Tundra SR5 4x4 Supercharged w/ lots of miles on it!
How'd I go AWOL? Did I miss a question directed at me? I have still been monitoring this thread with interest, just haven't had to fill my tank again to report further results.
Although if it interests you I've had my truck at the dealer for the past couple of days while they install the 3M film rock protector (clear bra) and have had a V6 SR5 4Runner as a loan. I've been getting 18.2 indicated on it, I actually thought it would do better considering I've had it in 2wd the whole time and it's only a six cylinder. I forgot to mention that in my Sequioa about 70 of the miles I traveled on the last tank were in 4wd (while I was heading to go snowboarding and traveling in the snow).
Last edited by crashing_sux; 01-07-2008 at 04:17 AM.
How'd I go AWOL? Did I miss a question directed at me? I have still been monitoring this thread with interest, just haven't had to fill my tank again to report further results.
Although if it interests you I've had my truck at the dealer for the past couple of days while they install the 3M film rock protector (clear bra) and have had a V6 SR5 4Runner as a loan. I've been getting 18.2 indicated on it, I actually thought it would do better considering I've had it in 2wd the whole time and it's only a six cylinder. I forgot to mention that in my Sequioa about 70 of the miles I traveled on the last tank were in 4wd (while I was heading to go snowboarding and traveling in the snow).
I thought you posted post 18. As I look back now, I see that it was Trebor129
__________________ 1984 BMW 533i (Metric Mechanic 3.7l with lots of goodies) 2002 Sequoia Limited
TundraSolutions.com is a registered trademark of Tundra Solutions, Inc.
Other trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of the TundraSolutions.com User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
Re: Gas Mileage for 08 Sequoia
Linear Mode
