I'm interested in knowing what mpg people are getting with their
broken-in 3.5L RAV4's. You could list if so inclined climate and
type of driving (like say half highway/city) and anything else like if
you are picky about a specific gasoline or motor oil.

Thanks.

<rosso.dimontalcino (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote

There are three places I know of where you could get some real-world fuel
economy reports:

www.FuelEconomy.gov now lists both the EPA ratings and has a section for
data supplied by real-world users.

Edmunds.com user reviews occasionally include information on fuel economy
("Hey, this is great!" or "Hey, this sucks!").

www.TrueDelta.com is an effort to collect reliability and fuel economy
statistics for a range of vehicles. I recommend you register to participate
because that way you can see more data. I don't think it caused any
junkmail.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Not picky about gas (I take the cheapest regular) and do combined
city/highway. If it's more city, I get 21-22. More highway, 23-24. I try
not to have a heavy foot, even though it is FUN...

rosso.dimontalcino (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote in news:1177007999.568684.300490
@n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com:

In article <1177007999.568684.300490 (AT) n76g2000hsh (DOT) googlegroups.com>,
rosso.dimontalcino (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote:

was looking at the Camry which also uses it. My concern was it has a
very high compression ratio for the specified regular fuel.
Toyota replied:
"Premium fuel is required to achieve the rated performance".

IMO being a high vehicle I wouldn't expect much for highway driving at
60mph+.

On Apr 20, 2:21 pm, who <i... (AT) notaspammer (DOT) net> wrote:
Good catch. I see now that the 2.4L engine has a (lower) 9.8:1
compression ratio and would take regular fuel while the 3.5L has a
higher compression ratio. If it only gets a little better mpg than
the 3.5L though the 2.4L might be overworked and thus underachieves in
mpg. Consumer Reports touts the 3.5L as getting only 1mpg less. I
look at it the other way and say the 2.4L gets (if the numbers are
real) only 1mpg more.

rosso.dimontalcino (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote in news:1177007999.568684.300490
@n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com:

I get 23.7 in city driving around 28 on hwy. Mine is FWD only, no AWD, and
I have a heavy foot. I'm impressed with the mileage for the size of the
vehicle and it's power.

hardly germaine to your query but wife's 3.5 Avalon gets at least 28 on
highway - her co-workers tell her don't drive faster than angels can
fly.......

who <i (AT) notaspammer (DOT) net> wrote:
Consumer Reports does not say premium fuel is requred for the RAV4 V6,
as they say for many other cars (such as the Passat V6).

Their tests say 15/29 (city/highway) for the V6, 17/29 for the 4-cyl.

Bill Tuthill <ccreekin (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote in news:462f9994 (AT) news (DOT) meer.net:

We always use regular unleaded (87 octane here), and the manual makes no
mention of having to use premium, but at least 87 octane. As stated
earlier we consistently get 23 in town and about 28 hwy, and have never
gotten less then 20 mpg even in the winter. We were advised by a friend
who has one that they used 85 octane while on a trip out west and
developed some engine problem, can't recall what. Which the dealer
claimed was due to the lower octane fuel and wouldn't cover repairs.
Don't know how they ended up.

"PermanentGuest" <your.couch (AT) the (DOT) livingroom> wrote

Particularly if they were driving at higher altitudes, like in Denver (the
1.6 km-high city), the fuel should have been ok. The truck should have had
anti-knock sensors to prevent any damage.

Jeff