Mazda3 Real World MPG

smoothsailin · March 2010

Sorry, but you appear to have taken my response the wrong way. No insult was intended.

I congratulate you on your plans to have your son attend the BMW teen school and other instructional opportunities. I also agree completely that the person behind the wheel is the biggest safety factor. Clearly with your training and experience your kids will have an ace in the hole over most young drivers. I plan to teach my kids how to drive defensively too, but they may not receive the opportunity to receive training in vehicle handling under extreme condtions on a track...and I feel it's safe to say most parents will not be able to provide such opportunities for their kids either.

However, I hope we can agree that poor judgement, lack of maturity and inexperience plays a major roll in the much higher-than-average rate of accidents involving young drivers.

Like you I'm not greatly concerned about driving members in my family in a vehicle that may lack all the safety equipment that's available. I also own and ride two motorcycles (sometimes two-up with my son) which obviously presents an even higher risk of injury.

All I'm saying is that before I choose to turn over a vehicle to one of my kids I'll want it to be one that's well-designed for crash protection and equipped with most of the safety equipment currently available. While there's no replacement for a responsible and well-trained driver, I also believe that should any driver be unable to avoid a crash, safety equipment present in the vehicle they're in could make a difference in preventing or minimizing their injuries.

As a parent it would certainly be heart-wrenching to have a police officer tell us after an accident that our child might still be alive if the car they were driving had been equipped with "x" or "y".

whobodym · March 2010

I agree. I've always had a stick as my primary driver and lived in Seattle, since the 70s. Seattle is about as hilly as San Francisco, and when you're getting practice every day, you don't even think about hill starts, at all. Yes maybe once or twice a year I kill it, but so what, it's not an issue.

whobodym · March 2010

My 3S replaced an Integra GS-R, which of course was a 5MT, and revved high enough (3050 per mile) that it happily could use 5th gear on 30mph city streets if they weren't too steep uphill. Day in day out on my 13 years of urban suburban freeway commuting, it averaged 31 mpg or so, a couple less in the winter. I was spending 90+% of the time in 5th gear, even in everyday driving. On long trips (more than one tank of gas) it never seemed to improve much beyond the low 30s I was already getting. Maybe 33 or so. Revving about 4000 rpm all day long wasn't ultraeconomical. (although you have to hand it to Honda engineers, this B18C engine did that for me for more than 175,000 miles and still didn't consume any oil when I sold it)
The new 3S on the other hand revs only 2400 per mile, and you really have to be going 45 or 50 before you can spend any time in 6th. I have yet to take the car more than 30 miles from home, but I'm expecting more mileage improvement out on a long trip than the GS-R ever gave. Some playing around resetting the trip computer suggests it at least. You need some space to get the best out of long legs. But in the meantime, the everyday commuting is giving maybe 27 mpg when the GS-R would have given 29 or so. At least I have the consolation of not needing to buy premium gas.

roadburner · March 2010

We'll have to agree to disagree. I believe that giving my son the proper training will allow him to drive my '02 without any undue risk. I wouldn't say the same thing about an Austin Healey Sprite or a Fiat 850, but the '02 handles and stops like a modern vehicle- and with regards to safety, the car was way ahead of its time.

andres3 · March 2010

the end there's not really a good VW dealer in SD and only one Audi dealer; I got the Mazda3 (Hine of course) as my experience owning them has been pretty simple: they seem bulletproof compared to German cars. The car's solid. interior good enough. Chassis is great. Engine/tranny not so good - really archaic actually.

I've heard good things about Drew VW in La Mesa. Also, don't forget there is Hoehn Audi and Escondido Audi both within San Diego (County). Sorry about your trim and window issues. I do know Audi gives the dealers a hard time with things that could potentially be caused by "driver error or driver damage and abuse." I think the Warranty managers at Audi of America will cost Audi more customers in the long run than the thousands of dollars they save every year in denied warranty claims. It's a bad long term business policy to keep warranty costs minimal; unless the method of doing that is to make parts that never break down in the first place.

andres3 · March 2010

As far as the Mazda3 is concerned, I've rented a few Automatic Mazda3 s models, and there is no question that my 2.0 liter 5-Speed is noticeably quicker. Geez, better power and better economy, what's not to like?

Thanks to companies like Audi, there are things like DSG which turn the tables on manuals. I get to 60 MPH faster AND it gets better gas mileage at the same time (only disadvantage is slightly more weight). I find that if I want to eat my Big Mac, drink my coke, and text at the same time (joking about the texting), automatics make life much easier than manuals to do those distratcting things.

So maybe parents should insist on manuals as a safety feature, not a distraction feature for teens. I think the distraction will distract from other greater distractions.

shipo · March 2010

The DSG is just another fancy automatic that I seriously doubt will do much to hurt manual transmission sales. As for getting better fuel economy, hmmm...

Per the Audi web site, the FWD A3 manual gets 21 mpg city versus 22 for the DSG version, however, in the "combined" test they both get 24 mpg, and on the highway the manual 6-Speed bests the DSG by 2 mpg (30 vs. 28 mpg). For my part, as long as I can order a car with three pedals under the dash, they will be no cars darkening the threshold of my garage that only have two pedals.

Best regards,
Shipo

blueguydotcom · March 2010

Trust me, I wish I could say the same about 3 pedal cars. I'm going back to manual when I can - pain be damned.

@Andres, I do believe a manual forces drivers to focus more and with a teen it's important that they're always communicating with the car. You can't drive a manual and ignore the engine sounds, the chassis, your speed, your braking, etc.

andres3 · March 2010

Per the Audi web site, the FWD A3 manual gets 21 mpg city versus 22 for the DSG version, however, in the "combined" test they both get 24 mpg, and on the highway the manual 6-Speed bests the DSG by 2 mpg (30 vs. 28 mpg). For my part, as long as I can order a car with three pedals under the dash, they will be no cars darkening the threshold of my garage that only have two pedals.

No fair, your looking at a 2010 A3, I think they may have changed the gearing on the DSG later on since 2006.

In 2006, the combined rating was 25 MPG for the DSG (1 MPG better), and highway was also 30 MPG so it was tied. I wouldn't mind if they dropped in the 7 speed DSG from the S4 into my A3. It really does need a high/tall cruising gear at speed to improve high speed mileage. However, the gearing is fantastic for sport use.

Real life experience has taught me that my agressive lead foot will still get me 24 to 25 MPG in combined driving (mostly highway), and cruising at 80 my highway mileage will be about 28 to 29 MPG. 75 or 70 easily gets it to 30 MPG+.

shipo · March 2010

Not fair? Sorry, totally fair. Why? The test changed in 2008 for all cars (regardless of fuel type, transmission or size) to what the EPA has determined a more "real world" test.

For my part I kind of agree that the new numbers are more representative of what the average driver will get in the real world, errr, that is for gasoline fueled cars that is, the new test seems to be horribly off for diesels. Long story short, the DSG will likely never beat (but may match on occasion) a good old fashioned stick when it comes to highway mileage.

andres3 · March 2010

Long story short, the DSG will likely never beat (but may match on occasion) a good old fashioned stick when it comes to highway mileage.

However, I know of no manuals with 7 forward gears to choose from that have been made yet to this date. Would that be something you could even want (a seven speed manual?).

As a manual fan, I think you are the right person to ask.

Check out the Audi website again, the S4 with 7-speed DSG outdoes the manual in HIGHWAY mileage specifically. Hooray for 7 speed DSG's!

shipo · March 2010

At least for the U.S. market, I'm at a loss to come up with a single advantage that a 7-Speed transmission will have over a 6-Speed, errr, that is except for bragging rights. Given the broad torque curves of modern engines (especially turbocharged engines like Audi uses), I'll hazard a guess that in real-world driving, the 7-Speed gearbox does nothing but inflate the sticker price of the car and the cost of repairs down the road. Me, I'll stick with a 6-Speed manual.

autonomous · March 2010

According to the Canadian Press Toyota will supply Mazda with its hybrid system used in the Prius; Toyota already sells this technology to Nissan. Mazda plans to sell hybrids in Japan by 2013. Under the agreement, Mazda will develop its own hybrid by combining its next-generation SKY engine, currently under development, with Toyota's system.

crashburn07 · April 2010

I have a 2010 s Sport HB (2.5L) and manual trans. I drive about 130 miles per day, with about 100 of it interstate. I have been getting 29 - 32 while driving with a "nice to average" demenaor. That has not been easy. One of these tanks, I am going to rip it up and probably get 23 MPG. I have been using Regular (87 Octane) grade. For one tank (just for Ss and Gs), I used high test (92 Octane) and got 27 MPG with no real difference in performance.

blueguydotcom · April 2010

Still hovering at 20-21 on every tank. Absolutely sickening.

roadcrazy · April 2010

Brand new 2010 hatchback with an automatic transmission. First tank 50% highway/50% city was 26.7. Second tank 100% city was 24.5.

blueguydotcom · April 2010

What speeds? I tend to average about 75 on the freeway and my driving is heavily tilted to the freeway (90/10).

roadcrazy · April 2010

My highway speeds are 70MPH to 75MPH with very little traffic. To clarify, my city driving is better described as suburban. Light to moderate traffic but frequent traffic lights.

blueguydotcom · April 2010

I really don't get it. I see maybe four-five traffic lights all day and my mileage is just atrocious. In the morning I hit the freeway without ever stopping and see at worst 2 lights after getting off the freeway. Coming home, at worst 2-3 lights and most of the time I'm moving above 70-75. All told my commute is less than 20 miles round trip and most is on the freeway. It's so baffling that my Mazda3 gets worse mileage than any of my far more powerful BMWs.

roadcrazy · May 2010

I don't understand either why your gas mileage is so poor. I just filled up tonight and calculated my mileage 26.2 MPG. This is with major construction going near my office. About 5 times the last two weeks it to me 20+ minutes to go a mile.

whobodym · May 2010

how about some comparison of notes that come from complete records? My 2010 3GT 6MT has now gone 4293 miles and I've bought a total of 166.1 gal. That's 25.8 mpg. My driving is urban / suburban, no long trips yet. I usually go 65-70mph on the freeway. My tank-to-tank mpg varies quite a bit but I am pretty sure the biggest cause of that variation comes from my varying temptation to top off the tank -- which is completely irrelevant to real mpg. I have "zeroed" out the trip computer several times, and I am observing it seems to be slightly on the optimistic side. It has usually said about 27 mpg, during the above time interval.

smoothsailin · May 2010

2005 3i 2.0L w/5-speed manual.
Purchased 3/1/05

73,766.3 miles / 1,897.038 gallons = 38.88 mpg
$4,725.31 spent for fuel = 6.4 cents / mile

blueguydotcom · May 2010

Yours is manual. And you average about 5 MPH lower on the freeway. I'm fairly sure if I had a manual I'd be getting far better numbers.

My appointment is later this month with the dealer.

shipo · May 2010

Hey Blue, when did you make the jump from a stick to an automatic?

blueguydotcom · May 2010

With this car. A leg problem happened to coincide with my 335i getting lemoned. Kismet or bad luck, I went with an automatic assuming the pain/surgery were going to last. No surgery yet/possible and pain mostly subsided. The car's turned out to be economical only in the cheap lease and low insurance cost; as for MPGs I think my 335i even with premium might have been about the same cost for fuel. So really for a savings of about $3500 a year I get...to 31 months and counting!

shipo · May 2010

I can relate. A few years ago I had to let Wifey drive my 530i for over six months due to a badly broken right leg and partially severed foot. I still managed to get around by driving her minivan and slinging my casted let over into the passenger footwell and driving left footed; got pretty good at it too.

Hopefully your leg problem will correct itself and/or become correctable via surgery so that you can get back to rowing your own.

Best regards,
Shipo

whobodym · May 2010

I did 15-mile loops (each) on WA state I-90 Exit 34 to 42 back to 34, today, at 50 60 and 70 mph, in 4th 5th and 6th gears, more than 100 miles of driving with almost zero problems with any traffic impeding. Cruise control, only 1 stop sign per loop. AC off, windows closed. ">Not correcting for trip computer or speedometer error, results:
http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2065402&id=1247040125&l=5e4645f293

blueguydotcom · June 2010

Took my car to Mazda, did an oil change, tire rotation and balance and they looked it over for issues but couldn't find any. Put 150 miles on since then (90% freeway) and put gas in again today. 7.43 gallons. Sigh.

The Mazda SA had the temerity to tell me, "Well the mileage sticker is always wrong by about 17%". Um, yeah 4 years ago. Today they've corrected and really it's off sometimes but not by this much. The sticker says 22/29. I get 20. With mostly freeway. Even going by his inane comment I should be at about 23-24 MPGs. But I'm lower than the city mileage.

He then tried to blame the gas. Yes, the gas is giving me a giant hit.

I'm taking it back to the dealership next Friday. They claim they'll run more tests but then added the caveat, "your mileage is within normal range."

whobodym · June 2010

if you have the opportunity to get into a very-light-traffic interstate highway kind of environment such as 5AM Saturday, do the test I described in my facebook excel spreadsheet closed-loop 15 mile drive. Find a route where the turnaround stop-sign allows a turnaround with (almost) no time stopped, and drive it 100% at constant speed with cruise control (except the turnaround of course). 60mph is probably the easiest speed to use. Turn the A/C off and keep the windows all closed. Reset the trip computer fuel consumption right before you start. Drive from Point A to Point B and back to Point A again and see what the average MPG is. You really do need to drive a long ways to get the number to settle down. In this kind of driving the automatic should not be any worse than the stick, in fact might be better if gearing is higher. 6MT runs 2400 rpm at 60mph, I don't know what 5AT does in 5th. My 6MT car did 33mpg under the above conditions (i.e. 60 mph in 6th gear). Which reminds me to ask -- are you sure the auto trans is getting into 5th gear? Are you sure the torque converter is locking up properly? If your tach rpm wanders while driving the freeway, and/or the rpm is high, you may not be locked up in 5th gear.

whobodym · July 2010

I've now got a photo of my read-out after 3300 mile trip in my 2010 MZ3 SGT 6MT. We did Seattle-Sacramento-Palo Alto-Carmel-Big Sur-LA-San Diego-Death Valley-Winnemucca-Bend-Seattle. (the computer was reset at the start, and not touched during trip). I drive as fast as most everyone on the road.

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2065402&id=1247040125&l=5e4645f293

igozoomzoom · July 2010

How much of the 3300 miles were in stop-and-go traffic (surface streets, LA freeways, etc.)? Did you use the A/C most of those miles? If so, that figure (29.8mpg) is even more impressive! My '06 MZ3 (2.3L/5MT) has never averaged over 26mpg during a highway trip at 70-75mph with the A/C on...

whobodym · July 2010

We were stuck in a normal, not extraordinary, number of traffic backups, and did spend a couple hours each poking around downtown SF and central LA. Certainly A/C On most of the time, a lot of the time the temperature was 95-100+, and the car is black. The 6MT 3 turns 2400 revs per mile (2400 @ 60mph) in 6th. What does a 5MT? We also own a 2006 MZ5 (vanlet) 2.3 5MT, and in similar driving it gets about 27mpg.

igozoomzoom · July 2010

My '06 runs at about 2600rpm at 60mph in 5th gear. Living in North Georgia, there are hills (mountains) to climb every few miles (at least), so that hurts fuel economy to a degree. I also run the A/C (wide open) from early spr=)ing to late fall because of the humidity...so 25-26mpg at 70+mph suddenly seems pretty good under those conditions!

In the winter, with the A/C off and the cruise set at 75mph, I've managed anywhere from 28.4 to 30.2mpg average per tank.

I was pleasantly surprised to see my overall fuel economy (by almost 1mpg overall) when I replaced the OEM tires. The Goodyear Eagle RS-As were toast at only 26k miles and I replaced them with a set of Dunlop SP Sport Signature tires (both P205/50R17).

whobodym · July 2010

Interesting, thanks, I like having the added comparison frame of reference.

I disagree about blaming mountains though -- as long as you're talking about ones where you coast down the backside without braking. I have a lot of cross-continental trips under my belt in a half-dozen stick VWs, Hondas, and Mazdas, and there is zero sign that the Rocky Mtns hurt gas mileage to my eye. In fact, since engine pumping losses (the friction of the air going thru the engine, I think) are optimal at wide open throttle (comparing against equal RPM) it might actually be optimum to charge up a mountain pass at 70mph then coast down the other side, as long as you stay in high gear going up, and coming down the fuel injection has zero fuel flow while coasting.

And re A/C, remember that "A/C On" really means "compressor cycling on and off to a thermostatically controlled temperature". So in the winter, the compressor is off a whole lot larger % of the time even when your interior indicator light is on. During our Pacific NW rainy season (Oct-June) I keep the A/C on lots of the time (and adding some heat), the dehumidification is a huge comfort plus. (and remember you get A/C On, no choice and no indicator light, when you select windshield defrost)

whobodym · July 2010

much to my surprise, my '10 3 SGT 6MT with OEM Yokohama tires under-reads its odometer by 2 or 3%. A true 50 miles by the milesposts only adds 48.5 miles to the odometer. Thus our California trip I've noted in adjacent posts worked out to true 31.0 mpg for what the trip computer registered as 29.8 overall average. That's a real surprise -- MPG is better than the computer says.

blueguydotcom · July 2010

One day I'll get it back to the dealer on a non-Saturday (the service department claims they can't research any real problems on a weekend). Still blown away by how roof the engine feels along with what I feel like is the tranny slipping. Could be my imagination (it's maddening to be in an automatic to begin with so the entire experience is very foreign to me). I always feel like the auto holds some gears too long (1st and 2nd) and rarely finds its way into the right gear out of a corner. Something is off...or I'm just not used to automatics like this.

blueguydotcom · July 2010

I meant to write "rough"... I need some caffeine.

eoghan1 · August 2010

Listening to Car Talk on NPR I think the brothers said coasting in neutral may not be fuel efficient because the engine computer would continue to feed fuel to keep the engine running. Whereas, if you left the 5th gear engaged the computer would likely completely close off fuel intake. Any Mazda techs out there know if this applies to the Mazda3?

shipo · August 2010

It applies (and has applied) to virtually all fuel injected cars from all manufacturers for at least a decade now.

blueguydotcom · August 2010

But in the automatic if you leave it in gear the car will downshift as you slow down, revving the engine repeatedly. Quite frustrating but it simply won't let you coast...

jwill78 · February 2011

Somehow just came across this topic, but it's interesting to me too. I have a 2005 Mazda 3s 5sp manual and it's my work commuter and run around car. It spins at about 3k rpm @ 70mph and 3,500rpm @ 80 mph. I average about 26 mpg after 65k miles. I've thought more about what I could do to up that, but I can't really complain with 26 at this point. I really wish I had a 6sp just to drop the rpm's a little, but no sense wishing for what I can't have right now. Something to keep in mind though when this one dies and I get another. Not that I can foresee that happening for another several years.

nsbio1 · March 2011

The mileage has been between 25 all city to 33 mostly highway at 75mph and A/C on.

ahightower · March 2011

2008 3i touring sedan (2.0 liter), five speed manual. I have kept a spreadsheet with every tank of gas since new... a little obsessive? Anyway, over the past 53,678 miles I have averaged 31.67 mpg.

My driving style is pretty tame. I go 25 miles each way to work, mostly highway. Have never taken it on a long road trip, every tank is at least partly city driving.

Other miscellaneous stats:
Best tank 36.95 mpg
Worst tank 27.52 mpg
Cheapest fuel $1.319 Dec 2008
Most expensive fuel $3.969 July 2008 (what a swing in five months!)

Still loving this car. Mileage has actually dropped off a little bit since I got new tires about 6 months ago. Lifetime average was 31.92 last July. But the new tires (yokohomas) are very quiet and grippy in poor weather. The best part of all is that it's paid for. The interior and exterior still look great. Original floor mats were a disappointment, my heel wore a hole through in a year. Replaced with heavy duty rubber mats from Weathertech which have been good.

I plan to keep it until passing it on to my son when he can drive in 2016. He's already learned how to change the oil

nsbio1 · March 2011

Your mileage seems to be 1-2 mpg better than mine with the same car. Funny, I also put Yokohamas on it and they do seem quieter than the OEM tires. I would have loved to squeeze another mpg or two from my car, but overall I can not complain. It is a great car to drive. The only two quibbles with it that I have is that the brake rotors warp like there is no tomorrow, and that there is no automatic trunk opening key on a remote (to wait full five model years to include that simple thing was plain dumb on the engineers' part).

shipo · March 2011

With just over 40,000 on my 2009 Mazda3i Touring 5-Speed my average mileage is also in the thirty-one to thirty-two mpg range. I've managed just over thirty-nine on a couple of longer trips.

FWIW #1, I threw the OEM tires away after only 700 miles and replaced them with a set of Michelin Pilot Sport A/Ss; the improvement in performance (wet, dry, snow) cannot be over stated. Said another way, the OEM tires are absolute crap.

FWIW #2, my 2009 has a trunk button on the remote.

crashburn07 · March 2011

">Thanks Whobodym for all your efforts! I have apparenty the identical model to yours: 2010 Ms HB 6spd with the Sunroof. I have a 56-mile trip to work each day, almost all interstate. My numbers, albeit not as well characterized as yours, are similar. If only I had the kahunas to drive 50 mph in 6th gear on the interstate! My best MPG for a tank is about 35, even so. With 38k on the car, I will soon be looking at replacing my tires. If you have any ideas on what tires will offer the best of all worlds (handling, mileage, and durability), I would be interested in what you know. Thanks again!!! Bob

shipo · March 2011

On other Mazda web sites the tires that are getting the vast majority of the buzz these days for handling, mileage, and durability are the new Continental ExtremeContact DWSs.

By way of comparison, the Michelin Pilot Sport A/Ss that I'm currently rockin' on my 2009 will probably need replacing late this coming fall before the snow flies; by then they'll have something over 50,000 miles. I'm thinking I'll probably opt for the Continentals over another set of Michelins. Why? Even though they may not have quite the handling sharpness of the Pilot Sports, reports indicate they're still pretty good, and the fact that they'll likely last even longer and cost a bit less is enough to put them at the top of my short list.

whobodym · March 2011

re driving 50mph on the open interestate, it was rather foolhardy of me. The traffic coming rapidly up behind me, even in the right lane, was nerve-wracking. I was really depending on everyone being on their toes. If I'd picked an earlier darker hour there might have been lighter traffic, but what odds of encountering a dazed driver?
re tires, I tend to go with the highest-performance famous-name-brand I can find that is still all-season. An MPG-head might share my feeling that one-notch too-large tires, to get larger rolling radius, are good. On an MZ5 or MZ3, this means going 215/50-17 instead of 205/50-17. So the radius is 0.5 times 10mm taller -- not much but something. I've done this on our MZ5 and they work fine but won't fit snow chains. Another advantage is, less propensity for nose scraping. One other disadvantage, while I think the fuller-wheelwell bulgier-sidewall look looks good, it is easier to cause curb-pinch damage if you parallel park a lot. But both our Mazdas' gearing is certainly low enough that the car isn't bothered by the slightly increased effective ratio.

shipo · March 2011

Moving to a 215/50 R17 will also induce speedometer and odometer error.

nsbio1 · March 2011

>FWIW #2, my 2009 has a trunk button on the remote.

Yes, they came up with the trunk remote button beginning from 2009 model year. This is the only tangible difference between 08 and 09 models, but it alone makes me jealous.

Mazda3 Real World MPG

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles