Fuel Economy

[PiCASSO]

Well, after 2.5 months and nearly 8,000 km, here are my fuel economy numbers:

Date | L/100km | mpg (US) | mpg (UK)
------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------
10/17/04 | 10.98 | 21.42 | 25.72
10/24/04 | 09.06 | 25.95 | 31.16
10/27/04 | 10.42 | 22.57 | 27.10
10/27/04 | 10.45 | 22.50 | 27.02
10/31/04 | 08.94 | 26.31 | 31.59
11/07/04 | 10.29 | 22.87 | 27.46
11/14/04 | 10.77 | 21.85 | 26.24
11/16/04 | 09.41 | 24.99 | 30.02
11/21/04 | 09.17 | 25.65 | 30.80
11/22/04 | 09.06 | 25.97 | 31.19
12/06/04 | 09.82 | 23.96 | 28.78
12/09/04 | 09.72 | 24.19 | 29.05
12/11/04 | 10.46 | 22.48 | 27.00
12/13/04 | 10.27 | 22.91 | 27.52
12/16/04 | 10.21 | 23.03 | 27.66
12/20/04 | 10.78 | 21.82 | 26.21
12/23/04 | 10.49 | 22.43 | 26.93
12/31/04 | 10.16 | 23.14 | 27.80
------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------
Average | 10.03 | 23.56 | 28.29


Now, I do about 70% highway driving, and another 30% of city driving. This includes reving the engine to it\\\'s redline from time to time, and regular shifting around 3,500 RPM. Canadian EPA state the following numbers (www.mazda.ca):

City: 9.2L/100km
Highway: 6.7L/100km

And the USA equivalent (www.mazdausa.com):

City: 25 MPG
Highway: 32 MPG

So for both cases, I am not even close to the CITY rating for the Canadian and USA ratings. I personally don\'t think that I will get anything better than 9L/100km or 25 MPG even if it\'s pure highway driving (as it is in some of the examples above). Perhaps I should really test this out and drive approximately 100 km/h (in the right lane, of course) and see if I can get within 25% of these numbers that EPA is claiming. BTW, I\'m WAY past my so-called break-in period. Should I bring this up to the Mazda dealer? Or simply live with the bad fuel economy?

Cheers,

PiCASSO

[VeRmiLLioN]

All I know is that I get about 450kms on a full tank with my 3GTS.

Sucks actually. I got 424km on a full tank with my Probe GT (2.5L V6).

[PiCASSO]

I\'ve updated the chart to include some distances travelled with litres used:

Date | Distance (km) | Fuel Used (L) | L/100km | mpg (US) | mpg (UK) | Fuel Left (L) | Distance Left | Total Range
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
10/17/04 | 400.0 | 43.93 | 10.98 | 21.42 | 25.72 | 11.07 | 121.56 | 521.56
10/24/04 | 468.7 | 42.48 | 9.06 | 25.95 | 31.16 | 12.52 | 113.45 | 582.15
10/31/04 | 518.4 | 46.35 | 8.94 | 26.31 | 31.59 | 8.65 | 77.31 | 595.71
11/07/04 | 397.4 | 40.87 | 10.29 | 22.87 | 27.46 | 14.13 | 145.29 | 542.69
11/21/04 | 500.0 | 45.86 | 9.17 | 25.65 | 30.80 | 9.15 | 83.87 | 583.87
11/22/04 | 515.0 | 46.64 | 9.06 | 25.97 | 31.19 | 8.36 | 75.72 | 590.72
12/11/04 | 378.5 | 39.60 | 10.46 | 22.48 | 27.00 | 15.40 | 161.09 | 539.59
12/20/04 | 397.5 | 42.85 | 10.78 | 21.82 | 26.21 | 12.15 | 131.01 | 528.51
12/31/04 | 387.1 | 39.34 | 10.16 | 23.14 | 27.80 | 15.66 | 159.15 | 546.25
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
Average | 440.29 | 43.10 | 9.88 | 23.96 | 28.77 | 11.90 | 118.72 | 559.01

I\'ve removed all the entries that had less than 39L (or 14L before fully empty). You can see that I\'m averaging approximately 440km per tankful. Theoretical range (based on fuel economy and 55L tank) is averaging approximately 560km.

As a comparison, my 2002 Honda Civic Si coupe did average: 7.71 L/100km or 30.51 MPG (US), and a maximum theoretical range of 652.16 km (with a 50L tank). Now, I\'ve been driving that Civic for 3-years, just as hard as the Mazda3. But to consume another 2.29 Litres for every 100km with a 0.5L larger engine? That doesn\'t really make any sense, or simply the fact that Mazda hasn\'t figured out fuel economy with their engines like Honda has.

My 2-cents,

PiCASSO

[majic]

YYYY | MMM | DD | FILL | ODOM | TRIP| L/100 | mpg | STATION| ($/L) | Cost
2004 | Nov | 28 | 43.95 | 462 | 448 | 9.81 | 23.98 | CT | $0.739 | $32.48
2004 | Dec | 01 | 42.04 | 842 | 380 | 11.06 | 21.26 | Shell | $0.718 | $30.18
2004 | Dec | 06 | 47.55 | 1335 | 493 | 9.64 | 24.39 | Esso | $0.717 | $34.09
2004 | Dec | 10 | 49.32 | 1836 | 501 | 9.85 | 23.89 | CT | $0.669 | $33.00
2004 | Dec | 15 | 51.36 | 2361 | 525 | 9.78 | 24.04 | Sunoco | $0.662 | $34.00
2004 | Dec | 19 | 45.77 | 2832 | 471 | 9.72 | 24.20 | Esso | $0.679 | $31.08
2004 | Dec | 23 | 50.07 | 3319 | 487 | 10.28 | 22.88 | Esso | $0.699 | $35.00
2004 | Dec | 28 | 48.28 | 3839 | 520 | 9.29 | 25.33 | Esso | $0.744 | $35.92
2005 | Jan | 01 | 44.35 | 4342 | 503 | 8.82 | 26.68 | Esso | $0.699 | $31.00*

* this is the best mileage to date. I was a bit dissapointed with the results i was getting thus far :( I used to drive to work every day so it would be stop and go traffic all the time, pretty much city driving. but that last one (bold) everyone was on holidays and i drove at hwy speeds 100-120.. the numbers are approximately 75% city 25% hwy (speed and gear shifting wise)

now i USUALLY set the cruise at 110kph and shift roughly at 3000RPM but OFTEN (even on that last tank) i like to redline 1,2 and 3 :D

i guess you could try shifting earlier 2500-3000 and set cruise when you can at 100-110kph and see if it helps at all. but for me.. it\'s back to the GO train.. much more relaxin than getting stuck in traffic

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by majic

* this is the best mileage to date. I was a bit dissapointed with the results i was getting thus far :( I used to drive to work every day so it would be stop and go traffic all the time, pretty much city driving. but that last one (bold) everyone was on holidays and i drove at hwy speeds 100-120.. the numbers are approximately 75% city 25% hwy (speed and gear shifting wise)

now i USUALLY set the cruise at 110kph and shift roughly at 3000RPM but OFTEN (even on that last tank) i like to redline 1,2 and 3 :D

i guess you could try shifting earlier 2500-3000 and set cruise when you can at 100-110kph and see if it helps at all. but for me.. it\'s back to the GO train.. much more relaxin than getting stuck in traffic

Hey Maciej,

I initially thought that the 8.82 L/100km was an outlier, but you are hovering in the mid-9\'s with your fuel economy. I would wait until you get your next few fill-ups before dismissing or accepting that last 8.82 figure.

As for shifting, I guess it\'s all dependent on the mood and time I\'ve in. If I\'m in a hurry, I will certainly not granny shift. Same thing for the mood, as recently with some of the stresses of moving (recently got myself out of Windsor and into Toronto), I use my Mazda3 as my escape goat. :D

GO train? I found a place that is exactly 6.7km away from my work, so all I have to do is drive on Carville/Rutherford from Richmond Hill to Concord and I\'m at work within 10-minutes. Hehehe... :)

I\'m looking forward to seeing other people\'s figures... assuming that they are as anal about entering the numbers as you and I in an excel spreadsheet. Yes, I also include amount of money spent, cost for fuel, etc. This way I can see the trend of the fluctuations in pricing, along the amount of money used for ownership for the Mazda3.

Cheers,

PiCASSO

[majic]

Pawel, i assure you my last 8.82L/100 has to do with MUCH less stop and go traffic. so there _IS_ hope.. and yah.. i live in oakville and commute 50km to work (downtown) sux but oh well..

now, as for the mileage.. i am really hoping that 1) car will get better with time 2) come summer i will see better results as the engine will have an easier time..

and i doubt you\'ll see anyone else\'s numbers to this level of anality (is that even a word?) :p but yah, it does help to see how much you spend each month and helps you plan pit stops during trips and all that.. anyway.. till the next fill

[everfeb]

Majic and Picasso...what are you driving???
I have 3S GT auto...bot Dec11/03..built Oct/\'03
I don\'t think you are anal...it\'s nice to see some precise numbers. Cars before the 3 I didn\'t pay much attention to gas mileage. Bot the 3 because of the promise of good mileage. I try to drive in a way to get optimum gas mileage except for a bit of fast highway driving. Here\'s my numbers...not as detailed as yours. All US MPG. SHOULD GET 32 HWY/ 24 TOWN/ 28 50/50
Below #\'s are Mixed City/Hwy unless noted.

WINTER-DEC03JANFEBMAR\'04.../ 18.125/ 21.95/ 20.05/ 16/ 21.7/ 23.88-85%hwy driving fast/ 26.63-all hwy driving 100kmhr/ 18.32/ 14.9-MY WORST all town,around 0C, 1-15 minute idle/ 20.72
SPRING/SUMMER\'04..19.89/ 20.36/ 21.24/ 22.57/ 29.55...MY BEST..99%hwy beautiful weather no A/C most at around 100KM HR/ 21.89/ 24.81 mostly hwy/ 22.75 mostly highway-fast
FALL-NOW 28.89-all highway 100-110KMHR/ 22.75-40% hwy/ 22.35-44% hwy/ 24.09-mostly hwy/26.42-all highway moderate speeds/ 25.42-85%hwy slow to moderate sppeds/ my last one-Dec14 fill-up..16.76MPusGAL-32%hwy.

One of the reasons I bot this car was because of my expectation of good gas mileage. I\'ve been disappointed. My 2 best highway mpg were 29.55 and 28.89 (not bad) but both in perfect weather at slowish highway speeds. My guess is that you would have to drive this 2.3 auto at 90KM hour or slower in order to get anything near 32 mpgUS on the highway. Not exactly ZOOM ZOOM. I perceive my 2.3 auto to be a real gas pig at above 115km hr highway speeds and particularly around town. Since buying the 3 I\'ve been watching mpg on my 225HP Acura 3.2 TL and it sort of pisses me off I usually getter better hwy mileage with the Acura than the 3. What gives with this?

Right now I am doing a 100% around town mileage check on my 3. It\'s been very cold here in NWONT
some snow, I don\'t have winter tires...the way it\'s looking so far I\'ll be surprised if I get 12mpUS gal. I\'ll report back on this thread when completed.

To be honest...2 things...First, if most people did exact and precise mileage checks like Majic and Picasso have done plus keep track of %hwy/city driving I feel they wouldn\'t be as happy as they seem to be about their mpg especially when compared to what they should be getting...BTW I consistently use 20%-30% and up to as high as 53% more gas than should be needed to travel a certain distance based on %hwy/city km\'s driven. 2nd...I have an Oct03 build date and just get the feeling something is not right with my car-engine wise-it runs good and sounds good but it just seems something is not right. From posts I read on different forums I get the feeling that more recently build 3\'s do get better gas mileage than early builds and that 2.3 5spds get closer to EPA #\'s than the auto does. I have no proof of this..just a perception.

Anyway..I\'ll be watching this thread with interest. Hope there are more \"anal\"ytical people out there.

everfeb

[dinu01]

This is normal for the 2.3 engine, especially w/MT and driven on the highway.

My 2.0 gets 8.5 with shifts around 3500RPMs too...

Enjoy the car! It\'s very sweet w/the 2.3!!!

[PiCASSO]

Everfeb,

Very nice to get a 3rd opinion on the fuel economy, and I\'m glad to see your numbers in the same ballpark as ours (you know what they say... \"misery loves company\"). Although I\'d like to \"take it easy\" on my Mazda, I feel that it\'s not worth it to save a few dollars on gas and simply drive the car the way it was meant to.

As for the tires, I still have my OEM Goodyear all-seasons, but I\'m thinking of purchasing a set of winter rims/tires. That may happen when I have some money in the bank account in the next month or two.

Cheers,

PiCASSO :)

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by dinu01


This is normal for the 2.3 engine, especially w/MT and driven on the highway.

My 2.0 gets 8.5 with shifts around 3500RPMs too...

Enjoy the car! It\'s very sweet w/the 2.3!!!

Yes, I have to admit that I\'m enjoying the 2.3L engine compared to my sister\'s 2.0L in her 2002 Protege. I haven\'t driven the 2.0L Mazda3, but I\'m assuming that it\'s not as refined as the 2.3L? My sister\'s 2.0L sounds like a diesel, regardless of how much time it had to warm up. This was one of the deciding factors of purchasing my \'02 Civic Si instead of a \'02 Protege.

And I am certainly enjoying the with sweet reving 2.3L engine. ;)

[///M]

I\'ve driven both and I find the 2.0l somewhat smoother than the 2.3.

[rbart4506]

I\'ve got the 2.0L and it\'s plenty smooth and quiet at idle. Actually there are times I can\'t even tell if it\'s running. When I do push the motor is has a nice little growl and never feels like it\'s being strained. The best is my mileage is a nice consistent 30mpg...

Now I must admit when the car is full with me, my wife and two kids...Then the 2.0l does show a slight lack of acceleration, but honestly at that time I don\'t care. I\'ve got the whole family with me and I\'m not out to race anyone.

Rich

[AfterBurner]

Originally posted by rbart4506


I\'ve got the 2.0L and it\'s plenty smooth and quiet at idle. Actually there are times I can\'t even tell if it\'s running. When I do push the motor is has a nice little growl and never feels like it\'s being strained. The best is my mileage is a nice consistent 30mpg...

Now I must admit when the car is full with me, my wife and two kids...Then the 2.0l does show a slight lack of acceleration, but honestly at that time I don\'t care. I\'ve got the whole family with me and I\'m not out to race anyone.

Rich


I second that except without the wife and kids since I don\'t have any.:D

[amit2000]

I currently have 3000km on my M3 (2.0L Auto). When I first got the car, I got around 11L per 100km, which I guess is not bad considering it is brand spanking new. After a couple of fill ups, I still continued to receive the same mileage, if anything, a bit lower. All this time I was filling up at Esso stations since I receive Aeroplan miles, then I heard from a couple of folks that Esso\'s gas is the dirtiest in Canada, and Petro Canadas gasoline is the cleanest. I thought all gasolines were pretty much the same, since they go through the same government regulations. Nevertheless, I decided to try Petro Canada gas and surprisingly, I have so far gotten 475KM with about another 25-30Km before the gas light comes on. Say I get 500KM with the gas light coming on, with about 10L in reserve, I can get around 600km on a tank if the full 55L is utilized. That is a drastic improvement since the gas light would usually come on around 400km. I don\'t know if it is the Petro gas, or the car has passed the break in period, I am leaning towards the gas. I dont know if it helps, but try using Petros gas instead of the other providers and see what kind of mileage you get.

[dinu01]

Consistently get 8.5L/100kms

[cstraw]

Here was my response to a similar thread in the Drivetrain forum regarding fuel economy.
http://torontomazda3.com/forum/read.php?TID=651&page=3

:Here are my November and December numbers thus far. As you can see, the fuel economy begins to suffer with a drop in temperature. I\'m sure having to drive through snow and slush that we\'ve had quite a bit of here in North/Central Ontario doesn\'t help either:


Oct. 18 634km 45.14L 7.12 L/100km
23 349km 24.6L 7.05 best to date


Nov. 3 577km 41.389L 7.17
13 240 25.8 10.75 (father visited and I left him the car, just goes to show what short trips and inefficient driving results in)
17 297km 22.7L 7.64 L/100km
21 463 34.53 7.50
25 418 22.4 7.84
28 548 42.25 7.71
Dec. 2 417km 33.4L 8.01 L/100km
5 491 38.1 7.75

The car is a 2.3L Sport GT, mtx (5 speed), no mods, regular gas (Sunoco whenever possible), shift mostly just before 3k rpm. I rarely travel the 400 series highways since most drivers don\'t know how to use it accordingly and it frustrates the hell out of me. On 80km/h posted roads I tend to drive 92-95km/h... yes that is slow... but that is probaly why many of you may be complaining about your fuel economy. The extra ~4 minutes I would save in my travel isn\'t worth it. I may switch over to an aftermarket air filter in the spring, it will interesting to see if that makes a noticeable difference in either power or economy.
Getting close to advertised fuel economy rating is possible, decide whether or not you will need to change your driving habits if you want to achieve that.
\"



I have yet to add my December figures but I have had a decrease in mileage, most likely attributed to the colder weather. I am pleased with the returns and continue to drive conservatively, particularily with the road conditions here in central Ontario. One interesting note, I did travel down the 400 from Coldwater onto the 401 to Milton one fine day in December and despite the higher car speed (115km/h) I did get 640km to that tank without the low fuel light turning on. I will try to post my December fuel log as soon as I calculate it from gas receipts.

Chris

[dinu01]

The 2.0 in the PRO is a diesel compared to the 2.0 in teh 3 - they\'re different engines all together!

Today I just got my 2nd lowest reading EVER - 8.06L/100kms - city and hwy

Best was 7.9L/100kms on highway-only in the summer.

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by cstraw



Here was my response to a similar thread in the Drivetrain forum regarding fuel economy.
http://torontomazda3.com/forum/read.php?TID=651&page=3

:Here are my November and December numbers thus far. As you can see, the fuel economy begins to suffer with a drop in temperature. I\'m sure having to drive through snow and slush that we\'ve had quite a bit of here in North/Central Ontario doesn\'t help either:


Oct. 18 634km 45.14L 7.12 L/100km
23 349km 24.6L 7.05 best to date


Nov. 3 577km 41.389L 7.17
13 240 25.8 10.75 (father visited and I left him the car, just goes to show what short trips and inefficient driving results in)
17 297km 22.7L 7.64 L/100km
21 463 34.53 7.50
25 418 22.4 7.84
28 548 42.25 7.71
Dec. 2 417km 33.4L 8.01 L/100km
5 491 38.1 7.75

The car is a 2.3L Sport GT, mtx (5 speed), no mods, regular gas (Sunoco whenever possible), shift mostly just before 3k rpm. I rarely travel the 400 series highways since most drivers don\'t know how to use it accordingly and it frustrates the hell out of me. On 80km/h posted roads I tend to drive 92-95km/h... yes that is slow... but that is probaly why many of you may be complaining about your fuel economy. The extra ~4 minutes I would save in my travel isn\'t worth it. I may switch over to an aftermarket air filter in the spring, it will interesting to see if that makes a noticeable difference in either power or economy.
Getting close to advertised fuel economy rating is possible, decide whether or not you will need to change your driving habits if you want to achieve that.
\"



I have yet to add my December figures but I have had a decrease in mileage, most likely attributed to the colder weather. I am pleased with the returns and continue to drive conservatively, particularily with the road conditions here in central Ontario. One interesting note, I did travel down the 400 from Coldwater onto the 401 to Milton one fine day in December and despite the higher car speed (115km/h) I did get 640km to that tank without the low fuel light turning on. I will try to post my December fuel log as soon as I calculate it from gas receipts.

Chris

Wow. I think that I\'ve been spoiled from using a 1.7L to a 2.3L engine, so I\'m capitaling on using every band of power that I can from the 2.3L. It will be difficult to change my habits to shift under 3,000 RPM because there so so much bandwidth available, it seems cruel to allow the engine to shift so early. I dunno, I\'ll try it for a week... but I know that from time to time, I will forget and eat a few litres along the way when pulling up beside another rice rocket.

A few more thoughts about the 1.7L VTEC Civic to the 2.3L Mazda3 engines:

2.3L - 1.7L = 0.5L
0.5L/1.7L = 0.294 or 29.4% increase
7.7L/100km - 10.0L/100km = 2.3L/100km
2.3/7.7 = 0.299 or 29.9% increase

So in theory... all the numbers add up. As you increase your displacement, you increase your consumption. But I\'m not sure if that will work in other cases.

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by dinu01


The 2.0 in the PRO is a diesel compared to the 2.0 in teh 3 - they\'re different engines all together!

Today I just got my 2nd lowest reading EVER - 8.06L/100kms - city and hwy

Best was 7.9L/100kms on highway-only in the summer.

Funny, I should have tried to drive the 2.0L on the Mazda3 before leasing my 2005 MY. But then again, I wanted the 5-door hatch, and it wasn\'t available, so it makes no difference.

For my sister, on the other hand, who\'s lease on her 2002 Protege runs out in August of 2005, she\'ll have the decision to make between the 2.0 and 2.3L if she decideds for the 4-door (although she appears to be leaning towards the hatch).

[dinu01]

The 2.3L feels \"stronger\" and pulls better than the 2.0 - I drove both in MT

Since I wanted a sunroof but the insurance Co. wanted roughly $40+/mth for the 2.3L, I had to get the 2.0L. It would have cost me too much(car+ins+maintenance+gas, etc), plus I don\'t like the GFX package AT ALL.

So the 2.0L GS w/Sport Package was it, although sometimes I think that the 2.3L would have been nice...

If could only gove me the 2.3L w/sunroof and no plastic running boards, I probably would have forked over the extra $ and get the GT.

[billyfo]

I never try 2.0L one cause I went straight to Sport model.

for mine 5MT, I drive usually 50:50 city/hwy, sometimes drive 140km/h on hwy, and now get 8.69L/100km. Although not sure, but if our cars got 6MT, it would get better mileage, when I drive at 120km/h, it revs at 3200rpm, which seems quite high, my old CRV rev only 3000rpm at the same speed.

[majic]

Alright.. time for an update

today I drove from Oakville to Pickering to Collingwood (Blue Mountain) to downtown (Danforth) and back to Oakville. I took 400 series/DVP/Gardiner/80kmh roads.

on the major highways i drove 100kph using cruise control. on the 80kph roads, i drove 92-95kph (cruise as well). I had 3 stop and go traffic situations + some city driving that accounted for < 5% of the entire trip. *drumroll*

distance 520km, gas used 39.189L 7.54L/100 YAY!!! finally

YYYY | MMM | DD | FILL | ODOM | TRIP| L/100 | mpg | STATION| ($/L) | Cost
2005 | JAN | 08 | 39.19 | 5385 | 520 | 7.54 | 31.21 | Esso | $0.689 | $27.00

7.54L/100km - this is with 3 adults weighing in at about 450lbs total + 3 snowboards and other equipment, I was finally satisfied to see those numbers.

it was a bit tough not racing the engine and it was nice to get a contsant speed going without shuffling through gears or idling

Oh funny thing, my range would have been much longer BUT as i was driving into collingwood gas was 66.9 so i figured i\'ll fill up on the way home so that i can enjoy boarding now. on the way home, this jumped to 75.8. I had plenty left so i said \'screw it\' and drove home. I got off the hwy in oakville and saw petro canada at 68.9 I thought it was a mistake, I drove past esso and baaam 79.1 so i decided to pay shell a visit around the corner. 68.9 - nice but i wanna see sunoco or esso that are just 2 blocks away. I drove there and they were both 68.9 This is when I figured i wanted my airmiles and a dollar off at dominion so i went back to shell just to see the price jump to 79.1 (literally 2min later!!!) so i drove back to esso and sunoco, esso: 79.1 sunoco: 68.9 I quickly filled up at sunoco, got home, took my mom\'s car and filled her up too.

ugh.. this is what you get for being cheap. yeah yeah.. i wasted gas by driving around. literally the whole \'loop\' was done in 5 min and my decision making process wasn\'t so good (obviously) due to a long day of boarding :D now time for sleep.. l8r

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by majic


Alright.. time for an update

today I drove from Oakville to Pickering to Collingwood (Blue Mountain) to downtown (Danforth) and back to Oakville. I took 400 series/DVP/Gardiner/80kmh roads.

on the major highways i drove 100kph using cruise control. on the 80kph roads, i drove 92-95kph (cruise as well). I had 3 stop and go traffic situations + some city driving that accounted for < 5% of the entire trip. *drumroll*

distance 520km, gas used 39.189L 7.54L/100 YAY!!! finally

YYYY | MMM | DD | FILL | ODOM | TRIP| L/100 | mpg | STATION| ($/L) | Cost
2005 | JAN | 08 | 39.19 | 5385 | 520 | 7.54 | 31.21 | Esso | $0.689 | $27.00

7.54L/100km - this is with 3 adults weighing in at about 450lbs total + 3 snowboards and other equipment, I was finally satisfied to see those numbers.

it was a bit tough not racing the engine and it was nice to get a contsant speed going without shuffling through gears or idling

Oh funny thing, my range would have been much longer BUT as i was driving into collingwood gas was 66.9 so i figured i\'ll fill up on the way home so that i can enjoy boarding now. on the way home, this jumped to 75.8. I had plenty left so i said \'screw it\' and drove home. I got off the hwy in oakville and saw petro canada at 68.9 I thought it was a mistake, I drove past esso and baaam 79.1 so i decided to pay shell a visit around the corner. 68.9 - nice but i wanna see sunoco or esso that are just 2 blocks away. I drove there and they were both 68.9 This is when I figured i wanted my airmiles and a dollar off at dominion so i went back to shell just to see the price jump to 79.1 (literally 2min later!!!) so i drove back to esso and sunoco, esso: 79.1 sunoco: 68.9 I quickly filled up at sunoco, got home, took my mom\'s car and filled her up too.

ugh.. this is what you get for being cheap. yeah yeah.. i wasted gas by driving around. literally the whole \'loop\' was done in 5 min and my decision making process wasn\'t so good (obviously) due to a long day of boarding :D now time for sleep.. l8r

First off, nice figures. Secondly... don\'t get too excited. There is a chance that the machine that you used to fill-up gas in Collingwood didn\'t fill-up exactly like the ones in Toronto. The only way to prove that is to see your following figures. You should, in theory, get better numbers if you continued to drive as you did and had less loads on the car.

As for the gas pricing, yeah, I\'m the same way. Not cheap... but simply want to get the bang for my buck. Especially when the pricing of fuel is so temperamental by 10 to 15-cents within a few kilometers. I\'ve been finding that there exists a station that is always more competitive than the others. Some say that it\'s the corporate parent companies that set the pricing. Sure, I\'ll believe that, but to a certain extent. Because there are probably another 10-15 margins that the operators can play with, and if they want to see more business, they are willing to loose a few cents. That would explain why in Mississauga, for example, you can go from 72-cents to 65-cents per litre from the SAME company in the SAME time frame of the day. I am, by the way, surprised that the Collingwood region would have gas at such a low rate, compared to the GTA. I guess that operators in the Toronto area are simply GREEDY. It\'s money that makes the world go round...

Oh well.

[amit2000]

As I said in an earlier post, I was mostly using Esso gas and got horrible fuel economy. Two days ago, I decided to use Sunoco, and for some odd reason, the car is much more smoother and does not vibrate at all. It is a noticeable difference, even when reving the car, it just sounds much better. Now only have to see what kind of fuel economy I can get.

[majic]

Originally posted by PiCASSO

don\'t get too excited. There is a chance that the machine that you used to fill-up gas in Collingwood didn\'t fill-up exactly like the ones in Toronto. The only way to prove that is to see your following figures. You should, in theory, get better numbers if you continued to drive as you did and had less loads on the car.


I initially thought that the 8.82 L/100km was an outlier, but you are hovering in the mid-9\'s with your fuel economy. I would wait until you get your next few fill-ups before dismissing or accepting that last 8.82 figure.

man.. you keep bashing my good numbers :p

1st of all, it\'s called law of averages. each machine has its own cutoff point and will dispense only X amount of fuel. 2nd, i didn\'t fill up in collingwood, it was in oakville :p so in theory i would have to fill up at the SAME _PUMP_ each time, stopping after the first \'click\' Then again, there are all these variables you can\'t control (temperature for example) but anyway, what\'s important is that i can get closer to the \'ideal\' fuel consumption numbers with granny/hwy driving.

On this tank of gas, i\'m driving \'with the flow\' on the highway and when the flow is too fast i cruise at 110kph. Hopefully not too much city driving will take place and i\'ll come back to report on it and next fill ups. cheers,

--maciej

[ken]

Hey, I have also been keeping tack of fuel consumption figures for the past year on my 3 sedan gs auto. During the summer I can get 7.1-7.5L/100km, and for the winter it is about 7.5-7.8L/100km. 60-70% of my driving is on the highway, and I have been putting regular gas from shell. I am fairly satisifed with the fuel consumption of this car, considering I was driving a jetta before.

[majic]

Originally posted by ken


Hey, I have also been keeping tack of fuel consumption figures for the past year on my 3 sedan gs auto. During the summer I can get 7.1-7.5L/100km, and for the winter it is about 7.5-7.8L/100km. 60-70% of my driving is on the highway, and I have been putting regular gas from shell. I am fairly satisifed with the fuel consumption of this car, considering I was driving a jetta before.

your numbers will be lower b/c you have a 2.0L whereas PiCASSO and I have the 2.3L (0.5L/100km worse results in theory)

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by majic



Originally posted by ken


Hey, I have also been keeping tack of fuel consumption figures for the past year on my 3 sedan gs auto. During the summer I can get 7.1-7.5L/100km, and for the winter it is about 7.5-7.8L/100km. 60-70% of my driving is on the highway, and I have been putting regular gas from shell. I am fairly satisifed with the fuel consumption of this car, considering I was driving a jetta before.

your numbers will be lower b/c you have a 2.0L whereas PiCASSO and I have the 2.3L (0.5L/100km worse results in theory)

If only I was getting 0.5L/100km worse... I would be very happy. If I averaged 8.5L/100km with my current driving style, I wouldn\'t be complaining. But anything higher really puts a down the ownership experience in a worse perspective.

By the way, I appreciate you keeping my name spelled with the appropriate capitalization. :D

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by majic


man.. you keep bashing my good numbers :p

--maciej

Nie nie... I\'m just a little jealous when you have a few good numbers. :)

[majic]

Originally posted by PiCASSO

If only I was getting 0.5L/100km worse... I would be very happy. If I averaged 8.5L/100km with my current driving style, I wouldn\'t be complaining. But anything higher really puts a down the ownership experience in a worse perspective.

Yeah.. what i meant that the theoretical differences are about .5L but anyway.. i\'d be happy to keep it in the low 8s for mixed driving.


Originally posted by PiCASSO
By the way, I appreciate you keeping my name spelled with the appropriate capitalization. :D

I know what you mean, it\'s a nick name, so it\'s not like i would get offended if someone wrote \'majic\' i hate the way \'Majic\' look like and i prefer all lowercase

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by majic

I know what you mean, it\'s a nick name, so it\'s not like i would get offended if someone wrote \'majic\' i hate the way \'Majic\' look like and i prefer all lowercase

Does this include your first real name, \"maciej\"?

[PiCASSO]

Here\'s a quick update. With mainly 80% city driving, and the remaining 20% of highway driving, I\'ve averaged my WORST fuel economy to date: 12.724 L/100km. I couldn\'t even get close to 400km before the low-fuel light came on. With this fuel economy, I have a pathetic theoretical range of 463.92 km. Mind you, the past 381.1 km I managed to travel using 48.491 L of fuel wasn\'t on the race track or anything. Sure, there were times when I floored it, but I\'m being more and more disappointed in the fuel economy. If things don\'t shape up for spring, I\'m going to bring this to the dealership and if necessary to Mazda of Canada. :(

[majic]

Originally posted by PiCASSO


Here\'s a quick update. With mainly 80% city driving, and the remaining 20% of highway driving, I\'ve averaged my WORST fuel economy to date: 12.724 L/100km. I couldn\'t even get close to 400km before the low-fuel light came on. With this fuel economy, I have a pathetic theoretical range of 463.92 km. Mind you, the past 381.1 km I managed to travel using 48.491 L of fuel wasn\'t on the race track or anything. Sure, there were times when I floored it, but I\'m being more and more disappointed in the fuel economy. If things don\'t shape up for spring, I\'m going to bring this to the dealership and if necessary to Mazda of Canada. :(

wow that does suck.. have you tried shifting at say 2-2.5K? it\'s really weir b/c my worst mileage in pretty much all stop and go traffic was 11L and i was almost crying then..

my last 2 fillups (with much less - 50/50 maybe - city driving are ginging me low 9s) once again i tend to cruise at 110kph

YYYY | MMM | DD | FILL | ODOM | TRIP| L/100 | mpg | STATION| ($/L) | Cost
2005 | Jan | 10 | 38.63 | 5799 | 414 | 9.33 | 25.21 | Sunoco | $0.699 | $27.00
2005 | Jan | 15 | 49.39 | 6340 | 541 | 9.13 | 25.76 | Esso | $0.689 | $34.03

keep us posted and i wish others would contirbute to this thread

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by majic


wow that does suck.. have you tried shifting at say 2-2.5K? it\'s really weir b/c my worst mileage in pretty much all stop and go traffic was 11L and i was almost crying then..

Hehehe... I think I will have to begin shifting BEFORE 3,000 RPM. Problem is that I\'m usually late for everything. I dunno why, but I tend to have something hold me back till the last second. Always in a rush...

[PiCASSO]

Well, folks... here are my updated numbers for my fuel economy battle with my Mazda3:

--- | Date | Distance | Fuel | -------- | mpg | Fuel Left | Distance | Total Range
--- | -------- | (km) | (L) | L/100km | (US) | (L) | Left (km) | (km)
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
01 | 10/17/04 | 400.0 | 43.932 | 10.983 | 21.416 | 11.068 | 100.774 | 500.774
02 | 10/24/04 | 468.7 | 42.484 | 09.064 | 25.950 | 12.516 | 138.086 | 606.786
03 | 10/27/04 | 257.8 | 26.870 | 10.423 | 22.567 | 28.130 | 269.889 | 527.689
04 | 10/27/04 | 271.4 | 28.370 | 10.453 | 22.502 | 26.630 | 254.754 | 526.154
05 | 10/31/04 | 518.4 | 46.354 | 08.942 | 26.305 | 08.646 | 096.693 | 615.093
06 | 11/07/04 | 397.4 | 40.874 | 10.285 | 22.869 | 14.126 | 137.341 | 534.741
07 | 11/14/04 | 214.6 | 23.105 | 10.767 | 21.847 | 31.895 | 296.242 | 510.842
08 | 11/16/04 | 199.5 | 18.775 | 09.411 | 24.994 | 36.225 | 384.930 | 584.430
09 | 11/21/04 | 500.0 | 45.855 | 09.171 | 25.648 | 09.145 | 099.716 | 599.716
10 | 11/22/04 | 515.0 | 46.639 | 09.056 | 25.973 | 08.361 | 092.324 | 607.324
11 | 12/06/04 | 379.3 | 37.234 | 09.817 | 23.961 | 17.766 | 180.981 | 560.281
12 | 12/09/04 | 141.7 | 13.777 | 09.723 | 24.192 | 41.223 | 423.989 | 565.689
13 | 12/11/04 | 378.5 | 39.604 | 10.463 | 22.480 | 15.396 | 147.141 | 525.641
14 | 12/13/04 | 161.8 | 16.611 | 10.266 | 22.911 | 38.389 | 373.929 | 535.729
15 | 12/16/04 | 275.0 | 28.081 | 10.211 | 23.035 | 26.919 | 263.620 | 538.620
16 | 12/20/04 | 397.5 | 42.846 | 10.779 | 21.822 | 12.154 | 112.758 | 510.258
17 | 12/23/04 | 278.7 | 29.231 | 10.488 | 22.426 | 25.769 | 245.692 | 524.392
18 | 12/31/04 | 387.1 | 39.340 | 10.163 | 23.145 | 15.660 | 154.092 | 541.192
19 | 01/17/05 | 381.1 | 48.491 | 12.724 | 18.486 | 06.509 | 051.155 | 432.255
20 | 01/27/05 | 200.6 | 29.372 | 14.642 | 16.064 | 25.628 | 175.030 | 375.630
21 | 01/31/05 | 448.2 | 47.829 | 10.671 | 22.042 | 07.171 | 076.520 | 524.724
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
--- | ------ | ------ | Average | 10.405 | 22.887 | ------ | ------ | 535.617


You can see the cool 14.64 L/100km (16.06 MPG) that I got while driving mainly 90% in the city under -10 to 0 degree weather, where shifting took place at 3,000 +/- 200 RPM (as per Maciej\'s suggestion). \"WTF? \" I asked myself... so I brought the car into Avante Mazda (Richmond Hill, ON), where it was diagnosed left and right. And what did they find? Nothin. The car operated within the allowable specifications. My guess is that it\'s probably on the borderline of being acceptable, especially given my Hummer like fuel economy. So I\'ll continue to drive it and see just how bad it gets. Now, with approximately 8,500 km on the odometer, I am getting some 10.405 L/100km, or 22.887 MPG. Let\'s compare that to the ratings from Mazda:

Canadian EPA state the following numbers (www.mazda.ca):
City: 9.2L/100km (25.6 MPG)
Highway: 6.7L/100km (35.1 MPG)

And the USA equivalent (www.mazdausa.com, US gallons):
City: 25 MPG (9.4L/100km)
Highway: 32 MPG (7.3L/100km)

At the worst (USA) city rating of 9.4L/100km… I am off by 5.2L/100km or 56% from my #20 fill-up.
At the worst (USA) average rating 8.35L/100km… I am off by 2.042L/100km or 24.5% on my 3.5 month average.

Theoretical range by using every last litre in the (55L) tank has averaged 536.16 km. As a comparison, my 2002 Honda Civic Si coupe did average: 7.71 L/100km or 30.51 MPG (US), and a maximum theoretical range of 652.16 km (with a 50L tank). Now, I\'ve been driving that Civic for 3-years, just as hard as the Mazda3. But to consume another 2.68 Litres for every 100km with a 0.5L larger engine? That doesn\'t really make any sense! This extra 2.68L/100km works out to an extra 1929.6L for the 3-year 72,000km or $1,543.68 CDN in gasoline.

If this continues, I will be seriously reconsidering my first Mazda choice and might revert back to a Honda after my lease expires in October of 2007.

P.S. January 27th, 2005: Difficulties starting the car from time to time. Thursday, January 27th at 6:00pm, the car couldn\'t start after 3-4 seconds of cranking. The temperature was -15 degrees Celcuis and the tank was 1/2 full. Half-way mark on the fuel gauge came at approximately 150-km. Shifting was done carefuly on average around 3,000 RPM (normally it\'s 4,500 RPM). Fuel economy is the worst yet at 8,000 km. So how many more kilometer\'s required for a till the engine has \'broken\' in???

P.S.S. Formatting an Excel chart is a PAIN in the ass in these forums. I had to adjust the columns about 15-times before it came out the way it did (which I assume for most of your computers is looking okay).

[SwooshICE]

lol don\'t feel so bad ;)
i get 12+litre/100km almost ALL the time from about 95% city driving
and i have a 2.3 litre AT

i don\'t even push my car that much

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by SwooshICE


lol don\'t feel so bad ;)
i get 12+litre/100km almost ALL the time from about 95% city driving
and i have a 2.3 litre AT

i don\'t even push my car that much



Hehehe... well, you know what they say, \"Misery loves company\". :D

[kl7402001]

okay guys .. i have the CAI .. so far my consumtion is around 10L/100km .. but alot of stop and go driving tho .. i guess CAI helps abit ...

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by kl7402001


okay guys .. i have the CAI .. so far my consumtion is around 10L/100km .. but alot of stop and go driving tho .. i guess CAI helps abit ...

What kind of accelleration do you do (percentage of throttle) upon starting? And what RPM do you normally shift at?

Here are my recent figures (from my trip to London and back):

distance: 311.6 km
fuel: 32.044 L
economy: 10.284 L/100km
speed: 130 km/h (average on the 401, with another 20% city driving)

distance: 186.2 km
fuel: 14.460 L
economy: 7.766 L/100km
speed: 105 km/h (average on the 401, with all 100% highway driving)

This is my best fuel economy to date (which matches my Honda Civic\'s overall 3-year average)... which shows that you have to drive this Mazda in a vacuum (zero resistance) in order to get the claimed 6.7 L/100km through the Canadian EPA ratings.

[rene]

Hi everyone!

I am new here. I have a 2005 Mazda 3 Sedan, GT, Leather, Auto.

My last two pumps were on:

1/26 ------- 25.5 Li ------- 180.3 km
1/31 -------25.787 Li ----- 183.7 km

Both averages a little bit over 14 Li / 100 km. Not that good.

My wife drives the car and never on the Highway. Her work is 6 km away from our place and she picks me up at night ( 10 km. one-way).

I appreciate your advise, Thanks.


Rene

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by rene


Hi everyone!

I am new here. I have a 2005 Mazda 3 Sedan, GT, Leather, Auto.

My last two pumps were on:

1/26 ------- 25.5 Li ------- 180.3 km
1/31 -------25.787 Li ----- 183.7 km

Both averages a little bit over 14 Li / 100 km. Not that good.

My wife drives the car and never on the Highway. Her work is 6 km away from our place and she picks me up at night ( 10 km. one-way).

I appreciate your advise, Thanks.

Rene

Hmm... you have 2.3L automatic, with approximately 90% city driving. With what I see with my own car, I would have expected about 11-12 L/100km... since it hasn\'t yet \"broken\" in. Give at least 1,000 to 1,500 km before the engine itself breaks-in, but if you are like me have the transmission shift at 4,500 to 5,000 rpm on day-to-day basis, expect the fuel economy to suffer large.

Post more of your results as the weeks go by, and welcome to the forum, Rene.

[kl7402001]

Hey .. I usually drive to work about 10km away everyday and 2 of the days I drv for sauga to ryerson for school .. so most my driving is in the city ..i shift quite early and I try to drive on 5th in the city right after 60 .. and plus my CAI helps cos we run quite rich ... don\'t get me wrong i don\'t baby my car .. on the hwy i often downshift to third and blast thro traffic ... this car is just so fun to drive....

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by kl7402001


Hey .. I usually drive to work about 10km away everyday and 2 of the days I drv for sauga to ryerson for school .. so most my driving is in the city ..i shift quite early and I try to drive on 5th in the city right after 60 .. and plus my CAI helps cos we run quite rich ... don\'t get me wrong i don\'t baby my car .. on the hwy i often downshift to third and blast thro traffic ... this car is just so fun to drive....

Well, I\'m getting to the point that I should capitalize on the 2.3L engine and live with the poor fuel economy. I would certainly consider investing in a Cold Air Intake, but the problem is that after another 33-months, I will return the (lease) car and have spare CAI. Is it worth it? Perhaps not, but it may improve both fuel and peformance, as it is in your case.

Food for Thought:

Just imagine if you had a base Mazda6 with this engine? Guess what fantastic figures you\'d compain about with another 98 kilograms (or another larger person) strapped to your current Mazda3? Mazda\'s webpage advertises the same hwy rating of 6.7L/100km for the 6, while a slight bump to 9.6L/100km (from 9.2) in the city. I would be VERY happy if I could average 9.6 with my current Mazda3. Unfortunately, that can only happen if I began driving on the far right side of the highway, at near the speed limit. Oh well... :)

[Eric]

Originally posted by PiCASSO
I would be VERY happy if I could average 9.6 with my current Mazda3. Unfortunately, that can only happen if I began driving on the far right side of the highway, at near the speed limit. Oh well... :)

Well..., The EPA figures, pretty much assume that you are driving at or under the speed limit (90 kph I think for highway).

I have had one tank where I averaged 8.01 l/100km (554.2 km on 44.364L of gas). That was 2/3 highway, driving in the right lane at the speed limit (either 90 or 100kph). In city traffic I am in 4th at 50kph, and in 5th at 60kph. Of course if I am going to accelerate or go up a hill I have to drop back a gear. If you want to get close to the EPA figures, you have to drive like a granny.

[everfeb]

13.88 mpUSgal/16.94L/100km 13.88mpUSgal/16.94L/100km
151.62miles on 10.92 USgals/ 244km on 41.32 litres
This has got to be the new alltime WORST mpg record. This was however all city miles/km in very cold (-20 to -40C daytime temps) on quite slippery streets so didn\'t expect very good mileage but this is highly disappointing. Under the same conditions my 225HPAcura 3.2TL is getting better mileage which upsets me even more. Is there some reason why my Acura should get better around town mileage than my 160HP Mazda 3. I don\'t get it.

Over most of the life of my car I have been tracking my percentage of Town/Hwy miles travelled.
To date...on 39%city/61%hwy miles travelled I am averaging 22.58mpUSgal/10.42L/100km. This is ridiculous. At 39%C/61%H the book says I should be getting 27.99 mpUSgal. Even if we discount this by 10% I should be getting at least 25.19mpUSgal--not 22.58.

BTW I am 57 years old and absolutely do not have a lead foot. I think there is something wrong my car. Any suggestions for improving my mileage. Anyone out there been able to improve their mileage after having some kind of work done at the dealership.

everfeb

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by everfeb


13.88 mpUSgal/16.94L/100km 13.88mpUSgal/16.94L/100km
151.62miles on 10.92 USgals/ 244km on 41.32 litres
This has got to be the new alltime WORST mpg record. This was however all city miles/km in very cold (-20 to -40C daytime temps) on quite slippery streets so didn\'t expect very good mileage but this is highly disappointing. Under the same conditions my 225HPAcura 3.2TL is getting better mileage which upsets me even more. Is there some reason why my Acura should get better around town mileage than my 160HP Mazda 3. I don\'t get it.

Over most of the life of my car I have been tracking my percentage of Town/Hwy miles travelled.
To date...on 39%city/61%hwy miles travelled I am averaging 22.58mpUSgal/10.42L/100km. This is ridiculous. At 39%C/61%H the book says I should be getting 27.99 mpUSgal. Even if we discount this by 10% I should be getting at least 25.19mpUSgal--not 22.58.

BTW I am 57 years old and absolutely do not have a lead foot. I think there is something wrong my car. Any suggestions for improving my mileage. Anyone out there been able to improve their mileage after having some kind of work done at the dealership.

everfeb


Hi Everfeb,

First off, I\'d like to let you know that I feel better. Why? Because I don\'t feel left out anymore, with most of the people getting less than 10 L/100km. My average, is now 10.304 L/100km (which includes my record 7.7L/100km with 100% hwy driving), done in the past 8,800 km.

I can\'t remember if I mentioned it (in all the previous posts), but bringing the car to the dealership did nothing. They did a diagnostic with the engine sensors and computer, and found \"everything to be operating within normal parameters\". My guess is that \"normal\" is so wide, that getting less than 20 MPG is considered normal.

Secondly, I couldn\'t agree with you more about getting better fuel economy with a LARGER and more POWERFUL car. My dad\'s 2002 Buick Regal LS, with a 200hp 3.8L V6 burns about 12.5L/100km on a city cycle. On the highway, he can average a 8.5 L/100km doing some 120km/h. The only time I can get close to that is by driving another 15km/h slower, with my 1.5L smaller 4-cylinder engine.

Is there something wrong? Sure there is. Mazda simply didn\'t do a decent calibration of the engine to provide proper fuel economy figures to match their EPA ratings. In theory, you can get those figures... but the average joe-shmoe will be 25% or beyond those figures.

Will I buy another Mazda? We\'ll see what the market holds in October of 2007...

Cheers,

PiCASSO

[keving]

Well, I\'m just gonna add my fuel economy numbers here. I drive a sedan GT 5-speed, all city driving (to and from school). I only redline about 3 times a week, and 80% of the time I shift before 3000 rpm, with the other 20% of the time shifting at 4-5k rpm. I also revmatch when I downshift, usually revving up to 3000 rpm in the gear that I want to downshift into (I don\'t know if that should affect mileage at all, but oh well).

1) 11.48 L/100km
2) 13.21 L/100km
3) 11.64 L/100km
4) 14.14 L/100km
5) 12.11 L/100km
6) 11.40 L/100km

As you can see I\'m averaging horrible numbers, and I\'m pretty sure on #4 or #5 I actually drove like a granny, shifting at low 2k rpms, just to see how much I can squeeze out of this tank. Not much. Maybe driving like a granny is even worse. I\'ll have to keep keeping track. Oh yeah, I have over 4500 km on the odometer, so the engine should be more or less broken into. I don\'t know what\'s going on?! With these numbers I should be paying for a gas guzzler\'s tax!

kevin

PS. PiCASSO, you format your gas mileage with excel right? Can you teach me how to input formulas into columns of cells, so all I need to do is enter the kms and litres filled up, and it will automatically calculate L/100 km for me? Thanks.

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by keving

PS. PiCASSO, you format your gas mileage with excel right? Can you teach me how to input formulas into columns of cells, so all I need to do is enter the kms and litres filled up, and it will automatically calculate L/100 km for me? Thanks.

Hey Kevin,

Just send me a PM (private message) along with your e-mail address and I\'ll send you the Excel file that contains all the formulas for calculating feul economy in both L/100km, mpg (US), and mpg (UK). Yes, there is a difference between the US and UK gallon. :)

BTW, I\'m glad that my figures are better than yours! :D Hehehe... just kidding.

[keving]

Thanks!

PM sent (hopefully). It\'s my first time using it.

Kevin

[everfeb]

PICASSO...yup, misery loves company. Question...when they did the diagnostic with the sensors and computer did they just hook it up and scan it or/and did they download the latest update and reflash the PCM?? I hope I\'m using the right terminology???
everfeb

[kk3]

ive been reading through most of the forums and have dont think that anyone has as bad a fuel economy rating as mine.

i have a 2005 gt 2.3 auto
i usually let the trans shift at about 2.5k to 3.5k
so im not really racing it
my city rating is horrible..
im getting avg 12-14 L/100km
so that means a tank averages only a few hundred kilometers.
no where near the 500-650ish km other ppl are getting..

high way i get about 10 l / 100 km
its not bad but i drive fast.
for some strange reason when i drive at common speed or the limit
100 - 120kph (3000ish rpm), i get even worst milage than when im
doing 140ish ( 4400ish rpm)
has any one experienced this?

and what can i do about such bad milage.??
i love my car and i want to keep it for a long time.
but with gas being so expensive and the economy rating for a truck (new tacoma 4.0 v6 similar to my rating) i really dont want this problem to continue.

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by everfeb


PICASSO...yup, misery loves company. Question...when they did the diagnostic with the sensors and computer did they just hook it up and scan it or/and did they download the latest update and reflash the PCM?? I hope I\'m using the right terminology???
everfeb


Hmmm... not sure exactly what they (Avante Mazda, Richmond Hill) did with my Mazda. I would assume that if the firmware on the PCM was dated, they would upload it accordingly. I tried to ask questions like, \"was my car operating on the low or high end of the specification\", but I got no answer from the assistant service manager. Either he didn\'t know, or simply isn\'t used to an engineer asking technical questions regarding the work done on a vehicle. I\'ll follow up with them the next time I have an oil change done and verify that all the software (firmware) on the PCM is up to date.

[kl7402001]

holly cow!! 17L/100km?? ... man mine is pretty good .. 10L/100km ...

Shift at earlier rpm range man ... and i think this helps alot .. watch out for the blinking hand .. thats signalling a yellow coming soon so let off the gas .. or speed up .. so u won\'t have to stop and lose gas on stop and go ..

[keving]

Got the spreadsheet, thanks PiCASSO.

Kevin

[everfeb]

Originally posted by kl7402001


holly cow!! 17L/100km?? ... man mine is pretty good .. 10L/100km ...

Shift at earlier rpm range man ... and i think this helps alot .. watch out for the blinking hand .. thats signalling a yellow coming soon so let off the gas .. or speed up .. so u won\'t have to stop and lose gas on stop and go ..



Thanks for the tips. I already do these and everything else I can think of to get optimum gas mileage. Rolling stops, no more than 30 seconds idle at initial startup, turn motor off if I figure I am going to be sitting for longer than 10 seconds (not in traffic of course but for example a drive through window)..tire pressure..avoiding turning A/C by not using \"floor\" to \"defrost\" settings.

It\'s not the way I drive...it\'s the car...I really think there is something very wrong with it...for such a small car with such a small motor my 2.3 auto is a real gas pig when it comes to city driving. It\'s no hell at speeds above 65mph/105kmh either. Just something wrong.

The service department where I bought my 3 is really not up to speed so I\'m done with them and will be going to another dealer. Hopefully, they\'ll be better problem solvers???
everfeb

[kl7402001]

maybe ur O2 sensor is busted .. so ur car don\'t know how rich u are running? ..oh man hope u find the problem ...

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by kl7402001


maybe ur O2 sensor is busted .. so ur car don\'t know how rich u are running? ..oh man hope u find the problem ...

Yeah, that\'s something that my dealership (Avante) did is measure the O2 (Oxygen) levels before and and after the catalytic converter, and (if I\'m not mistaken) before the intake to see if the vehicle was running rich or lean. But \"everything was within normal parameters\" as mentioned by the service department. Oh well...

[everfeb]

About the O2 sensor I read somewhere there was a problem with California cars...the sensor was reversed somehow or other (I think). MAYBE some of our O2 sensors could be buggered...you never know.
A poster from Calgary on the Mazda Axella 3 forum was getting poor mileage and her dealership has replaced the \"emission harness\" and \"air flow sensor\" and said this should improve her mileage. She\'s checking a tank of gas now to see if mpg improve and is going to report back. Anyway I have no idea what this \"harness\" and \"sensor\" are. Maybe someone could enlighten? I will mention these 2 things + 02 sensor to my NEW service guys and see if they can determine anything.

PiCASSO...sounds like your dealer cares?? And is at least trying. Hopefully my NEW one will too.
KL7...Thanks..I do to. I have been very patient hoping my mpg would kind of improve over time on it\'s own. So I haven\'t done a lot of complaining to dealer. But mpg is getting worse so it\'s time. The service dep\'t at dealer where I bot the 3 just didn\'t seem to know anything or much care which is why I\'m leaving them. Hopefully the service people at the dealer I\'m going to be going to will be sharper and more up to speed.
everfeb

[everfeb]

KEVING...have you complained to dealer at all?? Have they tried anything to improve mpg?
According to brochure 9.2L/100km is the ultimate goal for city driving with your 2.3 5spd however these numbers are pretty much unattainable when a car is driven normally...especially in cold weather. But bring it to their attention if you haven\'t already. Maybe if enough of us who ARE AWARE of the fact we are getting poor mileage start to complain- Mazda might pay attention. I feel this car was sold to me very much under false pretenses as I get no where near the advertised mpg.
BTW..I do like the car. Just want to be able to drive it further for my money!!

everfeb

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by everfeb


About the O2 sensor I read somewhere there was a problem with California cars...the sensor was reversed somehow or other (I think). MAYBE some of our O2 sensors could be buggered...you never know.
A poster from Calgary on the Mazda Axella 3 forum was getting poor mileage and her dealership has replaced the \"emission harness\" and \"air flow sensor\" and said this should improve her mileage. She\'s checking a tank of gas now to see if mpg improve and is going to report back. Anyway I have no idea what this \"harness\" and \"sensor\" are. Maybe someone could enlighten? I will mention these 2 things + 02 sensor to my NEW service guys and see if they can determine anything.



As far as I understand, the \"emission harness\" is electrical wiring that connects the \"air flow sensor\" (up front at the intake manifold) and the two O2 sensors (behind the exhaust manifold, between the catalytic converter), which make their way to the ECM (engine control module) that will determine if the amount of air input is equivalent to the air output designed by the software program on the ECM. The ECM has a specific emission program for a specific region. You\'ve probably heard \"California emissions\" on The Price is Right, which has a unique tail pipe emission requirement compared to the remainder of the 49-states. I believe that Canada adopts the US 49-state requirements. Europe has also different requirements, where they are now at Euro4 emissions, which through each revision has become more and more stringent. I used to work at DCX for 3-years (3-years ago) so I\'m trying to recollect a little of what I did with homologation.


Originally posted by everfeb

PiCASSO...sounds like your dealer cares?? And is at least trying. Hopefully my NEW one will too.



My dealer cares probably because I\'ve put a complete matrix showing all the various figures on my fuel economy on the Mazda3. I guess that they know that I\'m a little educated and therefore can\'t bullsh*t me around. Regardless, I still think that Avante Mazda provide great service... (I\'ve brought her in twice so far). Best of luck with yours. If you need the emissions matrix that I gave to Kevin... I\'ve attached to this post the Excel file, which I\'ve renamed the extension from *.XLS to *.DOC. If you can\'t see the extension... simply change the settings in your Windows Explorer under: TOOLS -> FOLDER OPTIONS -> VIEW -> uncheck the HIDE EXTENSION FOR KNOWN FILES -> APPLY.

Cheers,

PICASSO

[keving]

everfeb,

Thanks for the advice, I will probably ask my dealership (avante richmond hill) what the problem is soon. However, I only have 4500 km on my car so far, so *perhaps* my car still hasn\'t full broken in yet. But I will definately bring it to Avante R.Hill\'s attention that another mazda3 owner isn\'t happy with the fuel economy.

Kevin

[PiCASSO]

Latest Figure:

February 5th through 11th
90% city driving, 10% highway
224.8 km
25.380 L
11.290 L/100km (20.834 MPG)

Not getting any better... with approximately 9,000 km on the clock. :(

[majic]

now for some latest results

2005 | Jan | 1 | 44.35 | 4342 | 503 | 8.82 | 26.68 | Esso | 0.699 | 31.00
2005 | Jan | 6 | 48.717 | 4865 | 523 | 9.31 | 25.25 | Shell | 0.739 | 36.00
2005 | Jan | 7 | 39.189 | 5385 | 520 | 7.54 | 31.21 | Esso | 0.689 | 27.00
2005 | Jan | 10 | 38.625 | 5799 | 414 | 9.33 | 25.21 | Sunoco | 0.699 | 27.00
2005 | Jan | 15 | 49.394 | 6340 | 541 | 9.13 | 25.76 | Esso | 0.689 | 34.03
2005 | Jan | 25 | 45.9 | 6793 | 453 | 10.13 | 23.21 | Esso | 0.719 | 33.00
2005 | Jan | 29 | 46.15 | 7234 | 441 | 10.46 | 22.48 | Sunoco | 0.715 | 33.00
2005 | Feb | 5 | 46.009 | 7682 | 448 | 10.27 | 22.90 | Esso | 0.739 | 34.00
1. 2005 | Feb | 11 | 45.855 | 8199 | 517 | 8.87 | 26.52 | Shell | 0.807 | 37.00
2. 2005 | Feb | 12 | 47.623 | 8813 | 614 | 7.76 | 30.33 | Esso | 0.819 | 39.00
3. 2005 | Feb | 13 | 49.42 | 9417 | 604 | 8.18 | 28.75 | Shell | 0.769 | 38.00

last 3 lines is my trip to montreal, treamblant and about the town (and back to TO)

1. some city but mainly highway a few traffic jams (sporadic) but pretty good avg for some mixed driving

2. did about 100km around town here (not too much stop and go) and then on the hwy to mtrl i drove @ 110kph half way and then when i relized we\'re running late for our reservation is stepped it up to 117-119kph (cruise)

3. ALL but about 20km (at most) highway, 20km was pretty much downtown mtrl in traffic going places. cruise @ 117-119kph


looks like 110kph cruise is a very favourable speed. 7.54L/100km was done going at about 100 on major hwys and 92-94kph in 80 zone

[kl7402001]

new update ... normal driving .. this fill up 41L and 463km ... 8.85L/100km

[majic]

Originally posted by kl7402001


new update ... normal driving .. this fill up 41L and 463km ... 8.85L/100km

normal is subjective.. my normal might be different from yours - and probably is. so if you\'re not gonna post at least highway/city, then the figures are meaningless :sarc

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by majic



Originally posted by kl7402001


new update ... normal driving .. this fill up 41L and 463km ... 8.85L/100km

normal is subjective.. my normal might be different from yours - and probably is. so if you\'re not gonna post at least highway/city, then the figures are meaningless :sarc

Agreed. I would recommend that people provide:

1. Approximate percentage of City Driving (anything under 80km/h)
2. Approximate percentage of Highway Driving (anything over 80km/h)
3. Approximate RPM shifting range (3,000 RPM, 4,000 RPM, etc)

And if you want to be specific, you get get into the details on average speed on the highway, even the city driving (stop/go), etc. Something to think about.

[everfeb]

AGREED....AND what you are driving. A 2.0L 5spd is supposed to get much better mileage than a 2.3auto. If we don\'t know what you are driving we really can\'t tell if you are getting good or poor mileage.
everfeb

[Indusbreed]

I am averaging at 590-600KM per tank if do hwy driving. 560-580 for city driving.
I have GS 2005 2.0L Auto. I have 1600 Kms so far on the ODO.

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by Indusbreed


I am averaging at 590-600KM per tank if do hwy driving. 560-580 for city driving.
I have GS 2005 2.0L Auto. I have 1600 Kms so far on the ODO.

How much is a tank? 55 liters (giving you from 9.17 to 9.82L/100km) or perhaps 45 litres (giving you 7.50 to 8.04 L/100km)??? Honestly... a spread of 7.50 to 9.82L/100km is a lot. You need to determine how much fuel you are filling up each time you go to the gas station.

[Indusbreed]

Tank is 55L.

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by Indusbreed


Tank is 55L.

[Smiling]... I know that the theoretical limit of the tank is 55L, but I\'m sure that you didn\'t drive it till the last drop of fuel was used? I\'m simply asking how much fuel did you use in order to have more accurate fuel economy numbers.

[kl7402001]

Sorry there guys .. I thought u guys already know cus I posted my driving habits a few post back ..

here its is again in more detail for those who weren\'t paying attention(read!!)
2 days out of 6day of the week that I drive my car I drive from sauga to Toronto to go to school Ryerson. Rest of the days i drive 15-20min to and from work taking Matheson. ...

Umm and I think my signature saids I drive a GT so I have a 2.3L engine ... its MT

Shifting around 3k rpm

[everfeb]

PiCASSO...BTW, thanks for thinking of me regarding the fuel economy tracking doc you posted a while back. I know very little about how cars work and I know even less about how to work a computer.
So I\'m just going to carry on doing my Mileage checks manually. Only takes a few minutes and not very often as I don\'t put a lot of km\'s on the 3. But thanks very much.
everfeb

[everfeb]

INDUSBREED...just wondering---do you know how to calculate L/100km?
everfeb

[majic]

everfeb,

YGPM :)

[Indusbreed]

INDUSBREED...just wondering---do you know how to calculate L/100km?

Yup, acutally it very easy.:D :D Either you can use the calculator or the unitary method.
Its not as complicated as Solving 4th Order diffrential equations or Advanced Vector Algebra.

FYI: Lifetime member of IEEE.;) ;)

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by everfeb


PiCASSO...BTW, thanks for thinking of me regarding the fuel economy tracking doc you posted a while back. I know very little about how cars work and I know even less about how to work a computer.
So I\'m just going to carry on doing my Mileage checks manually. Only takes a few minutes and not very often as I don\'t put a lot of km\'s on the 3. But thanks very much.
everfeb

Anytime, Everfeb. :)

Now for an update:

20-Feb-05
10.681 L/100km, 22.022 MPG
City 40%, Hwy 60%

21-Feb-05
10.201 L/100km, 23.057 MPG
City 30%, Hwy 70%

Overall average (with nearly 10,000km on the odometer): 10.359 L/100km, 23.034 MPG

Here\'s a decent read that Everfeb started on the other forums (although no one really answered his initial question):

Improved Gas Mileage!!! (http://www.mazda3forums.com/viewtopic.php?t=15124)


Originally posted by Indusbreed



INDUSBREED...just wondering---do you know how to calculate L/100km?

Yup, acutally it very easy.:D :D Either you can use the calculator or the unitary method.
Its not as complicated as Solving 4th Order diffrential equations or Advanced Vector Algebra.

FYI: Lifetime member of IEEE.;) ;)

Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers... is alright, but not as exciting as SAE. :D

[Indusbreed]

but not as exciting as SAE.
you think so??.....:D :D :D

[black305]

Just thought I\'d add my two cents...

Just went on a trip, 95% highway driving, average 130km/h.

45.424 litres
591 km

This equals 13.01 km/litre which translates to 7.68 L/100km or 30.6 mpg.

And for those who don\'t know, I have a GT, 5-speed.
Everything seems to be in line with Mazda\'s published numbers.

[Eric]

Originally posted by black305


Just thought I\'d add my two cents...

Just went on a trip, 95% highway driving, average 130km/h.

45.424 litres
591 km

This equals 13.01 km/litre which translates to 7.68 L/100km or 30.6 mpg.

And for those who don\'t know, I have a GT, 5-speed.
Everything seems to be in line with Mazda\'s published numbers.

I just did a trip to Massachusetts and got similar results. My best tank (almost all highway).

45.084 liters
607.5 km

7.42 L/100 km.
38.06 Miles per Imperial Gallon.
31.69 miles per US gallon.

[Eric]

I just filled up a tank which was about 90% Highway going about 110 kph. My car has about 8200 klicks on the odometer.

47.919 liters
650.2 km or 404 miles
7.37 l/100 km
38.33 miles per Imperial Gallon
31.92 miles per US Gallon.

The fuel light came on at 630 km.

[black305]

110 km/hr? how many tercels and hyundai accents did you get passed by? :p

[Eric]

Originally posted by black305


110 km/hr? how many tercels and hyundai accents did you get passed by? :p

Well, this is the Fuel Economy thread after all. The point is that if you drive like a granny, you can actually achieve or get very close to the claimed fuel economy numbers for the car. You can of course pass all the Tercels and Accents that you like, you can speed, shift at 7k, race every Civic on the road and take corners on two wheels, but if that is how you drive you lose your right to complain about how much time and money you spend at the gas pump.

[black305]

so who\'s complaining? and did you miss the :p that means i\'m kidding

[Eric]

Originally posted by black305


so who\'s complaining? and did you miss the :p that means i\'m kidding


I guess that I should have added a few :p s of my own. My response was meant to be light hearted, not critical. My apologies if it was interpreted otherwise :sarc .

[rene]

Hi Everyone,

I just improved my gas mileage!

From Jan. 27, 2005 to Mar. 17, 2005, I average 13.08 L/100 km. w/

Airflow selector dial on \"Defroster and Floor vents\"
Fan control dial on \"2\"
Temp. control dial on (from center to) \"2nd or 3rd line\" on the right.

And from my last 2 pumps;
Mar. 23, \'05 ----- 25.787 Li ----- 226.9 km ----- 11.365 Li/100 km
Arp. 03, \'05 ----- 44.478 Li ----- 435.5 km ----- 10.213 Li/100 km

Airflow selector dial on \"Dashboard vents\" ..... (will try Dashboard & Floor next time)
Fan control dial on \"1\"
Temp. control dial on (from center to) \"2nd line\" on the right

I have a GT sedan, leather, auto .... city driving (no highways) .... odometer - 3501 km.

10.213 is very close to 9.8! Thanks to everyone for the info\'s. tips and advise.

TM3 is GREAT!

[cstraw]

Well here is my updated gas log. I am happy so far, and to echo Eric\'s comments on fuel economy, I drive conservativel and attain near advertised fuel economy ratings, it can be done. This is with a 2004 Mazda 3 Sport 5speed.


Date $ L km L/100km mpg

3-Nov 33.07 41.39 577.0 7.17 32.79
13-Nov 19.58 25.80 240.0 10.75 21.88
17-Nov 17.00 22.70 297.0 7.64 30.77
21-Nov 25.00 34.53 463.0 7.46 31.54
25-Nov 22.40 32.79 418.0 7.84 29.98
28-Nov 31.22 42.25 548.0 7.71 30.51
2-Dec 24.70 33.40 417.0 8.01 29.36
5-Dec 27.38 38.10 491.2 7.76 30.32
15-Dec 33.51 45.84 603.0 7.60 30.94
5-Jan 20.37 29.14 374.1 7.79 30.19
10-Jan 33.94 45.68 538.0 8.49 27.70
18-Jan 32.73 42.89 542.0 7.91 29.72
23-Jan 34.14 45.60 494.0 9.23 25.48
28-Jan 35.00 46.10 505.0 9.13 25.76
30-Jan 17.83 22.30 285.0 7.82 30.06
4-Feb 36.80 44.39 505.0 8.79 26.76
10-Feb 34.83 43.59 511.0 8.53 27.57
15-Feb 35.46 47.62 601.0 7.92 29.68
25-Feb 38.07 38.93 450.0 8.65 27.19
1-Mar 34.54 42.91 580.0 7.40 31.79
5-Mar 23.70 28.24 345.0 8.19 28.73
7-Mar 20.03 24.40 332.0 7.35 32.00
19-Mar 35.11 42.04 551.0 7.63 30.83
20-Mar 25.31 30.50 404.0 7.55 31.15
23-Mar 36.00 40.04 570.0 7.02 33.48
24-Mar 18.57 22.51 284.0 7.93 29.67
30-Mar 56.01 66.73 915.0* 7.29 32.25

sum/avg 802.3 1020.4 12840.3 7.95 29.60
*double tank

[Eric]

Great numbers cstraw!

[Eric]

I just filled up my tank.

615.3 km
43.580 liters
7.08 L/100 km
39.88 miles per imp. gallon
33.21 miles per US gallon

This was regular commuting for me. 70% highway, 30% city.
The warmer weather seems to really help fuel economy. The car now has 8200 klicks on it.

[Coaster]

cstraw

I\'ve had my car exactly one year today. My numbers pretty much match yours. I have a GT HB with 5spd, 38K so far with a low of 26.6 mpg & a high of 36.7 mpg. I mostly get around 30 mpg. I do however drive @ 120 kph & up on the 401 & 407 & go with the traffic flow everywhere else.

[wtom]

I gave up logging my L/100km but with the intake on, my mileage has been slightly better! After fill-up, I would usually get to the mid-point of the fuel gauge and it\'d be at 200km (give or take a few of course). After the intake and fill-ups, I noticed I get at least 50km more each time. I\'m on my third fill-up now. (Yeah for some reason my car has sh*t mileage from the start... for the first ten or so fill-ups I would always get 10.xxL/100km. Even when I tried to baby it. No idea what it was.

[ken]

Here are my latest numbers if anyone is interested..

2.0L automatic, 90% rush hour city driving
467km for 37.735L => 8L/100km

Before when I drove 70% non rush hour hwy, I get about 7.6L/100km. So I am pleasantly surprised that I can get by on 8L/100km.

[DeLaY_NoMoRe]

I have a GT-HB 5MT for only few weeks, before I got this car, I was driving a 01 Protege GT (2.0L, AT). By comparing the fuel economy, I found that MAZDA had actually got an improved fuel efficiency, for the Protege (it has a same 55L fuel tank) I can drive up to around 450KM and just before the fuel light to lit up, but for my new 3, it did about the some kilometres, but which is a 2.3L engine compare to the 2.0L one.......

However; I think MAZDA should work harder to improve its fuel efficiency. 1 of my frd is driving a RSX 5MT (not the TYPE S), and he has a smaller tank (50L), he could drive his car at an average of 600+ KM full tank, or even when he drove more GENTLE (not to rev the engine):D , he could even reach 700KM.......moreover, even a 4-cyl ACCORD would cost less fuels than us.....:(

[wtom]

What other factors could impact the fuel economy besides lead foot syndrome, unnecessary weight in the car, tire pressure? I\'ve been babying my drive the past two weeks 75% city roads, nothing out of the ordinary being carried around in the car (at most it\'s been my gf and myself, combined less than 240lbs), and tire pressure is at 32lbs psi, give or take a pound.

After fill up on Apr 10th, I calculated 10.15L/100km. Just this evening after fill-up, I calculated 10.00L/100km. W T F?!?!?! Average for this car has been 10.67L/100km for all the times I\'ve logged.

My first Mazda3, same exact specs and same exact driving style; average 9.13L/100km and majority of the time had between 8.2L/100km to 9.5L/100km.

What could possibly be different on my present 3 compared to the first 3 that causes such an increase in fuel economy?

[chaser]

Originally posted by DeLaY_NoMoRe
However; I think MAZDA should work harder to improve its fuel efficiency. 1 of my frd is driving a RSX 5MT (not the TYPE S), and he has a smaller tank (50L), he could drive his car at an average of 600+ KM full tank, or even when he drove more GENTLE (not to rev the engine):D , he could even reach 700KM.......moreover, even a 4-cyl ACCORD would cost less fuels than us.....:(

No wonder Honda knows how to build cars eat less gas. ;) I know \'cos I drove a Honda before and all the other cars in my family are Honda/Acura.


Originally posted by wtom
What could possibly be different on my present 3 compared to the first 3 that causes such an increase in fuel economy?


Admit it or not, people drive faster and more aggressively after winter, intentionally or unintentionally. And it think your Draxas exhaust + AEM CAI keep seducing your right foot to press harder :D

[wtom]

Yeah I asked my gf last night about my driving. She says I am a lot more harder on the acceleration in this second car compared to the first 3 i had. Although all times I\'ve logged fuel economy on the first 3, the numbers were 90% 8.xL/100km even up to the last fill-up prior to the accident. That\'s why i keep thinking there must be something else inside the car (engine bay) that causes such poor fuel economy in this 3 now.

[SoopaBanana]

Could it be the CAI?

For some reason fuel economy is constantly dropping on my 3... Lately I can only get approx. 450km for a full tank... What\'s going on?!?!

[wtom]

CAI should improve fuel economy... unless that\'s a myth all along? :(

[SoopaBanana]

Don\'t quote me on it. My info came from Mr Fatty...

[wtom]

Well with CAI it should technically improve MPG but because we all prefer to hear the engine roar, we stomp the gas more/harder. :D

[billyfo]

drive gently, you\'ll get higher mileage. to-date I get about 8.2-8.4L/100km, about 50/50 highway/city. I shift at 3k-3.5k but don\'t floor the gas pedal.

[nifty6]

WTOM mentioned his milage improved \"with the intake on\" , not sure what that means?
Also what is \"CAI\" ? Had the car only 2 weeks and on the first fill up I got 31MPG 70% highway 30% city. GT, Auto
Thanks

[majic]

Originally posted by nifty6


WTOM mentioned his milage improved \"with the intake on\" , not sure what that means?
Also what is \"CAI\" ? Had the car only 2 weeks and on the first fill up I got 31MPG 70% highway 30% city. GT, Auto
Thanks

CAI - cold air intake, a modification to the stock sustem that allows for the engine to breathe in (intake) cooler air, thus more air in the chamber (cold air has a lower density so you can cram more in) thus more explosions and more power.

our car runs rich as it is, the \'intake\' (CAI) help sto lean out the A/F (air-fuel ratio) and allow for better mileage in theory, but with more power more ppl WOT (wide open throttle) it and use more gas. :)

i\'m sure you can use the search (http://torontomazda3.com/forum/search.php) to get more answers..

EDIT: pls specify mileage in L/100km next time since there are two types of gallons. Also, 2.0L or 2.3L - it\'ll make a difference

[cookie]

With a full tank I can go about 450km. But I think if I use 94 I can get more km\'s.

[majic]

Originally posted by cookie


With a full tank I can go about 450km. But I think if I use 94 I can get more km\'s.

what does that mean? does tehlight go on at 450? do you empty your tank and then fill 55L and you make 450? it\'s useless to state w/o more detail.. btw 94 octane will not improve your mileage and most likely deteriorate it (search (http://torontomazda3.com/forum/search.php) up on it in the forum). there\'s no need for 94.. just use regular and the car will be happy as well as your pocket.

[MAZDA Kitten]

Originally posted by cookie


With a full tank I can go about 450km. But I think if I use 94 I can get more km\'s.

Only 450 to a FULL TANK? http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/eek.gif
Thats insane. You must be beating the snot out of your car bcause I usually hit between 280-300 at HALF TANK

[PlatMS6]

i got 330km on my last tank (it was driven for about 20km afer the light came on) and its a 2.0 ....but im not exhaggerating...that gas pedal is on the floor non-stop :) ...plus just like a dub its a 2.Slow so pretty much that thing gets all the horsies beaten out of it all the time, also i have to keep those rpm\'s up lol
lol im a traffic warrior


ive switched from esso to sunoco on this tank right now....even tho its driven aggressively all the time it shouldnt guzzle that much...

[RedRaptor]

Originally posted by majic



Originally posted by cookie


With a full tank I can go about 450km. But I think if I use 94 I can get more km\'s.

what does that mean? does tehlight go on at 450? do you empty your tank and then fill 55L and you make 450? it\'s useless to state w/o more detail.. btw 94 octane will not improve your mileage and most likely deteriorate it (search (http://torontomazda3.com/forum/search.php) up on it in the forum). there\'s no need for 94.. just use regular and the car will be happy as well as your pocket.

Relax man, no need to pick on the newbies on TM3. If I remember correctly, you didn\'t use the search feature too often either at first. Everyone has their own way of treating their car and different things work for certain people, I really don\'t think you should be discrediting cookie. Maybe you should ask her what engine oil her car uses? She uses synthetic oil (Castrol) and a lot of people have reported better fuel milege with synthetic oil.

Something to think about next time before you shoot down someone\'s claim.

[wtom]

Originally posted by MAZDA Kitten

Only 450 to a FULL TANK? http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/eek.gif
Thats insane. You must be beating the snot out of your car bcause I usually hit between 280-300 at HALF TANK

Another good example of my argument. How the fudge can I only be getting 250km max at halfway point on the fuel gauge?!?!? We both drive similar cars (5MT, not aggressive)... this really bothers me.

majic, when someone says they can go 450km on a full tank, that most likely means 450km up to the fuel light coming on. No one in their right mind that I know of would \"empty your tank and then fill 55L and you make 450.\"

[majic]

Originally posted by RedRaptor

Relax man, no need to pick on the newbies on TM3. If I remember correctly, you didn\'t use the search feature too often either at first. Everyone has their own way of treating their car and different things work for certain people, I really don\'t think you should be discrediting cookie. Maybe you should ask her what engine oil her car uses? She uses synthetic oil (Castrol) and a lot of people have reported better fuel milege with synthetic oil.

Something to think about next time before you shoot down someone\'s claim.

i did not discredit cookie - not once i said.. \"that\'s IMPOSSIBLE\"

that\'s why i asked questions to get more information to properly compare one\'s mileage. so for those who strive for best fuel economy might want to know what the other members use, and in no way i was \'shooting down\' her claim.. just asking for more clarification and saying that 94 octane won\'t do her any good as other members on other forums have suggested/tried. as always YMMV..


Originally posted by wtom

Another good example of my argument. How the fudge can I only be getting 250km max at halfway point on the fuel gauge?!?!? We both drive similar cars (5MT, not aggressive)... this really bothers me.

majic, when someone says they can go 450km on a full tank, that most likely means 450km up to the fuel light coming on. No one in their right mind that I know of would \"empty your tank and then fill 55L and you make 450.\"

on my current tank i got 280-290 at the 1/2 point. by no means that was HARD driving but here and there it was spirited, but mainly highway cruising 100-120kph

you\'re right, nobody would empty their tank (and maybe i used teh wrong words in my previous post) but some ppl do say their car\'s \'range\' is say 500, that\'s after calculating fuel used and fuel remaining and _IF_ they used all the fuel they could go THAT far.

EDIT: splleing

[nifty6]

GT. AUTO, GFX. first tank 31MPG
second tank 29MPG hope it gets better, not aggressive...yet
50% highway, 50% city.
Ron

[ken]

ok here are my latest numbers:

auto, 2.0L, 90% city, 10% hwy

21.302L for 239.7KM ~ 8.8L/100km

[rbart4506]

First time to the light on my GS....I got 600km, so I\'m guessing close to 700km for a full tank...I put in 46L so that\'s about 7.7L/100km or 29.6mpg for the older folk...

I\'m happy!!!

Rich

PS the car has almost 30000km\'s...

[ken]

Filled up again today, here are the latest #s:

2.0L auto 50% hwy

31.484L, 388.2km => 8.11L/100KM

[nifty6]

Originally posted by rbart4506


First time to the light on my GS....I got 600km, so I\'m guessing close to 700km for a full tank...I put in 46L so that\'s about 7.7L/100km or 29.6mpg for the older folk...

I\'m happy!!!

Rich

PS the car has almost 30000km\'s...


Not sure about your calculation but 7.7L/100km is 36.69 mpg imperial or 30.55 U.S gallons not 29.6mpg..should make you really happy

[rbart4506]

Originally posted by nifty6



Originally posted by rbart4506


First time to the light on my GS....I got 600km, so I\'m guessing close to 700km for a full tank...I put in 46L so that\'s about 7.7L/100km or 29.6mpg for the older folk...

I\'m happy!!!

Rich

PS the car has almost 30000km\'s...


Not sure about your calculation but 7.7L/100km is 36.69 mpg imperial or 30.55 U.S gallons not 29.6mpg..should make you really happy

You sir are correct *laugh*...

I had been doing a rough conversion from kilometres to miles (a factor of 0.6) not the actual conversion. Once I added the actual conversion factor into my spreadsheet it worked out. That means that I\'m averaging close to 32mpg over the life of the car....

I love my 2.0L...And I don\'t baby the thing, but I don\'t drive the piss out of it either...What\'s the point, straight line speed ain\'t fun...In this car it\'s the curvy roads that make me smile...

Rich

[torpedo20]

With a full tank I normally get around 520 to 570 km which is what I\'d expect.
Btw,
mine is 2.3 engine.

I could be wrong but it seems to me is that the most complains are coming from 2.0 engine owners.

[rbart4506]

Originally posted by torpedo20


With a full tank I normally get around 520 to 570 km which is what I\'d expect.
Btw,
mine is 2.3 engine.

I could be wrong but it seems to me is that the most complains are coming from 2.0 engine owners.


Nope...Not as far as I have seen...It\'s the 2.3L guys that are having the probs...The 2.0L people are pretty consistent at the 7.7L/100km or 30mpg mark...That is unless of course they are constitantly hammering their cars, but I have yet to hear of any really crappy mileage coming from a 2.0L...Now the 2.3L is a different story...

Rich

[wtom]

2.3 here and finally TRIED to baby the car (read \"grandma/pa driving styles\") since last fill up. I reached halfway point with about 250kms. Couldn\'t stand it for the last bit though and went back to my normal lead foot driving. :D

Normal driving from fill up I\'d get about 200kms to 220kms.

EDIT: Night of Apr 30 - Looks like I have a serious problem of Lead Foot Syndrome;

Latest fuel economy numbers (with AEM CAI and Draxas cat-back with high-flo cat);

L/100km [MPG]
9.59 [24.54]
10.15 [23.17]
10.00 [23.52]
10.15 [23.17]
10.77 [21.84]
8.84 [26.62] <-- babied for first half of tank, then back to my \"normal driving\" but also did some highway for about quarter of the remaining tank

[nifty6]

Originally posted by wtom


2.3 here and finally TRIED to baby the car (read \"grandma/pa driving styles\") since last fill up. I reached halfway point with about 250kms. Couldn\'t stand it for the last bit though and went back to my normal lead foot driving. :D

Normal driving from fill up I\'d get about 200kms to 220kms.

EDIT: Night of Apr 30 - Looks like I have a serious problem of Lead Foot Syndrome;

Latest fuel economy numbers (with AEM CAI and Draxas cat-back with high-flo cat);

L/100km [MPG]
9.59 [24.54]
10.15 [23.17]
10.00 [23.52]
10.15 [23.17]
10.77 [21.84]
8.84 [26.62] <-- babied for first half of tank, then back to my \"normal driving\" but also did some highway for about quarter of the remaining tank


Wow you do have a lead foot, After four fill ups I am averaging 30MPG with the 2.3 AT.
You must rev it up close to the red line every chance you get.

[wtom]

Originally posted by nifty6

Wow you do have a lead foot, After four fill ups I am averaging 30MPG with the 2.3 AT.
You must rev it up close to the red line every chance you get.

Actually I don\'t. With the exhaust system, the cops will be on me like mountain lions. What I do is accelerate hard off the light. Not hard as in race but just harder than needed (ie. car behind me slowly gets smaller and smaller). I don\'t encourage this, of course. :p

[maldini]

For the GT 5-speed, it is rated at 25/32 mpg. For the GT w/automatic, it is rated at 24/29 mpg. It is clear that the automatic shift is not good enough for highway use. A rating like 24/31 mpg is more reasonable. I don\'t know if there something wrong with the tuning of the engine.

[rbart4506]

Latest fillup on my GS sedan....A bit more highway driving this time...

552km\'s got me to just above the 1/4 tank left...put in 38.5L so that works out to about 7L/100km or 33.7mpg...

I really think that if I did a long highway trip that I could squeeze about 800km\'s from the tank conisdering I probably had a good 150km\'s left in this tank...

Rich

[ken]

Another fillup, on a GS auto, 10% hwy driving

446.5km in 35.697L => 7.99km/100L

[Fuman]

Just be happy your gas gauge WORKS....

I\'m still driving my 91 protege, I just had to replace the gas tank.
The meter is STUCK on 1/2 a tank, my mechanic is busy for now, I think I\'m giving him the car on friday.

I should be getting the three SOON (i mean order it).
my guardian loves the matrix, I think its a total rip... but thats anyother story.

I think I avg 500KM/40Ls. Thats on a 1.5L engine with 200,000KM. and I shift at 2500 rpm though. The car is actually kind of weird, I can stay at 2500RPM until I hit 70km/h where it then drops to below 2000. its like the car has a CVT.

[cstraw]

Well just to update you on my recent fuel log.
Sport GT - 5 speed.

20-Mar 25.31 30.50 404.0 7.55 31.15
23-Mar 36.00 40.04 570.0 7.02 33.48
24-Mar 18.57 22.51 284.0 7.93 29.67
30-Mar 56.01 66.73 915.0 7.29 32.25
5-Apr 35.75 48.24 688.0 7.01 33.54
9-Apr 43.98 50.45 709.3 7.11 33.07
6-May 27.02 32.68 448.0 7.29 32.25
8-May 27.50 33.25 504.0 6.60 35.65 :)
10-May 20.00 24.48 352.0 6.95 33.82
12-May 18.95 23.84 331.0 7.20 32.65

I need to do a better job of keeping all my receipts and writing
down the mileage numbers for each fill up. Still happy with the
results and still driving with fuel economy in mind.

Chris

[billyfo]

recently I bought some STP fuel injection cleaner (red bottle and about $2.80 selling in CT), it really give me an increase for gas, average I got 260-280km half tank, I now get about 310km half tank and 580km when empty light comes up.

[Redhouse]

Hi,
I have a 2005 mazda 3 sport gt. I\'ve got my last 6 tanks reccorded.



Travel L/100km mpg mpg(I)

418 10.3 22.9 27.5
454 9.6 24.6 29.6
424 10.1 23.2 27.8
470 7.7 30.7 36.9
331 10.7 21.9 26.3


The 4th sample (470km) included about 370km on cruise at 100km/h (2800rpm)
A lot of my driving includes messing about at stoplights in the city, etobicoke area.

I was a bit dissapointed at the last sample though, 10.7L/100km sounds like too much too me for the type of driving I have been doing.

[maldini]

In general, are people satisfied with the fuel economy of the 2.3L engine?

[cstraw]

For the 2.3L in general... NO. However, there are a few 2.3L manual transmission drivers such as myself who are quite happy with the fuel economy and are achieving near advertised fuel economy #\'s.

Chris

[Optimzer]

OK - so I\'ve been doing a little measuring of my own on the economy of my \"whip\"... :)

Here are the primary results:

Date | Fuel (L) | Distance | L/100km
5/19/05 | 45.73 | 482km | 9.49
5/27/05 | 46.03 | 521km | 8.83

I\'ll keep updating this post every few weeks as I go past the break-in period..

[ken]

Auto, 2.0L, 95% city driving

Date | Fuel (L) | Distance | L/100km
5/25/05 | 37.301 | 471km | 7.92

[Redhouse]

mazda 3 sport gt. stock rims/tires

(km)| Vol (L)| L/100km| mpg(US)|
418| 43.015| 10.291| 22.86| 60% city
454| 43.360| _9.551| 24.63| 60% city
424| 43.027| 10.148| 23.18| 80% city
470| 35.980| _7.655| 30.73| 10% city
331| 35.537| 10.736| 21.91| 95% city
192| 19.852| 10.340| 22.75| 65% city
403| 40.245| _9.986| 23.55| 100% city

[majic]

Originally posted by Redhouse


mazda 3 sport gt. stock rims/tires

(km)| Vol (L)| L/100km| mpg(US)|
418| 43.015| 10.291| 22.86| 60% city
454| 43.360| _9.551| 24.63| 60% city
424| 43.027| 10.148| 23.18| 80% city
470| 35.980| _7.655| 30.73| 10% city
331| 35.537| 10.736| 21.91| 95% city
192| 19.852| 10.340| 22.75| 65% city
403| 40.245| _9.986| 23.55| 100% city


how fast do you drive when you do highway? especially the 7.65L/100 tank? thx

[Optimzer]

this might have been answered before, but how does everyone measure their mileage and fuel consumption? It\'s not a straight-foward thing to do accurately...

I suppose one way to do it would be to fill the tank, drive, then fill it again and measure how much fuel you had to put in. but then, you\'re filling it twice and you can\'t really tell if you\'re filling it to the same level the second time...

I guess you could also fill the tank, drive and then estimate by the gauge reading how much fuel you have left and/or used up but that doesn\'t sound a whole lot accurate either...

[Spellbinder]

I usually do it by filling the tank until the gas shuts off from the pump and then paying the odd amount.

Then drive and refill the same way.

The Number of litres required to refill against the km I have driven. I am sure it is not exact but it must be pretty close.

Well thats how I have been doing it *shrug*

[majic]

this has been an issue b?c how do you really know how much you\"re putting in> (ugh my kb is messed up time to reboot) but i for one fill up all the way all the time and record it in a spreadsheet to track the mileage>>> but each pump will have a different cut off so unless you use the same station all the time (same pump actually) then you can\"t be too accurate but good enough to average out in the long run

[cstraw]

I calculate my fuel economy based on gas reciepts and trip computer readings. The volume of gas put in the tank is indicated on the recipt (most of the time) and all one needs to do is write on the receipt the number of kilometres that the volume of fuel netted them, I always write it down immediately upon refuelling and then reset the trip computer to 0 for the next fillup. A quick way to determine the fuel economy for L/100km is to use the following equation:

((Litres pumped into tank) x 100) / number of kilometres off trip computer

example:
(42.25L x 100) / 595km
= 7.101 L/100km

Since I measuring fuel economy given actual kilometreage and fuel consumed it is accurate. I don\'t need to assume a full fuel-fillup every time since the volume is printed on the receipt. You can set up an excel spreadsheet if you are as nuts as I am!

Chris

[majic]

oh man.. case of the mondays for me today..

i do enter the exact volume of fuel.. i really was asleep when i wrote my previous post and a spreadsheet is the way to go.. and no you\'re not nuts.. unless we both are..

also for those who want to see their long term fuel consumption do NOT average the averages.. add up all the litres of fuel you consumed and the mileage travelled and use teh equation by cstraw (more accurate than taking the average of your averaged results) anyway..

i find the fuel consumption (even in traffic) has been much better lately (eg. summertime) when the car doesn\'t have to run UBER rich for a long time - till the engine warms up. so if you\'re getting crappy mileage now, it\'s only gonna get worse :(

[Electra-fire]

Interesting...
I get anywhere from 580km to 640km on a full tank...
I do both highway and city driving.

But Seeing most of your records I think I\'ll keep more actuate records
But still 600km a tank average hey I can\'t complain hehe
:D

[Titanium_M3GT]

I do 90% city driving in traffic (1hr each way to work) and get at least 530 kms to a tank. The last time I filled up it was 43L@540KMS (7.96L/100KM). I find the fuel efficiency pretty good in this car.

M3GT sedan, 5spd

[ken]

99% high traffic city driving, 2.0L, auto

35.624L, 410.5km ~ 8.7L/100km

[Optimzer]

Originally posted by Titanium_M3GT


I do 90% city driving in traffic (1hr each way to work) and get at least 530 kms to a tank. The last time I filled up it was 43L@540KMS (7.96L/100KM). I find the fuel efficiency pretty good in this car.

M3GT sedan, 5spd

what are your shift points and how hard do you accelerate? do you coast a lot?

[Titanium_M3GT]

Usually shift aroung 3500RPM. I dont accellerate hard unless Im pissed!!

[majic]

Originally posted by Titanium_M3GT


Usually shift aroung 3500RPM. I dont accellerate hard unless Im pissed!!

wow.. i usually shft at 2500-3K depending on what gear and what the situation is.. although i do like to shift @ redline on occasion ;)

but with shifting at 3500RPM i don\'t hink i could ever do < 8L/100km

hmm i guess i can try it on the next tank

what about A/C? windows down? for me < 60kph windows down unless it\'s really humid or it\'s stop and go with no breeze. anything over 60kph A/C

[Optimzer]

I also shift somewhere b/t 2200-2800rpm and would never think I could get mileage better than 8L/100km

tell me how you do it! :D

[majic]

Originally posted by Optimzer


I also shift somewhere b/t 2200-2800rpm and would never think I could get mileage better than 8L/100km

tell me how you do it! :D

maybe he has a bunch of gnomes pushing his car? :p

[Titanium_M3GT]

A/C off and windows down most of the time. If I use the A/C I will get approx 500KM/tank. I dont understand the difference in fuel economy, my car is a Dec. 04 production date. What production date is everyone elses? I think Electra_fire gets better gas mileage than I do...I would be curious to know the production date on that car as well.

[Optimzer]

Originally posted by majic



Originally posted by Optimzer


I also shift somewhere b/t 2200-2800rpm and would never think I could get mileage better than 8L/100km

tell me how you do it! :D

maybe he has a bunch of gnomes pushing his car? :p


mmmmmm...yummy gummy gnomes....


hereeeee gnome.....come so i can eat you.... :p

[majic]

Originally posted by Titanium_M3GT


A/C off and windows down most of the time. If I use the A/C I will get approx 500KM/tank. I dont understand the difference in fuel economy, my car is a Dec. 04 production date. What production date is everyone elses? I think Electra_fire gets better gas mileage than I do...I would be curious to know the production date on that car as well.

well AC should be better on the highway due to the drag caused by open windows. and when you\'re stuck in traffic the AC uses up a lot more juice.. also.. electra fire has a 2.0L model so the comparison isn\'t valid.. and finally the sedan weighs about 30kg less than the sport as well as has a lower coefficient of drag (0.332 vs 0.346 - 17\" wheel models)

[Electra-fire]

haha ya I\'m in the 2.0..
BUT for those who own the 2.0 I\'m going to start recording if you want to do a comparison
I usually drive with AC off, and 120 to 140 for speed on the highway...
But I also want to see if AC really does effect my gas that much with it on.

[Optimzer]

Originally posted by majic



Originally posted by Titanium_M3GT


A/C off and windows down most of the time. If I use the A/C I will get approx 500KM/tank. I dont understand the difference in fuel economy, my car is a Dec. 04 production date. What production date is everyone elses? I think Electra_fire gets better gas mileage than I do...I would be curious to know the production date on that car as well.

well AC should be better on the highway due to the drag caused by open windows. and when you\'re stuck in traffic the AC uses up a lot more juice.. also.. electra fire has a 2.0L model so the comparison isn\'t valid.. and finally the sedan weighs about 30kg less than the sport as well as has a lower coefficient of drag (0.332 vs 0.346 - 17\" wheel models)

something I find I do in the name of economy is turn of the a/c when accelerating (say from a stop light) and turn it back on when I\'m coasting. I avoid traffic so it\'s not too much but I wonder if it hurts the car?

[Flagrum_3]

Originally posted by Optimzer



Originally posted by majic



Originally posted by Titanium_M3GT


A/C off and windows down most of the time. If I use the A/C I will get approx 500KM/tank. I dont understand the difference in fuel economy, my car is a Dec. 04 production date. What production date is everyone elses? I think Electra_fire gets better gas mileage than I do...I would be curious to know the production date on that car as well.

well AC should be better on the highway due to the drag caused by open windows. and when you\'re stuck in traffic the AC uses up a lot more juice.. also.. electra fire has a 2.0L model so the comparison isn\'t valid.. and finally the sedan weighs about 30kg less than the sport as well as has a lower coefficient of drag (0.332 vs 0.346 - 17\" wheel models)

something I find I do in the name of economy is turn of the a/c when accelerating (say from a stop light) and turn it back on when I\'m coasting. I avoid traffic so it\'s not too much but I wonder if it hurts the car?

Just a friendly warning....keep doing that and you\'ll be looking at getting new parts soon.


_3


.

[Optimzer]

won\'t be doing that anymore! :D thanks for the heads-up

it was pretty hot today so the a/c was on the whole time.

[SABIO]

I am almost done a full tank of gas. I am @ 367km on the trip!!! How is that for CR*P fuel economy!!!!!!!!!

but... Do you think it has something to do with the AEM C.A.I installed 2 weeks ago? She really roars sweet at 100km/hr in Third:) Even at 140km/hr in fourth if ya give some gas she screams in extasy... Yum....:D

OK.. I guess it is my bad driving habits that give me the garbage fuel economy...

p.s Third gear only takes ya up to 140km/hr... baby has some pep I tell ya;)

[PiCASSO]

Okay, boys and girls. I tend to be a little anal about documenting my fuel economy in my Mazda3.

http://server3.uploadit.org/files/tribus-Fuel.jpg

As shown in the chart above, I am averaging the following:

10.377 L/100km
22.953 MPG (US)
27.565 MPG (UK)
536.697 km (theoretical range till every single 55-litre is used)

The last entry, June 9th has been my 3rd worst hit. I have to mention that the previous 3-fill ups where at Shell gas stations, and the last one at Sunoco. Maybe the amount of fuel dispensed isn\'t calibrated so Sunoco is off by a few litres, thus giving me the sh*tty 11.826 L/100km (19.889 MPG)figure? I dunno, all I know is that I am a little disappointed in my overall average, which I expecting to drop below 10.0 L/100km.

Oh yes, in the past 7-months or so, I\'ve also spent $1,054.19 CDN in fuel for this Mazda. Mind you, I haven\'t driven it that many km\'s to begin with. I believe my odometer is at 14,000 km.

Cheers,

PiCASSO

[Optimzer]

wow that\'s detailed - being an engineer...I like!! :D

just a thought - I\'m not sure how you do your average b/c I don\'t have your spreadsheet file...but I\'m assuming that you\'re taking the average of each of your economy readings. However, as majic posted earlier, to get a more accurate posting, that doesn\'t give you the most accurate figure (you\'re taking an average of averages).

Try calculating the average by summing up all the litres of fuel you\'ve used and dividing by the total number of kilometers driven. This will, if anything, give you a more accurate average...

ie - (1000L / 14000km) * 100 = 7.14L / 100km

nice work though.

[Optimzer]

just to add to that...your economy does seem pretty crappy. you have quite a few high figures too - do you think those are outliers that aren\'t accurate or something happened? I haven\'t driven enough to speak about mine so I\'m waiting to see how it will turn out...

but what\'s your driving style? shiftpoints? a/c use? etc...

[nerdy_grrl_t]

Alright... I\'ve read through most of this thread and I still can\'t tell whether my car gets good/bad mileage... most people seem to be talking about the GT?

On my 2004 Sport GS the gas light comes on around 400 kms, so I\'d assume I get about 500km per tank? I do about 70% city, 30% highway and nearly the exact same mileage every week... seems to me I should be getting more out of one tank? (The car has 12400 kms on it).

Also someone suggested changing brands of gas... could that really help?


Nerdy_Grrl

[majic]

Originally posted by Optimzer


wow that\'s detailed - being an engineer...I like!! :D


then you\'ll like this too ;)

http://img142.echo.cx/img142/4901/fuel2iu.jpg

green - anything below 8.5L/100
pink (red was too bright :p ) - anything over 10L/100
at the top in blue overall averages

for the penny pinchers and tree huggers :p after 13898km I spent $958.69 - so 1L/100km difference will save you 100bux over ~14000km (compared to PiCASSO\'s numbers)

also, i\'ve been keeping my eye on when the light comes on and then how much i can fill and i\'ve averaged 11.53L of \'reserve fuel\'

just to rehash:

if ( mood == pissed off || ricer_revving == true || onramp_ahead == true){
shift(5000, 6750);
}else{
shift(2000, 3000);
}

if (temp == unbearable && (speed > 60 || rain == true)){
AC = ON;
windows = UP;
}else{
AC = OFF;
windows = DOWN;
}


Originally posted by nerdy_grrl_t


Alright... I\'ve read through most of this thread and I still can\'t tell whether my car gets good/bad mileage... most people seem to be talking about the GT?

On my 2004 Sport GS the gas light comes on around 400 kms, so I\'d assume I get about 500km per tank? I do about 70% city, 30% highway and nearly the exact same mileage every week... seems to me I should be getting more out of one tank? (The car has 12400 kms on it).

Also someone suggested changing brands of gas... could that really help?


Nerdy_Grrl

with a GS you should be in the 8s.. or at least most of the ppl on TM3 are getting those numbers.. looks like the 2.0L engine is closer to its advertised ratings.

[Optimzer]

Originally posted by majic

if ( mood == pissed off || ricer_revving == true || onramp_ahead == true){
shift(5000, 6750);
}else{
shift(2000, 3000);
}

if (temp == unbearable && (speed > 60 || rain == true)){
AC = ON;
windows = UP;
}else{
AC = OFF;
windows = DOWN;
}


hahahahaa - oh man that gave me a good laugh! :D

[maldini]

Originally posted by PiCASSO


Okay, boys and girls. I tend to be a little anal about documenting my fuel economy in my Mazda3.

As shown in the chart above, I am averaging the following:

10.377 L/100km
22.953 MPG (US)
27.565 MPG (UK)
536.697 km (theoretical range till every single 55-litre is used)

The last entry, June 9th has been my 3rd worst hit. I have to mention that the previous 3-fill ups where at Shell gas stations, and the last one at Sunoco. Maybe the amount of fuel dispensed isn\'t calibrated so Sunoco is off by a few litres, thus giving me the sh*tty 11.826 L/100km (19.889 MPG)figure? I dunno, all I know is that I am a little disappointed in my overall average, which I expecting to drop below 10.0 L/100km.

Oh yes, in the past 7-months or so, I\'ve also spent $1,054.19 CDN in fuel for this Mazda. Mind you, I haven\'t driven it that many km\'s to begin with. I believe my odometer is at 14,000 km.

Cheers,

PiCASSO


Can you make this spreadsheet available for us? I find it very useful.:)

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by Optimzer


wow that\'s detailed - being an engineer...I like!! :D

just a thought - I\'m not sure how you do your average b/c I don\'t have your spreadsheet file...but I\'m assuming that you\'re taking the average of each of your economy readings. However, as majic posted earlier, to get a more accurate posting, that doesn\'t give you the most accurate figure (you\'re taking an average of averages).

Try calculating the average by summing up all the litres of fuel you\'ve used and dividing by the total number of kilometers driven. This will, if anything, give you a more accurate average...

ie - (1000L / 14000km) * 100 = 7.14L / 100km

nice work though.

just to add to that...your economy does seem pretty crappy. you have quite a few high figures too - do you think those are outliers that aren\'t accurate or something happened? I haven\'t driven enough to speak about mine so I\'m waiting to see how it will turn out...

but what\'s your driving style? shiftpoints? a/c use? etc...

To clarify your questions, Optimzer:

1. It\'s a very simple spreadsheet, which I\'d be happy to upload to you if you like.
2. For each trip, I reset the \"A\" counter to zero.
3. Drive for a few days.
4. I take down the number of kilometers I\'ve travelled using the \"A\" trip reader.
5. I take down the amount of fuel filled up, to the top. I\'ve stopped trying to round off the cost fo the fuel to the nearest 50-cents or whole dollar, because I end up adding screwing around with the volume of fuel.
6. I use these two figures to calculate my fuel economy in Litres per 100 kilometers.
7. I also convert some of the metric units to their respective Imperial units. This is where I calculate both the US and UK gallons and their respective miles to the gallon.
8. I subtract the 55-litre theoretical full tank from the number of liters I\'ve used. With this amount I determine the amount of distance I can travel on the trip\'s particular fuel economy until the tank is empty. Then I add the original km\'s travelled to the theoretical km\'s and get the theoretical range of driving the Mazda till it\'s empty.
9. The only average that I have is calculated at the bottom, using Excel\'s AVERAGE(x,y) function. Nothing special, but it gives you an overall feel of how I\'m doing.
10. Driving habits vary. I will admit that I got a suprising 8.709 L/100km when driving from Toronto to Niagara Falls at 130-150 km/h. I expected nothing less than 10 L/100km with that high spirited driving.
11. So I think the real variable in these calculations is the GAS stations. I\'m sure that if I decided to check just how much fuel they really pump out, there will be some significant discrepancies. Mind you, that the amount of fuel pumped in the summer will be different in the winter, because of temperature difference. So the flow rates will change. I think it comes down to monthly calibration at each station to ensure that all consumers are infact paying the exact amount of money as claimed by the station. But to enforce that for the consumer level will probably rise the prices of fuel by a few cents, thus pissing off the consumers in the end.
12. My foot is usually heavy, with shift points around 3.5 to 4.5k revs.
13. Just imagine driving the base Mazda 6 with the 2.3L engine. It weighs plenty more, and I wouldn\'t be surprised if the figures are WORSE than the 3.0L V6.

Hope that answers your questions,

PiCASSO :)

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by majic



Originally posted by Optimzer


wow that\'s detailed - being an engineer...I like!! :D


just to rehash:

if ( mood == pissed off || ricer_revving == true || onramp_ahead == true){
shift(5000, 6750);
}else{
shift(2000, 3000);
}

if (temp == unbearable && (speed > 60 || rain == true)){
AC = ON;
windows = UP;
}else{
AC = OFF;
windows = DOWN;
}




My geek friend, Majic... when are you going to learn that PASCAL is the way of the programming future? Forget about your C++ (?) language. Or even try COBALT!

Man, I can\'t remember the last time I programmed anything. But I do remember learning BASIC, C, C++, and PASCAL back in high school and university. Now, I simply let people like you do my dirty work. Hahaha... :)


Originally posted by majic

for the penny pinchers and tree huggers :p after 13898km I spent $958.69 - so 1L/100km difference will save you 100bux over ~14000km (compared to PiCASSO\'s numbers)

also, i\'ve been keeping my eye on when the light comes on and then how much i can fill and i\'ve averaged 11.53L of \'reserve fuel\'



I\'ve actually driven 14,990, as of Monday, June 13th. I did some number crunching and I\'m actually 1,000 behind my lease. So I\'m happy because I was worried that my trips to Windsor and back would accumulate too many kilometers for me to catch up. But I will also admit that giving the car to my sister for various weekends has proved that she hasn\'t kept track of my fuel economy matrix, which would explain why I can\'t account for some 1,500 km (that\'s a lot of driving on my sister\'s part, isn\'t it?). Anyways, almost 8 months I\'ve had this car and spent $1,054 (of my money) to fill her up to drive 13,571 km. With this trend, I will end up spending nearly $1,600 per year in fuel alone (some 2,111 Litres of fuel at $0.760 per litre). Compare that to the figures Government of Canada is advertising in the 2005 MY most fuel efficient cars (vehicles.gc.ca) I\'m trailing the Honda Odyssey EX-L, a good full-size 3.5L 255-HP van, by a good 91 Litres per year (it will consume 2,020 Litres of fuel per year).

Bottom line:

You want fuel economy: Drive slow.
You want fuel economy and drive quick: Buy a Honda.

:)

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by maldini



Originally posted by PiCASSO


Okay, boys and girls. I tend to be a little anal about documenting my fuel economy in my Mazda3.

As shown in the chart above, I am averaging the following:

10.377 L/100km
22.953 MPG (US)
27.565 MPG (UK)
536.697 km (theoretical range till every single 55-litre is used)

The last entry, June 9th has been my 3rd worst hit. I have to mention that the previous 3-fill ups where at Shell gas stations, and the last one at Sunoco. Maybe the amount of fuel dispensed isn\'t calibrated so Sunoco is off by a few litres, thus giving me the sh*tty 11.826 L/100km (19.889 MPG)figure? I dunno, all I know is that I am a little disappointed in my overall average, which I expecting to drop below 10.0 L/100km.

Oh yes, in the past 7-months or so, I\'ve also spent $1,054.19 CDN in fuel for this Mazda. Mind you, I haven\'t driven it that many km\'s to begin with. I believe my odometer is at 14,000 km.

Cheers,

PiCASSO


Can you make this spreadsheet available for us? I find it very useful.:)


Just send me your e-mail address via Private Message (see that bottom right button that says \"Message\") and I\'ll forward you the Excel file. That goes for anyone, I\'d be more than happy pass it around. But in all honesty, it\'s nothing difficult for anyone with basic math skills to put together. After you get the spreadsheet, take a look at the formula\'s used to determine how everything works.

Cheers,

PiCASSO

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by majic


Originally posted by nerdy_grrl_t


Alright... I\'ve read through most of this thread and I still can\'t tell whether my car gets good/bad mileage... most people seem to be talking about the GT?

On my 2004 Sport GS the gas light comes on around 400 kms, so I\'d assume I get about 500km per tank? I do about 70% city, 30% highway and nearly the exact same mileage every week... seems to me I should be getting more out of one tank? (The car has 12400 kms on it).

Also someone suggested changing brands of gas... could that really help?


Nerdy_Grrl

with a GS you should be in the 8s.. or at least most of the ppl on TM3 are getting those numbers.. looks like the 2.0L engine is closer to its advertised ratings.

I have a friend at work with a 5-speed manual 2.0L GS. He\'s pulling anything from 6.5 to 7.5 L/100km. I try not to talk to this friend, as I\'m always in tears when I hear these figures. Then again, he drives on the highway at some 105 km/h. So it\'s funny to see grandma\'s in their Tercel\'s passing him on the right lane. :D

[nerdy_grrl_t]

ROFL Picasso... you guys are too funny... :p

[cstraw]

Hey I get those 6.6L/100km - 7.5L/100km in my 2.3L 5 speed, but I imagine your friend driving at 105 khr would even pass me. As mentioned above, if you want your car to return decent fuel economy slow down! otherwise quit complaining! I find it amusing every April when fuel prices jump and folks who drive without fuel economy in mind or drive unneccary vehicles complain about fuel when they have a way to solve their problem by using their right foot a little differently.

Chris

btw... here is my most recent log:
Date $ L km miles L/100km mpg

17-May 36.65 44.21 620.3 384.6 7.13 33.00
23-May 33.81 41.30 587.0 363.9 7.04 33.43
29-May 37.00 43.58 624.0 386.9 6.98 33.68
30-May 8.73 11.56 132.0 81.8 8.76 26.86
6-Jun 38.00 43.73 671.4 416.3 6.51 36.11 WOW!

tot/avg 1129.7 1417.7 18507.3 7.66 30.70

[elevin]

Bottom line:

You want fuel economy: Drive slow.
You want fuel economy and drive quick: Buy a Honda.

:)

Hahahha.. I have a civic, and it doesn\'t drive quick. ever. and it\'s not as pretty. :D

just calculated my first figures..

12.42L/100km... 100% city.

2.3 GT AT.

This is worse than my parent\'s V6 camry... ack.

[SwooshICE]

I get the same numbers as you elevin ;)
ya the numbers are worst than my dad\'s maxima -_-

[Illmatic]

Originally posted by SwooshICE


I get the same numbers as you elevin ;)
ya the numbers are worst than my dad\'s maxima -_-


Wow! I have a \'89 Maxima and man did/does that thing get BAD gas mileage!

[Optimzer]

I just worked out my long term average (about 1800km) and it works out to 8.8L/100km

[ken]

another fill up

2.0L auto, 95% city

462.5km, 36.708L => 7.94L/100km

[SourcE]

Women drivers.....!

My wife drives the car during the week and averages around 500-520

She was in the US for 2 weeks, so i had the car and averaged 430 :D :p :D

[TheProfessor]

Wow, you guys are a little nuts about the fuel economy, eh? You guys should just do what I do, fill \'er up, and have fun driving. There\'s nothing you can do about the mileage you\'re getting, unless you want to drive like a granny, and considering you all own a 3 then I can assume you don\'t.

[Flagrum_3]

I have to agree with PSIVIC somewhat, if your worried about economy, you should have bought a Smart Car,...but alas there are benefits to keeping track of your fuel consumption on a regular basis.The major reason is excess fuel consumption can be a good sign of engine or fuel system troubles and by keeping track you can catch most problems early.


_3


.

[TheProfessor]

True, but I don\'t do all these fancy spreadsheets or anything like that yet I can tell you that I consistantly get about 600-650km to a tank in my 6. If that were to drop to below 600 consistantly I would still notice!

[Optimzer]

Originally posted by Flagrum_3
if your worried about economy, you should have bought a Smart Car

_3


.

:sarc

[majic]

i don\'t think people here are complaining about not getting 3-4L/100 (smartcar/hybrid) BUT the original poster had a problem with the car constantly guzzling more than advertized and sometimes WAY MORE 11-12L/100km while doing the same type of driving as the rest of us. come on, it\'s not an SUV after all..

also knowing that getting a constant ~7.5L/100km (2.0L) vs say ~9L/100km (2.3L) under normal conditions (not grannying it) might be helpful for future mazda owners who like the looks and styling and can sacrifice performance a tad for better fuel economy.

[Flagrum_3]

I Agree with your statements, but the original poster also stated in a way, that he is expecting to get epa rating type fuel consumption, which I believe is unrealistic. Very view cars will match these ratings in the real word.And at the same time we all must expect not to get great mileage out of a 2.3 litre engine...(it is a large four plus the m3 is quite heavy) atleast not like a 2.0l or smaller.Also if he is consistently getting lousy mileage such as 11 or 12 liters per 100km then he should just simply take it in to get it checked out, not all vehicles coming from the factory are set-up perfectly.


_3


.

[billyfo]

true the EPA chart is outdated, but when the CITY mileage is 9.2L/100km, the owner has 70% hwy driving, so it won\'t be 10-12L/100km per tank, he also stated that he isn\'t driving like crazy. I drive 50/50 hwy/city as quite gently foot, I get 8.7L/100km, that\'s almost 2L/100km different. So we should advise the owner to take a look what went wrong other than \"why we should worry fuel economy\" stuff.

[PiCASSO]

Wow. I didn\'t think that my discussion about fuel economy will reach 10-pages. The main complaint about this Mazda3 is really just how FAR off we are from the EPA ratings. I do not expect to get numbers that are right on the money. No, but I expect to be at least close to the marker, with 10-15%. My current average is now 10.369 L/100km or 22.964 mpg, after driving some 15,500 km in the last 8-months.

Let\'s refresh everyone\'s minds about Mazda\'s USA and Canadian EPA figures:

Canadian EPA state the following numbers (www.mazda.ca):
City: 9.2L/100km (25.6 MPG)
Highway: 6.7L/100km (35.1 MPG)

And the USA equivalent (www.mazdausa.com, US gallons):
City: 25 MPG (9.4L/100km)
Highway: 32 MPG (7.3L/100km)

At the worst (USA) average (combined city/highway) rating 8.35L/100km... I am off by 2.019L/100km or 24.2% on my 3.5 month average. That 2.019L/100km translates to 484.56 litres for 24,000 km done in year. At an average $0.80/Litre, this works out to $387.65 extra that I have to pay because of the poor fuel economy. I actually average more like 70% highway and 30% city in my driving (which would make the difference much worse), but assumed that I am doing the 50/50 split.

So, what does this all mean? It probably means that most of us who drive \'regularly\' will not be getting anything their fuel economy with 10-15% of what\'s advertised.

Let\'s compare that to my agressive driving I\'ve done in my 2002 Honda Civic SiG. Advertised numbers are 7.6 and 5.9 L/100km for city and highway. I averaged 7.70L/100km through out my 3-years with the car. Working with the same combined city/highway, averages to 6.75 L/100km. A difference of 0.95 L/100km or 14.1%.

Bottom line: I don\'t think there is anything that the dealership will do to make my Mazda3 any more fuel efficient, unless Mazda has done some better programming of their engine control management for 2006+ MY (that will allow all previous MY\'s to be reflashed). Mazda, please let us know you\'ve done your homework!

[Flagrum_3]

Hey Picasso, I think you are erring on the figures...sorry. Remember the U.S gallon is smaller than our gallon by approx 1/5th.Your average miliage of 10.36l is actually 27.6 mpg which is not good anyways, but depends on what your percentage is city driving.

1 Canadian gallon= 4.55 liters

100 km = 62.5 miles

EPA rating for M3 Sport 5sp I believe is 9.2/100 city and 6.7/100 highway that translates to 30.9 mpg and 42 mpg respectfully.If you average it out we should be seeing about 8L-9L per 100 km which you are off the mark by a bit...not bad though, but it depends on your percentage of highway versus city driving.


_3


.

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by Flagrum_3


Hey Picasso, I think you are erring on the figures...sorry. Remember the U.S gallon is smaller than our gallon by approx 1/5th.Your average miliage of 10.36l is actually 27.6 mpg which is not good anyways, but depends on what your percentage is city driving.

1 Canadian gallon= 4.55 liters

100 km = 62.5 miles

EPA rating for M3 Sport 5sp I believe is 9.2/100 city and 6.7/100 highway that translates to 30.9 mpg and 42 mpg respectfully.If you average it out we should be seeing about 8L-9L per 100 km which you are off the mark by a bit...not bad though, but it depends on your percentage of highway versus city driving.

_3
.



I don\'t want to be argumentative, and I am aware that the US gallon is smaller than the UK gallon. Please see my earlier post on page #8 (click here and scroll down (http://torontomazda3.com/forum/read.php?TID=1395&page=8)). You will notice that I included the useless UK mile per gallon numbers.

Why I say useless, because 90% of the automotive publications that we read are from United States, and majority of us are exposed to US television that advertise fuel economy in US miles per gallon. Having to see UK MPG figures on our side windows when purchasing cars is as helpful as someone telling you that our engines operate at 550 Kelvin. Sure, you know how to convert it to Celcius or Fahrenheit, but is it necessary?

The same goes for the UK gallon:

1 Metric Liter = 0.2641721 US Gallons = 0.2199692 UK Gallons
1 US gallon = 3.785412 L
1 UK gallon = 4.546092 L

Let\'s do a conversion for everyone who is a little challenged in that area:

9.2L/100km (our Canadian rating for city driving in the 2.3L Mazda 3)

( 9.2L ) (1 USG) (1 km)
---------- x ---------- x -------------- = 0.039113218 USG / mpg
( 100 km ) (3.785412 L) (0.6213712 mph)

invert that

25.56680431 miles per US gallon. If we used our useless UK gallons, we would get
30.70446349 miles per UK gallon.

But do we really want to talk about UK gallons in North America? Should we not compare apples to apples? I though so.

Nuff said... I have to get work. :)

[Flagrum_3]

Originally posted by PiCASSO



Originally posted by Flagrum_3


Hey Picasso, I think you are erring on the figures...sorry. Remember the U.S gallon is smaller than our gallon by approx 1/5th.Your average miliage of 10.36l is actually 27.6 mpg which is not good anyways, but depends on what your percentage is city driving.

1 Canadian gallon= 4.55 liters

100 km = 62.5 miles

EPA rating for M3 Sport 5sp I believe is 9.2/100 city and 6.7/100 highway that translates to 30.9 mpg and 42 mpg respectfully.If you average it out we should be seeing about 8L-9L per 100 km which you are off the mark by a bit...not bad though, but it depends on your percentage of highway versus city driving.

_3
.



I don\'t want to be argumentative, and I am aware that the US gallon is smaller than the UK gallon. Please see my earlier post on page #8 (click here and scroll down (http://torontomazda3.com/forum/read.php?TID=1395&page=8)). You will notice that I included the useless UK mile per gallon numbers.

Why I say useless, because 90% of the automotive publications that we read are from United States, and majority of us are exposed to US television that advertise fuel economy in US miles per gallon. Having to see UK MPG figures on our side windows when purchasing cars is as helpful as someone telling you that our engines operate at 550 Kelvin. Sure, you know how to convert it to Celcius or Fahrenheit, but is it necessary?

The same goes for the UK gallon:

1 Metric Liter = 0.2641721 US Gallons = 0.2199692 UK Gallons
1 US gallon = 3.785412 L
1 UK gallon = 4.546092 L

Let\'s do a conversion for everyone who is a little challenged in that area:

9.2L/100km (our Canadian rating for city driving in the 2.3L Mazda 3)

( 9.2L ) (1 USG) (1 km)
---------- x ---------- x -------------- = 0.039113218 USG / mpg
( 100 km ) (3.785412 L) (0.6213712 mph)

invert that

25.56680431 miles per US gallon. If we used our useless UK gallons, we would get
30.70446349 miles per UK gallon.

But do we really want to talk about UK gallons in North America? Should we not compare apples to apples? I though so.

Nuff said... I have to get work. :)


The American gallon is smaller than the Canadian Gallon, that is what I said.And for those that might be \"a little Challenged\"....In Canada we use the Imperial measurements,... I did not say UK measurements. Do some research.


_3


.

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by Flagrum_3

The American gallon is smaller than the Canadian Gallon, that is what I said.And for those that might be \"a little Challenged\"....In Canada we use the Imperial measurements,... I did not say UK measurements. Do some research.

_3



Before you get your panties all tied up in a knot, Flagrum_3:

1. I was not implying that you can\'t convert one unit to the next. It was actually to show other people that it\'s easy to go back from one unit to the next, if they like.

2. I was disagreeing with Canada using the UK gallon in the first place. We are located in North America. Our neighbour United States is NOT using the UK gallon and they are not going to change anytime soon. All figures that come out of United States will remain equivalent to 3.785412 metric Liters. That means for flow rates (Gallons per Minute) or fuel economy (Miles per Gallon), they are using the US gallon.

3. Why confuse the Canadian automotive public? They walk in the dealership with their handy Car and Driver magazine. They\'ve read upon the Mazda 3 doing 25 MPG in the city. They look at the sticker of the car, see the L/100km figure and glance down at the MPG. \"Oh, look\" they think to themselves, \"our Canadian Mazda\'s appear to be more fuel efficient, with a city rating of 30.7 MPG\". Must be something in the Canadian air or our fuel that makes our car drive further for every gallon. Majority of the people out there are not even aware the is a US and a UK gallon. What\'s the point of making the cars \"appear\" more attractive in Canada? Is it because of our \"ties\" to Great Britain (I don\'t want to go into a political discussion). I just don\'t see any logic in it.

4. What\'s more confusing for our British friends, they purchase petrol (gasoline) in Liters, drive in miles per hour, and have all their fuel economy ratings in UK miles per gallon. The average Joe will have a fun time trying to get a quick fuel economy figure from his last fill-up.

5. Ultimately, I believe the whole world should convert to the standardized metric units, and get rid of this discussion that you (Flagrum_3) and I are having. Wouldn\'t life be much simpler?

Now I really have to leave for work...

[Flagrum_3]

Hey no problem, I don\'t wear panties...boxer guy myself, but I think its more confusing just looking at American specs, we have our own measurements here, at the Mazda.ca site they state the gas mileage figures in Canadian EPA ratings and you can also find them on the Government of Canada sites, also I would think that since Canada has been using the metric system since the mid seventies people should be used to it, althought I agree with you that the whole world should be using metric, there\'s no telling them Americans anything! Th\'er one of the very few countries left that refuse to change.


_3


.

[Eric]

I just had my best tank of fuel so far.

Fill up #27 at 15,148.1 km on my 2005 Mazda3 Sport GT (2.3L engine).

650.4 km on the tank of fuel
45.638 litres of fuel
7.02 L/100 km
40.26 MPG(UK)
33.52 MPG(US)

Averages over all 27 fillups so far.

561.0 km / fill up.
8.12 L/100 km
35.07 MPG(UK)
29.21 MPG(US)

I am pleased with the fuel economy so far.

[SwooshICE]

7.02 L/100 km

i wish mine would do as good as that heh

[ken]

Latest fill up on a 2.0L auto, 90% city driving

466km, 37.486L => 8.04L/100km

[ken]

Another fill up, 2.0L auto, 70% hwy driving

38.81L, 548.8km => 7.0L

[whodilly]

Wow some of you guys get some great fuel economy! Mind you I do have the GT and most of my driving is \"spirited\" city or hwy. I usually get 450-500km per fill (approx 45L depending on when the warning light comes on). I guess i should keep track of my fuel consumption. will try next time and post results.

Just today I drove 170km... damn why does gas have to be so expensive, then we wouldn\'t worry about fuel economy :D

[MAZDA Kitten]

Wow all this mathematical stuff is over whelming.

All I know Ive been hitting amazing numbers. Last fill up (light wasnt on yet and had quite a bit to go) but from a full tank I had 608km. So Im guesstimating I wouldve hit OVER 700km since we have approx~100km left when the light comes on. I couldnt be happier. I think it has to do with the humidity no?

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by MAZDA Kitten


Wow all this mathematical stuff is over whelming.

All I know Ive been hitting amazing numbers. Last fill up (light wasnt on yet and had quite a bit to go) but from a full tank I had 608km. So Im guesstimating I wouldve hit OVER 700km since we have approx~100km left when the light comes on. I couldnt be happier. I think it has to do with the humidity no?

Light usually comes on when you have approximately 10L left in your tank. So you used approximately 45-litres (did you still have the receipt of how many litres you\'ve purchased?). With 608km and 45 Litres:

Fuel economy = 45L / 608km x 100 = 7.40 L/100km

Very nice. I\'m assuming that most of this was highway driving at a 105-110 km/h?


EDIT:

[Ya! I just became a SENIOR MEMBER... with over 100 posts!]

[david3]

I\'m still getting 7-7.5L/100km in my 2L auto.

[cstraw]

Well here is the the most recent part of my fuel log. Still quite pleased and always driving with fuel economy in mind.

2004 Mazda Sport 5-speed:

Date / Cost / Litres / km / miles / l/100km / mpg(US)

6-Jun 38.00 43.73 671.4 416.3 6.51 36.11
15-Jun 40.01 44.50 582.0 360.8 7.65 30.76
23-Jun 35.32 38.90 541.2 335.5 7.19 32.72
29-Jun 35.01 39.83 588.4 364.8 6.77 34.74
3-Jul 39.00 41.98 588.0 364.6 7.14 32.94
12-Jul 40.02 44.52 645.4 400.1 6.90 34.10
21-Jul 41.65 42.12 607.0 376.3 6.94 33.89
23-Jul 35.72 39.87 554.0 343.5 7.20 32.68
30-Jul 41.40 45.95 667.2 413.7 6.89 34.15
average 1437.8 1755.4 23280.5 14433.9 7.54 31.19

[majic]

i\'ll spare the spreasheet this time.. just wanted to highlight a few things

during my recent trip to NJ/Atlantic City i averaged

going there: 7.55 L/100km (31.16 mpg)
driving about 10mph over speed limits so 60-75mph all highway with a few toll stops and 10min road work crawl.

coming back: 7.80 L/100km (30.16 mpg)
tearing it up on the PA turnpike 476/276 going at 140avg?? often 160kph.. the rest of PA @ 20 over and 5-10 over in NY state (no cops in PA but a googleplex in NY)

A/C was set to 1, fresh air, temp was about 80% cold b/c it was getting too cold at times!!!

in other words.. this car LOVES THE HIGHWAY DRIVES!!! 5th gear pulls enough and maintains wicked gas mileage... in the city it\'s a little different story but lately i\'ve been getting mid/high 8s combined hwy/city and i love onramps and this engine sees the redline in 1st 2nd and often 3rd a few times a day :D The twisties in PA on the trunpike along with the scenery made it an awesome drive home.

[majic]

double post - tried to delete

[majic]

sorry for double post but it looks like we can no longer delete posts.. just an FYI.. lets keep talking about fuel here :D

[awhoy]

Hey Majic, seems like you are getting decent milage with you car now. If I recall, you weren\'t getting this kind of milage when you car was newer. After how many kilometers did you see you milage improve. I have a GT Sport auto with 5000km on it, I have yet to get below 9L/100KM and I don\'t drive the car hard.

The best milage I had so far was 9.13L/100KM, 90% hwy going to Georgian Bay with average speed of 100-120km/h and other 10% was on contry roads 80km/h. The AC was on 50% of the time. The worst was 10.87L/100KM with 50%/50% hwy/city. That was with Esso gas, I normally fill up with Shell. On average with 50% hwy and 50% city I get ~9.6L/100KM. So far I am pretty disappointed with the milage I am getting, still hopping it would improve as my 3 gets older.

-John

[majic]

John,

I think what has happened is this:

when i got my car, it was november.. it was being broken in and it was winter time.. it was chugging more gas.. 12000km later i switched over to synthetic, coincidentaly the temperatures went up and mileage improved (slightly)

it hasn\'t been super consistent thugh.. in march i have 2 and in may i have 1 instances that the fuel consumption was more than 10L/100km. since end of may, everything has been sub 9s.

the car has almost 24000km and my overall average fuel consumption is 9.06L/100km

what i wanted to point out in the post above is that even with a lot of redlining and spirited highway drives i was staying over 30mpg!!! (including having the A/C on at all times)

one time in the winter (jan 7) i took a trip to Montreal and i managed to get 7.54L/100km BUT i drove NO faster than 110kph on the highway and 90kph on 80kph roads - increasing the speed by roughly 30km and increasing the temperature by roughly 30C yields the same fuel consumption but adds some spice to the drive :)

ever since the switch to synthetic (end of march) the avg consumption has been 8.66L/100km - i won\'t be able to draw any conclusions till next march/april when i go througha winter on synthetic..

**NON scientific data - just my experimental results***
esso seems to give me the best mileage while sunoco and shell are the ones seeing 10L/100km most often..it could be a coincidence that i end up doing more city driving on shell/sunoco but i have quite regular driving patterns

hope this sort of helps?

[awhoy]

Thanks for the info Majic, my conern is that I am getting sub-par milage in hot weather, I would expect it wil only get worst in the colder months. I will switch synthetic oil at my 8K service and see if there is any improvement.

[oroboru]

Well I\'m up to my 3rd or 4th tank of gas, and so far this has been the best yet (though it may have to do with the fact I didn\'t touch the car over the long weekend at all).

501 KM on 40.550 L of regular gas, which brings the usage to about 8.09 L/100KM, a wee spot over the actual rated consumption.

[rene]

Hi,

I just want to share my fuel consumption; Toronto to Niagara Falls and back.

363 km
27.6 L
7.6 L/100 km

A/C \"on\" most of the time
Speed: 100 kph - 130 kph (@ 120 most of the time)

I have an 05 Sedan GT auto (9200 km) ... bought Nov. 04

[luvmazda3]

im getting about 475 on a GS...thats when the reserve light kicks in.. usually take that for another 50-60 Kliks

[Eric]

I just returned from doing the drive to the Boston Area and back. During that trip I had two tanks of gas that were 100% Highway. The only stops were for toll booths. On the second tank (return trip) I also encountered about 15 (20+ km) miles of construction delays. I drove the entire way at exactly the speed limit (65 MPH) using cruise control (I know, boring).

The results were... ( drum roll please)

Tank 1

Distance on tank: 740.7 km
Litres of fuel 44.660: (11.8 USGAL)
Fuel economy: 6.03 L/100km ( 39.01 US MPG or 46.85 Imp. MPG )

Tank 2 ( with major stop and go construction delays)

Distance on tank: 695.5 km
Litres of fuel: 45.806
Fuel economy: 6.59 L/100km ( 35.71 US MPG or 42.89 Imp. MPG )

Not too shabby I think.

Total to date:

Distance: 20,249.8 km
Litres of fuel: 1,584.184
Fuel economy: 7.90 L/100km (30.10 US MPG or 36.15 Imp. MPG )

This is a Mazda Sport GT w/ 2.3L engine

[bluntman]

Proven gas saving device (http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7993916387)

[bubu416]

That device should come as standard option for all Mazda3s, and to help ease the agony from some of the people on this board... :p


-bubu416

[cstraw]

Here is the recent portion of my fuel log... still very happy, especially when I see some vehicles requiring $100+ to fill up.

Chris


2004 Mazda 3 Sport 5speed

Date $ L km miles L/100km mpg(m) mpg (I)

23-Jul 35.72 39.87 554.0 343.5 7.20 32.68 39.03
30-Jul 41.40 45.95 667.2 413.7 6.89 34.15 40.78
4-Aug 41.00 42.31 647.0 401.1 6.54 35.97 42.95
6-Aug 38.44 41.89 670.7 415.8 6.25 37.66 44.97
11-Aug 30.00 31.28 449.9 278.9 6.95 33.83 40.39
13-Aug 33.00 34.10 478.0 296.4 7.13 32.97 39.37
19-Aug 33.18 35.11 500.4 310.2 7.02 33.52 40.03
29-Aug 37.01 37.42 553.6 343.2 6.76 34.80 41.55

average 1650.5 1977.5 26580.1 16479.7 7.44 31.61 37.75

[PiCASSO]

I am SO pissed off. This car is eat gas like a hog. The last 83.4 km that I\'ve done in pure city driving has provided me a cool 13.309 L/100km or 17.673 mpg. Let\'s refresh everybody with the quoted Canadian and US figures:

Canadian EPA state the following numbers (www.mazda.ca):
City: 9.2L/100km (25.6 MPG)
Highway: 6.7L/100km (35.1 MPG)

And the USA equivalent (www.mazdausa.com, US gallons):
City: 25 MPG (9.4L/100km)
Highway: 32 MPG (7.3L/100km)

Now let\'s look at what I\'m getting in my 2005 2.3L 5-speed manual P.O.S.:

http://server2.uploadit.org/files/twoktwocivicsi-Sad.jpg

From late April through late September (5 months of summer driving) I\'ve got an average of 10.071 L/100km or 23.806 mpg, based on an average of 52% city driving and remaining 48% of highway. I would be VERY happy if I got anything near the CITY EPA ratings from USA, but this is f*cking pathetic. I\'m going to file a complaint with Mazda of Canada on Monday, walk straight into their offices which are located near my work:

Mazda Canada
55 Vogell Road
Richmond Hill, Ontario
L4B 3K5
1-800-263-4680

If it means that an engineer from Japan needs to take a flight to Toronto in the next few years to solve this f*cking fuel economy issue, so be it. The only thing I can say is that there is some consistency with the figures: Pure highway driving will give me 9 L/100km, while city gives 11 L/100km.

Sorry for my venting, but enough is enough. I\'m going to get myself a drink... perhaps that will cool me off. :(

[SABIO]

When I bought my car in 04, the stated fuel econmy was 41 hwy and 32 city... they lowered later int the year... and the 05\'s are even lower.
So you can imagine how I feel when I get the same milage as you. I filled up the other day... actually spilt over... I have done 120kms... exactly 50/50 hwy/city. I have used over a 1/4 tank according to the needle.
I should fill it up again and see how much it used... I bet 15L..

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by SABIO


When I bought my car in 04, the stated fuel econmy was 41 hwy and 32 city... they lowered later int the year... and the 05\'s are even lower.
So you can imagine how I feel when I get the same milage as you. I filled up the other day... actually spilt over... I have done 120kms... exactly 50/50 hwy/city. I have used over a 1/4 tank according to the needle.
I should fill it up again and see how much it used... I bet 15L..

Sorry, I\'m not following. US EPA rating of 41/32 MPG for HWY/CITY back in 2004 MY for a 2.3L Mazda? Or are you confusing the Imperial Gallon from a US gallon? I never reference the larger Imperial gallon (that translates to 20% better MPG), since all of United States uses reference to the smaller US gallon.

1 US Gallon = 3.785412 Litres
1 Imperial Gallon = 4.546092 Litres
Difference of 0.76068 L or 20%

In your scenario... 1/4 of tank is about 13.75 litres... so at 120 km, your fuel economy is 11.5 L/100km. Welcome to the club, my friend!

Misery loves company...

[SABIO]

on the window sticker... thats where it said 32 city 41 highway..

so if thats Imp.Gal or US Gal or whatever... thats what the sheet in the window said.

that sounds right.. 11L / 100 km, at about 380-400km the low fuel light comes on. Which leaves me roughly 10 L. Which won\'t get me far........LOL

[SwooshICE]

I am getting similar numbers as you too PiCASSO :(

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by SwooshICE


I am getting similar numbers as you too PiCASSO :(

I\'m glad to hear that... and perhaps you should make complaints to your dealership first and then take over with Mazda of Canada. I called Friday evening (after my screaming post) and they called me back yesterday afternoon. After long conversation with one girl, I got another guy to follow up and tell me that he\'s talking to my dealership, Avante.

Avante did everything they could. Each time I brought my car in for service, they would diagnose the vehicle after my complaint about the fuel economy. But nothing showed up, and all figures were within their operating parameters (at least that\'s what I\'ve been told).

So Mazda of Canada\'s suggestion was for me to leave the car with them for a few days, allow them to drive it some 100+ kilometers and then see specifically what fuel economy their are getting. I didn\'t think that would be reasonable, so I asked MoC if I would get a loner vehicle for those few days. They replied to me that because I don\'t have extended warranty (don\'t need it, since my car will be returned within 74,000 km and the standard warranty is 80,000 km), I will have to deal with it on my own.

Unlike Toronto, not having a car for a few days is very painful, especially when everything is hundreds (exaggerating) miles away. Still, I have to talk to Avante and see if they are willing to provide me with a loner for those few days. If not, it will be very hard to find someone who is willing to go out of their way to pick me up and drop me off at work, in addition to running arrons (drug deals, etc) that I do on a regular basis.

As mentioned earlier, the only great thing about all this is that the figures are consistent. Same high 8\'s/low 9\'s on the highway, and high 10\'s/low 11\'s in the city. These figures are reserved for car like my dad\'s old 3,400 lb Buick Regal and it\'s 200 hp OHV V6.

I\'ll keep you boys (and girls) posted on my progress.

[SABIO]

Originally posted by SABIO
So you can imagine how I feel when I get the same milage as you. I filled up the other day... actually spilt over... I have done 120kms... exactly 50/50 hwy/city. I have used over a 1/4 tank according to the needle.
I should fill it up again and see how much it used... I bet 15L..


actually.. I drove until 209km.. just in town, around town. No racing or crazy driving...

23.8 Litres of fuel!! I will round up to 24l... it didn\'t spill over... needle was at half mark. Wow, what a great car.

so that would work out to...209km/24L of gas 11.48L/100km 3.03 Gallons... 60 miles..

Wow... 20 MPG!!! super.. MAZDA SUX... Throw my name on any complaint you give to Mazda.
I will sign anything too! This is crazy piss ass poor......

So my car is full agian of gas.. i should just drive on the highway till the gas runs out... just to see what mileage I get on the highway... cruise at 110km/hr...
maybe I should go visit bubba1983

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by SABIO



Originally posted by SABIO
So you can imagine how I feel when I get the same milage as you. I filled up the other day... actually spilt over... I have done 120kms... exactly 50/50 hwy/city. I have used over a 1/4 tank according to the needle.
I should fill it up again and see how much it used... I bet 15L..


actually.. I drove until 209km.. just in town, around town. No racing or crazy driving...

23.8 Litres of fuel!! I will round up to 24l... it didn\'t spill over... needle was at half mark. Wow, what a great car.

so that would work out to...209km/24L of gas 11.48L/100km 3.03 Gallons... 60 miles..

Wow... 20 MPG!!! super.. MAZDA SUX... Throw my name on any complaint you give to Mazda.
I will sign anything too! This is crazy piss ass poor......

So my car is full agian of gas.. i should just drive on the highway till the gas runs out... just to see what mileage I get on the highway... cruise at 110km/hr...
maybe I should go visit bubba1983

Been driving for the past 5-days in the city, driving approximately 140 km. My needle is half way between 3/4 and 1/2 (or 5/8). Haven\'t filled up, because I\'m afraid of the out come. But doing some light math: 0.375 x 55 L tank = 20.625L, with 140 km this translates into 14.7L/100km or 16 MPG. The more I think about it, the more I want to know my figures. I will be filling it up this morning and driving over to Avante Mazda to see what can be arranged for them to fully diagnose the car. This is getting worse every day, and I\'m thinking about selling this vehicle back to Mazda (or what ever that can be arranged for a lease vehicle).

[DeLaY_NoMoRe]

hm.....it seems the gas milage didn\'t work too bad to me compare with u guys......I usually get 450KMs (50/50 Hwy/City, most time with A/C on), just before the low fuel light came on. :)

[PiCASSO]

Okay, decided to fill up the car with some gas this afternoon, after having a conversation with the service manager at Avante Mazda.

http://x2.putfile.com/10/27311510329.jpg
Image (http://putfile.com/pic.php?pic=10/27311510329.jpg&s=x2)

As you can see, the fuel gauge is as accurate as the weatherman\'s weekly forecast. What appear to me originally as being 5/8th full (62.5% full, 3/8th empty = 20.625L) it was actually 15.776L (7/10th or 72% full). So there is a 10% discrepancy, which is not surprising.

Regardless, after some 136.0 km and 15.776 Litres, my 90% city/10% highway fuel economy average worked out to 11.6 L/100km. Theoretically, I would get a range of 474 km to a completely empty tank. This is slightly better than my previous fill-up with 13.3L/100km and a theoretical range of only 413 km with the 55L tank.

So where do I stand now? Well, I\'ve made an appointment for Tuesday, October 11th for Avante Mazda to take my car in for 2-days. Aside from addressing some of the issues such as A) noisy right wheel B) transmission whine and C) rattling glove box (to be replaced for the 2nd time), they will drive the car for some 100km to determine their own fuel economy. I will have to dish-out some $45 of my own money to get a rental car, as the standard 3-yr/80,000km warranty doesn\'t cover a rental.

My prediction: Mazda will tell me that the 10.5L/100km is \"normal\" and I should just live with it. One of the main reasons for leasing this vehicle was for their EPA rated fuel economy figures. Yes, I know I will NEVER attain those numbers, but I expected to be at least close to it. I am going to file a complaint with Natural Resources Canada for them to re-evaluate the 2.3L version of the Mazda, because I\'m pretty sure that Mazda of Canada put a ringer in their hands to evaluate the vehicle that\'s running lean (drawing less fuel) and simulating economy range that most of us never attain in normal driving.

Oh well,

PiCASSO :(

PS. It\'s amazing how much time and energy is spent on this vehicle. I wouldn\'t complain if the numbers advertised 8.0L/100km on the highway and 11L/100km in the city. False advertising... perhaps Better Business Bureau (http://www.canadiancouncilbbb.ca/)?

[PiCASSO]

Hmmm... did some reading up through Natural Energy Canada website to determine the figures rated for our Mazda3. Here are the results from the webpage (http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/transportation/tools/fuel-consumption-guide/fuel-consumption-guide-results.cfm?year=2005&type=CPC&Mfg=MAZD&attr=8):

Fuel Consumption Guide Search Results:

MAZDA 3 (2.3L M5): 9.3L/100km (city) and 6.8L/100km (hwy)
MAZDA 3 (2.3L A4): 9.9L/100km (city) and 7.6L/100km (hwy)

Compare that to what is published on their own website (Link (http://www.mazda.ca/include/printtable.asp?tablefile=/eng/Vehicles/Mazda3/sport_content/Mazda3_subnav05_content02.xml)):

MAZDA 3 (2.3L M5): 9.2L/100km (city) and 6.7L/100km (hwy)
MAZDA 3 (2.3L A5): 9.4L/100km (city) and 7.0L/100km (hwy)

So you can see that there is a discrepancy, especially with the automatic version (they have the 4 and 5-speed automatic figures on the Government and Mazda websites, respectively).

What\'s interesting, though, is that the 9.9L/100km and 7.6L are the numbers closer to what I\'m getting. They are not exact, but seem a bit more reasonable.

So I really think that Mazda of Canada has to repost their fuel economy figures, to be inline with Office of Energy Efficiency (Natural Energy Canada). This will make their vehicle un-attractive to the fuel concious people (especially with $1.10/L fuel pricing). If I had known up front that my vehicle would be making an average of over 10L/100km, I would certainly think twice before ordering one.

You may remember the screw up that Mazda had when they over rated their horsepower figures with 2002/2003 vehicles (I believe that the Miata was one of them). So their reinbursed the customers some $500 to $750 for their false advertising.

Consider this:

If I was getting say 8.5L/100km (happily, somewhere in the middle of their claimed figures), driving through my 3-year lease\'s 72,000 km at approximately $1.00/Litre, I would spend some $6,120 CDN for gas. Now, with my cool 10.3L/100km average (through out the last 20,000km or 12-months), this would work out to $7,416, or a difference of $1,296!!! Will I see any of this money back because of Mazda of Canada\'s false advertising? I doubt it. But if I\'m not satisfied by the end of the year with MofC\'s customer service, I will take it up with BBB and/or Office of Energy Efficiency.

[DeLaY_NoMoRe]

I guess ur car is particularly worse in this case, on the same fuel benchmark I would\'ve have driven at least 180KMs to around 200KMs already depended on the mode of city/hwy.......:(

P.S. I also have the same 2.3L/5sp version.

[SABIO]

I agree with your the false advertising statement. Like I said, The vehicle data sheet in my car window said 32mpg city and 41mpg hwy.

For 2006 I believe it has been changed to 25mpg city and 35 hwy.... big difference.

[SwooshICE]

I guess ur car is particularly worse in this case,

well its not just his car ;)
my numbers are pretty similar to his :(

[SABIO]

What irks me is the main reason I got a new car was for fuel economy.
My old 94 grand am got 480-500km a tank (50L)... like clockwork. The car had 190,000km 3.1L V6 (3-spd auto).
I would drive it until 480-500km... gas up...usually 45-47L needed everytime. Not great mileage but consistant.

So I get this new car.... Mazda says 32mpg up to 41 mpg. I think hey, sporty car, good mileage, save some gas $$$ will off-set the cost of new car...
Boy was I taken for a ride....
Mazda got my $12,000.. and I got a brand new 4cyl car that gets no better mileage than my worn out Pontiac V6 (3-spd auto)
And honestly....There was absolutley nothing wrong with my Grand Am. I sold it to a guy at my work. He still is driving it... still looks mint...still runs great.. Why did I get this car????

Why am I getting 20 MPG!!!!!!!!!!

[keving]

Edit 1 - Please bear with me, I\'m trying to figure out how to format this so it\'ll be less of a jumble haha.
Edit 2 - Ugh..I can\'t seem to get all my info to work, so I\'ll just post my L/100Kms here.
Edit 3 - Arggghh! Okay I give up, sorry about the hard to read format :(
Edit 4 - There... a bit better.

Date L/100KM

Dec 29/04 13.21243842
Jan 11/05 11.64467198
Jan 23/05 14.14464286
Jan 28/05 12.11188119
Feb 07/05 11.40339375
Feb 15/05 9.737881508
Feb 21/05 9.505939902
Mar 02/05 9.940118153
Mar 10/05 12.05361659
Mar 24/05 10.21136865
Apr 06/05 10.20926793
Apr 14/05 10.57276995
Apr 28/05 10.23495341
May 14/05 10.2461126
May 23/05 12.12732095
Jun 08/05 10.12265585
Jun 15/05 11.19259259
Jul 02/05 9.88672406
Jul 17/05 10.19047619
Jul 27/05 10.1451087
Sep 06/05 9.873464373
Sep 13/05 9.421164584
Sep 18/05 9.155746911
Sep 23/05 9.083880379
Sep 27/05 8.771382637

I see a pretty good trend going. The first couple of fillups, I was unaware that by turning on the rear defroster that would automatically turn on the air-conditioning, hence the horrible horrible fuel economy. Also, for the Sept 05 entries, I\'ve been driving more highways (around 20/80 highway/city) than before (city driving exclusively). I drive a 2.3L sedan with a 5spd, 16 inch tires ;) . Overall, I\'m pretty happy to see the fuel economy numbers slowly improving. :)

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by keving


Edit 1 - Please bear with me, I\'m trying to figure out how to format this so it\'ll be less of a jumble haha.
Edit 2 - Ugh..I can\'t seem to get all my info to work, so I\'ll just post my L/100Kms here.
Edit 3 - Arggghh! Okay I give up, sorry about the hard to read format :(
Edit 4 - There... a bit better.

Date L/100KM

Dec 29/04 13.21243842
Jan 11/05 11.64467198
Jan 23/05 14.14464286
Jan 28/05 12.11188119
Feb 07/05 11.40339375
Feb 15/05 9.737881508
Feb 21/05 9.505939902
Mar 02/05 9.940118153
Mar 10/05 12.05361659
Mar 24/05 10.21136865
Apr 06/05 10.20926793
Apr 14/05 10.57276995
Apr 28/05 10.23495341
May 14/05 10.2461126
May 23/05 12.12732095
Jun 08/05 10.12265585
Jun 15/05 11.19259259
Jul 02/05 9.88672406
Jul 17/05 10.19047619
Jul 27/05 10.1451087
Sep 06/05 9.873464373
Sep 13/05 9.421164584
Sep 18/05 9.155746911
Sep 23/05 9.083880379
Sep 27/05 8.771382637

I see a pretty good trend going. The first couple of fillups, I was unaware that by turning on the rear defroster that would automatically turn on the air-conditioning, hence the horrible horrible fuel economy. Also, for the Sept 05 entries, I\'ve been driving more highways (around 20/80 highway/city) than before (city driving exclusively). I drive a 2.3L sedan with a 5spd, 16 inch tires ;) . Overall, I\'m pretty happy to see the fuel economy numbers slowly improving. :)

Your figures look like mine.

Hwy: 8.5-9.5
City: 10.5-11.5

No where near the posted EPA ratings (at least on the window stikers of 2004/2005 MY vehicles). I have yet for TheBiz to confirm the 2006 MY stikers and their ratings.

Change your driving to more city than highway, and you\'ll start seeing figure in the 10\'s or 11\'s. My opinion is that 10 is reserved for 6-cylinder vehicles. My friend\'s 3.0L Inline 6 BMW 330Ci coupe makes 225-hp and averages the same 10+ L/100km (50 city/50 hwy). The extra 65-horse is evident in all driving conditions.

Hmm... another thought occurred to me:

3.0L 6-cylinder engine = 0.500 L/cylinder
2.3L 4-cylinder engine = 0.575 L/cylinder

Does that mean anything? I doubt it. But I do know that I shouldn\'t be getting the same fuel economy of a premium compact 3-series.

We\'ll see what Avante comes up with their assessment of my vehicle next week\'s Tuesday/Wednesday.

[Jeff-TheBiz]

Originally posted by PiCASSO
No where near the posted EPA ratings (at least on the window stikers of 2004/2005 MY vehicles). I have yet for TheBiz to confirm the 2006 MY stikers and their ratings.



Brochure Specs
(All numbers are L/100km)

2.0L Sedan(obviously)

5MT 4AT
2004 city 8.5 9.1
hwy 6.2 6.4

2005 city 8.5 9.1
hwy 6.2 6.4

2006 city 8.4 9.1
hwy 6.1 6.4

2.3L Sedan

5MT 4AT
2004 city 9.2 9.8
hwy 6.7 7.5

2005 city 9.2 9.8
hwy 6.7 7.5

2006 city 9.2 9.4
hwy 6.7 7.0

2.3L Sport

5MT 4AT
2004 city 9.2 9.8
hwy 6.7 7.5

2005 city 9.2 9.8
hwy 6.7 7.5

2006 city 9.2 9.4
hwy 6.7 7.0

Hope these numbers help... Myself, I am with Psivic.. I just gas it when it gets low and drive like I stole it.

[TheProfessor]

;)

[majic]

time to add some spice here :)

first and foremost my numbers can be seen here

http://xs51.xs.to/pics/05426/mileage.jpg

at the top, in the blue, you see my averages. 9.0L/100km is NOT spectacular BUT i\'ll take it. why? 2 reasons: 1) I redline more often than not 2) unfortunately most of my trips are SHORT and that\'s what brings the average down. my driving habits are roughly as follows (per week):

all cold starts
8x8km
2x70km
2x35km
2x50km

plus some misc stuff 10x5km (warm starts)

1) how can you not redline with a car like this? :D everytime it puts a smile on my face.. hehehe.. especially now with the simota intake .. zoom vroom :)

2) here\'s my hypothesis .. our cars LOVE the highway, hate the city. moreso, like any other car, our cars suck on SHORT trips on a cold engine (maybe even more than any other make/model)

when the car is cold (overnight or at the end of a work day) the engine takes about 3min or so (in these temps) to warm up. let me quickly rehash the concept of open/closed loop (http://torontomazda3.com/forum/read.php?TID=3856#53050) - done ;)

while the engine is getting to its operating temp it\'s pretty much siphoning the fuel like mad (running rich). my trips to and from the go station are a prime example of that. ~8km each way (12 minutes) and after about 3-4min the engine is finally at the operating temp but the \'damage\' has been done.

My car has almost 30K on it and it\'s just a month shy of 1 year. I\'d say it\'s been broken in already ;) and it looks like the TYPE of gasoline or the SEASON has very little impact on the fuel consumption. it seems the short trips (cold starts) are the ones that contribute to poor fuel economy. compare that to driving 800km from here to NJ and averaging 7.7L/100km WHILE driving at 140kph or more ;) on the turnpike often downshifting into 4th to pass/have fun (this is not the time to chastise me)

One last thing to add is, i never noticed this cold start (city) vs highway gas consumption until recently when i installed my simota intake.. granted i love to hear that thing roar and i WOT it more often, it seems like the city mileage has gone down BUT looking at the spreadsheet (last 4 tanks or so) there\'s no discernable drop.

just a quick plug on starting car up vs. idling (http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/communities-government/transportation/municipal-communities/articles/idling-myths.cfm?attr=8)


So, when should you turn off the engine? Believe it or not, more than 10 seconds of idling uses more fuel than restarting the engine. As a rule of thumb, if you\'re going to stop for 10 seconds or more – except in traffic – turn the engine off. You\'ll save money. And your vehicle won\'t produce harmful emissions of carbon dioxide, the principal greenhouse gas that contributes to climate change.

for more fuel efficiency stuff read this (http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/transportation/personal-vehicles-initiative.cfm)

and as for EPA, it gives you the theoretical, best case, ideal conditions examples.. so i guess it\'s nice to compare car to car based on the numbers but don\'t be completely dissapointed if you don\'t reach those numbers.. especially if you do not want to drive like cstraw or Eric :p to each their own :D

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by majic

at the top, in the blue, you see my averages. 9.0L/100km is NOT spectacular BUT i\'ll take it. why? 2 reasons: 1) I redline more often than not 2) unfortunately most of my trips are SHORT and that\'s what brings the average down. my driving habits are roughly as follows (per week):


Oh how I wished I was getting figures like your, Maciej. Since late April 2005, I\'ve averaged 9.992 L/100m (52% city and 48% highway), or since October 2004 I am at 10.232 L/100km. Here are my latest numbers:

http://x10.putfile.com/10/29419145574.gif
Image (http://putfile.com/pic.php?pic=10/29419145574.gif&s=x10)

As you can see, my best was 7.671 and worst 13.309 L/100km. I have to admit, that I\'m on the same boat with regards to SHORT trips, taking me just over 7-km to get to work each day. Put to put in perspective, 1.0L/100km does make a financial difference. Although the price of gasoline is under 90-cents, let\'s use that for our calculations.

1.0L/100km
$0.90 / L
24,000 km/year

Savings of $216 per year in gasoline alone. Keep in mind, Maciej, that our city rating is 9.2 L/100km, while highway at 6.7 L/100km. Yes, those are \"ideal\" conditions, but wouldn\'t I (or anyone else) who is driving 50% city and 50% highway be getting an average closer less that the city EPA rating?

Based upon my driving habit, and compared to many of my friends averages, this 2.3L 160-hp Mazda3 should be averaging me 8.5L/100km in 50/50 city/highway driving. But the current 1.7L/100km difference does hit the annual additional price for fuel: $367.20 (at average 90-cents a litre).

For perspective, please consider my friends\' fuel economy numbers, with the same 50/50 city/highway split:

BMW 330Ci, 225 hp, 5M -> 10.2 L/100km
Infiniti G35, 300 hp, 6M -> 11.5 L/100km
Honda Accord, 2.3L 150 hp, 4A -> 9.0 L/100km
BMW 328i, 190 hp, 5M -> 9.5 L/100km

All of these guys are agressive like I am on the road and my nearest displacement engine is the Accord, but that\'s A) an automatic and B) larger car (weight)... yet still getting better fuel economy.

Sadly, I\'ve \"relaxed\" on my driving for the past few months... trying to conserve fuel and show an improvement in the figures. Unfortunately, the numbers that I\'ve been collecting don\'t lie... city driving 10.5-11.5 L/100m, and highway driving 8.0-9.0 L/100km.

[cstraw]

Well since everyone else is doing it, here is my most recent portion of my fuel economy logbook:
2004 Mazda 3 Sport 5psd

Date $ L km miles L/100km mpg(m) mpg (I)
21-Jul 41.65 42.12 607.0 376.3 6.94 33.89 40.47
23-Jul 35.72 39.87 554.0 343.5 7.20 32.68 39.03
30-Jul 41.40 45.95 667.2 413.7 6.89 34.15 40.78
4-Aug 41.00 42.31 647.0 401.1 6.54 35.97 42.95
6-Aug 38.44 41.89 670.7 415.8 6.25 37.66 44.97
11-Aug 30.00 31.28 449.9 278.9 6.95 33.83 40.39
13-Aug 33.00 34.10 478.0 296.4 7.13 32.97 39.37
19-Aug 33.18 35.11 500.4 310.2 7.02 33.52 40.03
29-Aug 37.01 37.42 553.6 343.2 6.76 34.80 41.55
20-Sep 61.00 60.73 832.4 516.1 7.30 32.24 38.50
1-Oct 37.72 34.79 482.6 299.2 7.21 32.62 38.96
14-Oct 35.00 37.51 551.0 341.6 6.81 34.55 41.25
18-Oct 14.30 15.93 216.0 133.9 7.37 31.89 38.08
22-Oct 23.00 25.90 354.2 219.6 7.31 32.16 38.41
27-Oct 41.00 45.45 597.7 370.6 7.60 30.93 36.93
31-Oct 38.00 41.80 577.7 358.2 7.24 32.51 38.82

Average 1862.5 2197.8 29614.0 18360.7 7.42 31.69 37.84


Again, most of my driving is done on the highway at ~95kmh. I rarely redline the car and drive with fuel economy in mind (read: don\'t goose the car from stops) I make every attempt to avoid driving in areas with stop signs, traffic lights, idiot drivers, etc as I get rather aggravated in any urban/semi urban area for a number of reasons.

[TheProfessor]

Wow, those are some impressive numbers, though at the expense of \'spirited\' driving from the sounds of it.

[akherad]

Well, You guys are talking about Highway driving but I donno if you drive in a busy highway? everyday I take 401 and drive 24.8 KM (One Way) to work (almost 85% Highway) from Yonge Street to Explorer Drive (Mississauga) and as you know 401 is busy like hell and sometimes it\'s worse than city driving. Saying that, I\'m almost 9.0L /100 KM with 2.0 engine. I assume it\'s OK and I do not complain.
:sarc :zzz

[SABIO]

Originally posted by akherad
I\'m almost 9.0L /100 KM with 2.0 engine. I assume it\'s OK and I do not complain.
:sarc :zzz

25 MPG... Sounds like you drive a Mustang GT.... not a Mazda3 GT.. and a 2L to boot

[billyfo]

Originally posted by SABIO



Originally posted by akherad
I\'m almost 9.0L /100 KM with 2.0 engine. I assume it\'s OK and I do not complain.
:sarc :zzz

25 MPG... Sounds like you drive a Mustang GT.... not a Mazda3 GT.. and a 2L to boot

although 9L/100km is a bit high, but as he mention driving on busy highway, still a stop and go traffic, it should consider at city driving mileage.

[vanpatrick81]

hi guys. i drive a 2.3L and get roughly 8.5-9L / 100KM. major factor is stop and go on highway traffic. i drive about 60% City / 40% Highway.

i remember i was able to get 600km out of 45L with about 25% city / 75% highway. it was a little traffic on the highway that day too coz of a concert in Barrie so could probably have gotten more out of it.

[akherad]

Originally posted by billyfo



Originally posted by SABIO



Originally posted by akherad
I\'m almost 9.0L /100 KM with 2.0 engine. I assume it\'s OK and I do not complain.
:sarc :zzz

25 MPG... Sounds like you drive a Mustang GT.... not a Mazda3 GT.. and a 2L to boot

although 9L/100km is a bit high, but as he mention driving on busy highway, still a stop and go traffic, it should consider at city driving mileage.

That\'s right, it\'s like a city driving. Although I have a question. My Trip Computer reports 8.2 L/100KM as an average (I always reset it immediately after I refule the car). However I believe the real number should be 8.9 L/ 100KM. Any idea why Trip Computer reports wrong?:hoho

[SABIO]

Originally posted by akherad

My Trip Computer reports 8.2 L/100KM as an average (I always reset it immediately after I refule the car). However I believe the real number should be 8.9 L/ 100KM. Any idea why Trip Computer reports wrong?:hoho

well, why would it be accurate? Mazda said the 3 GT would get 32 city and 41 hwy. Why would they program the trip to tell you your actual correct milage.

[Whos ur dadd]

Stop yer whining kids.

12.5 L/100 kms with my Mazda6 V6. It\'s like I\'m in SUV territory. :(

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by SABIO



Originally posted by akherad

My Trip Computer reports 8.2 L/100KM as an average (I always reset it immediately after I refule the car). However I believe the real number should be 8.9 L/ 100KM. Any idea why Trip Computer reports wrong?:hoho

well, why would it be accurate? Mazda said the 3 GT would get 32 city and 41 hwy. Why would they program the trip to tell you your actual correct milage.

Good point. It would make the car look worse.

[PiCASSO]

Originally posted by Whos ur dadd


Stop yer whining kids.

12.5 L/100 kms with my Mazda6 V6. It\'s like I\'m in SUV territory. :(

That\'s not that far off from my 10.3L/100km with my lighter car/smaller engine Mazda3. :(

[cstraw]

Originally posted by PSIVIC


Wow, those are some impressive numbers, though at the expense of \'spirited\' driving from the sounds of it.

Oh I don\'t miss out on too much spirited driving as I don\'t slow down that much for corners... which in turn helps out on fuel efficiency...:p

Chris

[Whos ur dadd]

Originally posted by PiCASSO



Originally posted by Whos ur dadd


Stop yer whining kids.

12.5 L/100 kms with my Mazda6 V6. It\'s like I\'m in SUV territory. :(

That\'s not that far off from my 10.3L/100km with my lighter car/smaller engine Mazda3. :(

Fack. 13.5 L/100 kms on the last tank.

But I digress, this is a Mazda3 thread...

[MajesticBlueNTO]

Originally posted by Whos ur dadd



Fack. 13.5 L/100 kms on the last tank.

But I digress, this is a Mazda3 thread...

welcome to the 3.0L DOHC V6 autotragic world.

12L-14L/100km is what I used to get in my maxima. both stock (227hp/168hp crank/wheels) and modded (255hp/196hp crank/wheels) with a leadfoot.

believe me...$60+ (70L tank) fillups of 91, 92, or 94 octane wasn\'t fun.

[Whos ur dadd]

Originally posted by MajesticBlueN



Originally posted by Whos ur dadd



Fack. 13.5 L/100 kms on the last tank.

But I digress, this is a Mazda3 thread...

welcome to the 3.0L DOHC V6 autotragic world.

12L-14L/100km is what I used to get in my maxima. both stock (227hp/168hp crank/wheels) and modded (255hp/196hp crank/wheels) with a leadfoot.

believe me...$60+ (70L tank) fillups of 91, 92, or 94 octane wasn\'t fun.

Thanks, MBN. I kinda feel better.

The car I bought was a 2004 model. 2 years old and only 6,000 km. Owner was a student from overseas. Given the low kms, car must\'ve sat idle for good chunks of time. I understand that gas goes bad after a month or so, so wonder if the engine\'s all gummed up inside. Gonna change the spark plugs to see if I get a little better fuel economy.

[MajesticBlueNTO]

Here\'s why real world drivers will NEVER see EPA fuel economy results - from Car and Driver by Csaba Csere (http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=27&article_id=10257)

highlights:


* The mileage shortfall is caused by EPA fuel-economy test cycles that bear no more relation to real-world driving conditions than a Sunday afternoon bicycle ride does to the Tour de France.

* And because we all drive differently, on a variety of roads, in many different climates, no single test can possibly predict the fuel economy every driver will achieve.

* The current city and highway test cycles, however, underestimate the mileage that almost everyone gets. And how could they not? The highway test crawls along at an average speed of 48.3 mph and never exceeds 60.

[wtom]

* The current city and highway test cycles, however, underestimate the mileage that almost everyone gets. And how could they not? The highway test crawls along at an average speed of 48.3 mph and never exceeds 60.



That is nonsense. They should have an OPP officer on the highway while they do that test ... between 78km/h and 96km/h? False marketing.

Not that I care anymore about mileage. :p

[SABIO]

I am not sure what exactly the Canadian Testing Standards are... but they are way off compared to the US testing.

I was walking around the HCM yard up in Alliston a cpl weeks ago and I made a point to compare the US spec. cars vs. the CDN spec cars in terms of fuel milage.
A US 2006 Civic window sticker says 30Mpg / 40MPG
A CDN 2006 Civic window sticker says 40Mpg / 50Mpg (converted)

Same goes for the Honda Truck.. The best US MPG is 19 HWY.. The CDN sticker says 21 City ??

So the CDN testing is even more inaccurate

[SIM SIMMA]

Hey guys,

There must be a lot more new 2006s on the road now. Can some people chime in and share their fuel economy numbers for their cars?

I am approaching 1500kms and I am gettng pretty crappy numbers. Just curious what other 06s are getting.

I have filled 3 tanks and all are in the 11.4l/100kms range. Mixed driving of 60% city 40% hwy. I have not been driving it hard.

Just curious if everyone else with a 06 is around the same.

thanks!

[akherad]

Originally posted by Jobes


Hey guys,

There must be a lot more new 2006s on the road now. Can some people chime in and share their fuel economy numbers for their cars?

I am approaching 1500kms and I am gettng pretty crappy numbers. Just curious what other 06s are getting.

I have filled 3 tanks and all are in the 11.4l/100kms range. Mixed driving of 60% city 40% hwy. I have not been driving it hard.

Just curious if everyone else with a 06 is around the same.

thanks!

Well, My average numbers are about 9.2L/100 KM. (from September). it\'s a 2.0 though.