Anyone getting great MPG with the 2012 Skyactiv 3?

[rgs]

Wondering how people are doing with the Skyactiv milage. The best I've done on 3 fillups is 6.6l/100 (avg 6.7/100) almost all highway driving. When I look at the Fuelly stats only one or two persons are bettering that - one at 6.4 and another at 6.1. Nothing close to the EPA figures. 6.6 is 43 mpg but I was hoping to break 50. Maybe I just have to wait until it's further broken in but on Fuelly even those with nine or ten fill ups aren't getting very good milage. I know EPA figures aren't "real world" but they're usually a bit closer than this.
Richard

[Astig02]

As many members will say, let the car break in, it eventually get better.

[shutterbug]

Which gallon are you using? Canadian advertising is using the imperial gallon. If you're doing your calculations based on US gallon then 43 MPG is already better than EPA which is 40 MPG.
Then there's also the ethanol blended gas and "winter formula" gas.

[beyond]

I've been averaging around 7.5L/100 KM for now -__-
Would you consider that "good"?

[awagawa]

I've been averaging around 7.5L/100 KM for now -__-
Would you consider that "good"?

I'm currently at 10L/100 Km with mostly city driving and short trips, so I'd consider that good. I just got my first oil change two days ago, so hopefully that improves things a bit.

[rgs]

Should have made clear that I'm in Canada and am quoting Imperial mpg.

Beyond, I don't consider the 6.6 l/100 I'm gotten over the first 3 fill ups very good. At least some of the Mazda3 reviewers claim they got 5.6l/100 or better (41 mpg/US). I would consider that good.

[Aitch]

Best I've posted was 8.0L/100km, so I haven't even cracked the 7s yet. 4800km on it as well already. Of course this is mainly city and short trips, only 20-25% highway driving. I'd be ecstatic with anything in the 6s, especially low 6s.

[Booter22]

Should have made clear that I'm in Canada and am quoting Imperial mpg.

Beyond, I don't consider the 6.6 l/100 I'm gotten over the first 3 fill ups very good. At least some of the Mazda3 reviewers claim they got 5.6l/100 or better (41 mpg/US). I would consider that good.

6.6L / 100 km seems pretty good ( mind you these are all new cars and need to wear in) i didnt notice super decent fuel econ in my 2010 unitl about 24,000km but on fuelly the lowest 2012 is at 6.2L/ 100KM

[beyond]

I'm currently at 10L/100 Km with mostly city driving and short trips, so I'd consider that good. I just got my first oil change two days ago, so hopefully that improves things a bit.

Ouch 10 L / 100 KM? That's nowhere close to what they advertise...hopefully after the oil change mileage will get better for you....

Should have made clear that I'm in Canada and am quoting Imperial mpg.

Beyond, I don't consider the 6.6 l/100 I'm gotten over the first 3 fill ups very good. At least some of the Mazda3 reviewers claim they got 5.6l/100 or better (41 mpg/US). I would consider that good.

That's awesome...I'd be very satisfied in the mid 6's. Do you do mostly highway driving? City driving? Stick or auto? Maybe you can provide some more details...

I drive stick and I generally try to shift before 3000 rpm...most of the time I shift around 2000-2500...I also drive mostly city as well. So I keep telling myself, mid 7's for almost 80% city driving is pretty good mileage already

Best I've posted was 8.0L/100km, so I haven't even cracked the 7s yet. 4800km on it as well already. Of course this is mainly city and short trips, only 20-25% highway driving. I'd be ecstatic with anything in the 6s, especially low 6s.

Same, I'd be ecstatic with anything in the 6's...I thought the auto's were supposed to be better than the manuals on gas nowadays?

Oh yeah, I have roughly 3000 km's on my car. Only had it for about a month or less...

[rgs]

I should have mentioned I'm doing mostly highway driving, a couple of miles on a back road, a few blocks in town and the rest on the TransCanada. I'm also driving the automatic. Don't get me wrong. I love my Mazda3. Beautiful car - one of the best looking on the road - a great driving car, fast, wonderful handling, lots of power for passing, butter smooth shifting, spacious comfortable interior, dash looks like an airplane cockpit, lots of small touches that show the designers were really thinking hard about what a driver needs. But Mazda does advertise 58 mpg (4.9/100) highway, 40 mpg (7.1/100) city. Now no one should expect to hit those figures as they come from a very specialized test, but I would think we should be able to get a bit closer than we are. Much depends on terrain and driving style, of course. More zoom-zoom means less mpg but so far I've been driving to get the mpg. My previous car was a Honda Fit. Honda advertised 50 mpg and I usually got 45 to 47 mpg without much trouble. I'd like to get as close to the ads with the Mazda3. It is early days and I'm sure it'll get better but it would be encouraging to hear about other owners approaching the advertised figures.

[beyond]

I should have mentioned I'm doing mostly highway driving, a couple of miles on a back road, a few blocks in town and the rest on the TransCanada. I'm also driving the automatic. Don't get me wrong. I love my Mazda3. Beautiful car - one of the best looking on the road - a great driving car, fast, wonderful handling, lots of power for passing, butter smooth shifting, spacious comfortable interior, dash looks like an airplane cockpit, lots of small touches that show the designers were really thinking hard about what a driver needs. But Mazda does advertise 58 mpg (4.9/100) highway, 40 mpg (7.1/100) city. Now no one should expect to hit those figures as they come from a very specialized test, but I would think we should be able to get a bit closer than we are. Much depends on terrain and driving style, of course. More zoom-zoom means less mpg but so far I've been driving to get the mpg. My previous car was a Honda Fit. Honda advertised 50 mpg and I usually got 45 to 47 mpg without much trouble. I'd like to get as close to the ads with the Mazda3. It is early days and I'm sure it'll get better but it would be encouraging to hear about other owners approaching the advertised figures.

I haven't done all highway before, but from what I've read on other forums, you'd probably have to hover around the 100 km/hr speed to achieve MPG like what they've advertised

[rgs]

I see that in the US Mazda advertises the US EPA figures of 40 mpg/28 mpg which is 5.88l/100 highway 8.4 l/100 city or 48mpg Imperial highway and 33 mpg Imperial city. I suspect these are more realistic figures than the Transport Canada figures in use here and puts our results a lot closer.

[Impressive]

EPA rates the 2.0 SkyActiv-G at 28 city/39 highway, which = 33mpg. I assume using higher octane gas could potentially add a few KMs to your tank but those of you averaging around 33mpg who are complaining should have really bought a diesel instead or something.

[beyond]

Would using premium gas improve mpg's???

[doughboyr6]

Would using premium gas improve mpg's???

i doubt the gain (if any) would offset the additional cost

[htc***]

How many KM you have travel per tank for

City only ?
HWY only ?
Combine ?

Have anyone reach more than 700KM per tank in city driving and more than 1K KM in HWY driving ?

[Impressive]

i doubt the gain (if any) would offset the additional cost

Agreed.

[rgs]

I've done 730 mostly highway and there was at least another 130 in the tank according to the number of litres left in the tank when I filled up. That's pretty good. Doubt that over 1K is possible. Nice not to have to fill up so often. My old Honda Fit got good mileage but its tiny 40 litre tank meant stopping every couple of days at the gas station.

[beyond]

I've done 730 mostly highway and there was at least another 130 in the tank according to the number of litres left in the tank when I filled up. That's pretty good. Doubt that over 1K is possible. Nice not to have to fill up so often. My old Honda Fit got good mileage but its tiny 40 litre tank meant stopping every couple of days at the gas station.

730 is pretty damn good.

[Flagrum_3]

I should have mentioned I'm doing mostly highway driving, a couple of miles on a back road, a few blocks in town and the rest on the TransCanada. I'm also driving the automatic. Don't get me wrong. I love my Mazda3. Beautiful car - one of the best looking on the road - a great driving car, fast, wonderful handling, lots of power for passing, butter smooth shifting, spacious comfortable interior, dash looks like an airplane cockpit, lots of small touches that show the designers were really thinking hard about what a driver needs. But Mazda does advertise 58 mpg (4.9/100) highway, 40 mpg (7.1/100) city. Now no one should expect to hit those figures as they come from a very specialized test, but I would think we should be able to get a bit closer than we are. Much depends on terrain and driving style, of course. More zoom-zoom means less mpg but so far I've been driving to get the mpg. My previous car was a Honda Fit. Honda advertised 50 mpg and I usually got 45 to 47 mpg without much trouble. I'd like to get as close to the ads with the Mazda3. It is early days and I'm sure it'll get better but it would be encouraging to hear about other owners approaching the advertised figures.

Do you drive over 90kph on the highway? cause if you do you'll never get near the EPA rating. The EPA ratings from what I understand do not take wind resistance into account very much either. So there is alot of variables and it is not unusual to get 15-20% less then stated. I take most EPA ratings with a grain of salt. Hey but 6.6l/100km is not something to sneeze at.

_3

[LezOLee]

This conversation makes me cry. These mileage numbers that I could only achieve in a dream...

[hamza7]

Which gallon are you using? Canadian advertising is using the imperial gallon. If you're doing your calculations based on US gallon then 43 MPG is already better than EPA which is 40 MPG.
Then there's also the ethanol blended gas and "winter formula" gas.

Cool!, I didn't know that we used the British gallon. My friends and me always get into arguments about MPG of cars but now I know why.

[beyond]

I recently installed 17" wheels on my car and it seems like my mileage is getting worse!!! Anyone else install bigger wheels on their car?? What's the mileage you guys are getting?

[Booter22]

I recently installed 17" wheels on my car and it seems like my mileage is getting worse!!! Anyone else install bigger wheels on their car?? What's the mileage you guys are getting?

did you go with the oem size tire or a different size? dont forget a 17" rim ( depending on the rim ) can weigh more then the 16" which means it will take more power to rotate them.

[Impressive]

did you go with the oem size tire or a different size? dont forget a 17" rim ( depending on the rim ) can weigh more then the 16" which means it will take more power to rotate them.

^this and they also take longer to complete a full rotation than 16s, which doesn't help your fuel economy either.