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

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

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.

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.

[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 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 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