Printable View
I'm sort of trying something like that. Trying to keep the rpms below 2500 while driving on Highway 7. Funny thing is is that there are times when even doing 2000 rpms the L/100km value can be over 10L/100km. I've noticed this after accelerating from a stop. So this confuses me even more because do I go by rpms or by the mileage indicator?Quote:
Originally Posted by mazdaagain
Lobo
Stops and starts consume more fuel because fuel has to be injected for the acceleration. Thats why highway driving is more fuel efficient because you keep a constant speed.Quote:
Originally Posted by lobo
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by mazdaagain
Try driving around in first and second gear at 2500rpm and see how long your tank lasts as opposed to doing it in 5th.
Should see about 500-550 km per tank no?
Driving what model and doing mostly city or highway driving?Quote:
Originally Posted by AHickman
That estimate sounds about right regardless.
Thats close to mine. Best I avg so far is 32mpg.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paton
http://www.fuelly.com/driver/kimchisoup/3/log
Short trips in winter absolutely killed my fuel economy. I got 14L/100km on one tank in the worst of it (poor traction on snow too, and bumper to bumper).
How did you measure 10L/100km. Fill up to full and divide by km done since last fillup? The Trip computer is often wrong by at least 5%.Quote:
Originally Posted by lobo
I haven't done air filter change in ages. Try taking it out and seeing how clogged it it - shaking it out.
30 psi vs 34 psi has very small effect.. maybe 3%. Synthetic vs regular or viscosity also made negligible diff.
By far the biggest factors:
- winter, cold destroys mpg. My mpg skyrocketed from 21 to 29 in March.
- short trips, stop/go, time below 40kph. Should always be using cruise. 100km in city is 9-11L. highway its as low as 6.4L.. and this is 2.3L Auto
- air conditioner/heater on. You can instantly see the economy drop b 1L.
+1. From my experiments doing super slow accel might be actually worse, since you're doing <50kph longer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Impressive
And any accel will be >10L. Any hill is often also >10L at any speed.
A reasonable pace is about 10kph per 1.5 - 2sec... about 10 -12 sec to get up to 60kph.
Also noticed that 100kph vs 110kph on highway diff is small.. like 3%.
Over 120kph, fuel economy drops big though, and no surprise since pushing 3000rpm.
Strong wind (headwind) noticed especially on highway.. ie 5L one way, 10L other way.
For fuel economy, Mazda's lack of tall gear ratios suck.Quote:
Originally Posted by mazdaagain
Notice that the new Altima 2013 gets like 3000rpm at 100 MPH.
If you had some way of replacing the gearbox with a six auto that allows 1800-2000rpm at 110kph, you'd probably see at least 2L better fuel economy.
Mazda is also over-eager to inject lots of fuel on low end to give peppy start. Sure, you do 0-40kph in like 3 sec, but that quick change of moment wastes gas.
Mazda with CVT would be interesting. I was not at all suprised when the new SkyActive massively improved fuel economy, mostly through changest to gearbox.
You can do 120 in a gen two with like 2000ish rpm if you don't gas it on the on ramp too much. I try to keep my rpms under 3000 (or even under 2 if possible) daily, and I see about 500 kms to the tank depending on the ratio of city to highway driving (we'll say 50/50 on a 500 km tank) and how much A/C I use.
i just did a 400KM highway run and instead of using 87 octane, I used 89 octane and got 6L/100KM. That is by far the best mileage I have ever seen. IN the past past with 87 octane, i have gotten 8~9L/100KM doing 115KMPH. So I guess I'm going to run a few tanks with 89 octane and do my regular driving and update you folks in a few weeks.
i need to log the mileage of the 3 cuz it seems to fluctuate quite a bit. right now its not doing so well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimz
Mazda may bring diesel to Canada in 2013.
Problem is always emissions and all the related requirements.
Can not simply bring over European cars here.
Diesel has approx 10% higher energy content, but because of MUCH higher compression ratio and other things, burns more efficiently.
IMHO, all of this is moot, now that Mazda is running up to 13:1 in SKYACTIV with regular 87.
----------------
Only reason why 89 Octane would help that much is if the 87 you were using had lots of ethanol (more than 10% allowed).
Recall higher Octane = more difficult to burn. Its meant primarily for high compression turbo cars to prevent pre-detination.
Theoretically, 91 or 94 should not help much if at all. Even if it did improve fuel efficiency by 2 or even crazy 5%, it would be far less than the added cost.
Which car exactly do you have.Quote:
Originally Posted by sweetadad
Based on your numbers it seems you are pulling them out of the air....
ie, when I report a number: 7.48L/100km 80% hwy. 2.3L 08.
when YOU report: "8~9L/100KM doing 115KPH"
So basically nobody has any idea if its good or bad because we don't know which car, % hwy driving, and you gave a wide range of 26-30mpg.
My bad...this is a 2011 GX (so 2.0L engine, auto) hatchback. I've done that highway run many times and I've always gotten something like 8L/100KM (based on fuelly). This is the first time i got a 6L (fuelly calculation and not mine)Quote:
Originally Posted by kimchisoup
ahem....Quote:
Originally Posted by kimchisoup
check my fuel stats....my skyactiv gets on av about 6.5L/100 km AND with their 6 speed auto, I DO in fact do about 1900-2000 rpm on 110...so it's being done as you speak...all u gotta do is check in with a few other skyactiv owners and your suspicions will be put to rest.
I checked your fuelly page and would like to know how you have more than 55L fuel entries (some are over 60) when the standard fuel tank is only 55L (60L for GT with 2.5L).
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoomahh
what are peoples average fuel consuimption with a 4 speed automatic 2L?
http://www.fuelly.com/car/mazda/3
Click on a Year and then you can see if its GT or GS models.
Don't waste your time get a diesel. This is why I traded my mazda....
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8430/7...a312772c_b.jpg
This was my tank a couple weeks back strictly highway and still had at least 200kms till it was out. Food for thought!
:hawtQuote:
Originally Posted by DumpInfo
I want this fuel economy! Can't wait to see a skyactiv-d (maybe turbo?) in the Canadian market.
Good for the environment but we don't save money. The car is more expensive and basically we just pay the gas up front. With Toronto traffic, we don't really have "highway". A start-stop type of engine could be more meaningful.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkWB
Not bad for a 2010 GT.
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8503/8...165b1bef7c.jpg
In winter? That's crazy. Drove like a granny? LolQuote:
Originally Posted by Jackal
Actually drove it like a racecar. Average 120km/h. Who needs to get 1000 km if you go only 93km/h? Probably same mileage as mine if it was going 120. :goneQuote:
Originally Posted by loosecannon
Nice, Especially for winter. Ran it completely dry?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackal
It's great for the 2.5 L engine. Till about 3 squares left.Quote:
Originally Posted by eSS