Mazda6 - fuel economy

gyppo

Hi All,

Anyone got actual mpg figures for a 09 mazda6 1.8 petrol?
Owners opinions on these welcomed.

Thanks

gyppo

Anyone?......

Victor Meldrew

bit specific and vague that question,

My 2006 1.8 does 9l/100km, BUT, that is based solely on cold engine running in south dublin gridlock. I can get 6L on long runs.

you don't buy a Mazda for fuel economy. you buy it because it's not a mondeo or a passatt or a vectra..

Nonoperational

There were about 3 threads in the past month discussing the fuel economy of the 1.8 Mazda 6. About 30-35mpg as far as I remember. Not great but a very good car that gives few problems and is a fine car to drive.

Absurdum

Wife has one, averaging around 36mpg, but the vast majority of that is short city journeys.

Great car btw.

analfabets

I was getting 8.2L/100km (34.45Miles per Imperial gallon, 28.68 Miles per US gallon) Driving Newcastle-Blanch-Newcastle.

Ardennes1944

gpf101 wrote: »

There were about 3 threads in the past month discussing the fuel economy of the 1.8 Mazda 6. About 30-35mpg as far as I remember. Not great but a very good car that gives few problems and is a fine car to drive.

they were probably all mine

gyppo

Victor Meldrew wrote: »

bit specific and vague that question,

My 2006 1.8 does 9l/100km, BUT, that is based solely on cold engine running in south dublin gridlock. I can get 6L on long runs.

you don't buy a Mazda for fuel economy. you buy it because it's not a mondeo or a passatt or a vectra..

Yes, I suppose it was!

Actually moving from an 05 mondeo tdci to this, hence the economy question. No longer doing big mileage, and some bills are looming with the ford.

Not mad on the newer model mondeo, and the others you mentioned don't float my boat either. I took a test drive in the Mazda last week and was impressed, and web reviews are good for the petrol model.
However, some fuel claims stated on the web looked overly impressive, hence the question.

unkel

Deutschlandfürimmer7 wrote: »

they were probably all mine

And did you decide against buying a Mazda 6 petrol because the fuel consumption was so bad?

BTW if you do 5k miles per year, the difference between 20MPG (huge gas guzzler) and 40MPG (frugal supermini) is about €15 per week

Plenty of fools have "traded down" their car for a smaller and / or more frugal one spending thousands in doing so and the savings in fuel are tiny...

johnos1984

What tax band do these fall into?

I noticed a 2l auto one on carzone............I'd shudder to think how expensive it is to tax.

As much as I love the frugal nature of my Passat I miss the enjoyment of the petrol engine. I'm interested to see when change time comes if I will be tempted back into one.

The cheaper purchase price is certainly attractive

Absurdum

the 1.8 petrol is €447 per year in motor tax

gyppo

johnos1984 wrote: »

What tax band do these fall into?

I noticed a 2l auto one on carzone............I'd shudder to think how expensive it is to tax.

As much as I love the frugal nature of my Passat I miss the enjoyment of the petrol engine. I'm interested to see when change time comes if I will be tempted back into one.

The cheaper purchase price is certainly attractive

1.8 is 162g/km, 447e tax

I don't know about the 2l one.



Slighty torn myself. Love my old car, very economical, but I'm not doing enough miles not to justify replacing it with another diesel

xflyer

The Aircon will bite into the fuel economy. Only use when you have to. The worst thing about the Mazda is the battery which runs down far too easily even with a single interior light left on. Never had to jump start a car as much as the Mazda 6.

johnos1984

gyppo wrote: »

Slighty torn myself. Love my old car, very economical, but I'm not doing enough miles not to justify replacing it with another diesel

Many people will be sorry in the near future they were lured in by the economy of the diesel cars

I cover miles out of my own pocket so a diesel is necessary but if I could have a choice I'd prefer petrol. Nicer to drive and cheaper to service

Absurdum

xflyer wrote: »

The worst thing about the Mazda is the battery which runs down far too easily even with a single interior light left on. Never had to jump start a car as much as the Mazda 6.

that happened the wife's car :pac:

gyppo

johnos1984 wrote: »

Many people will be sorry in the near future they were lured in by the economy of the diesel cars

I cover miles out of my own pocket so a diesel is necessary but if I could have a choice I'd prefer petrol. Nicer to drive and cheaper to service

Very true. Modern diesels have become too clever for their own good, and the potential for big bills is huge once out of warranty.

Ardennes1944

unkel wrote: »

And did you decide against buying a Mazda 6 petrol because the fuel consumption was so bad?

BTW if you do 5k miles per year, the difference between 20MPG (huge gas guzzler) and 40MPG (frugal supermini) is about €15 per week

Plenty of fools have "traded down" their car for a smaller and / or more frugal one spending thousands in doing so and the savings in fuel are tiny...

Yes I did indeed. Couldn't justify it really.
And I fully agree with what you said. My parents have a 07 1.6 Mazda 3 touring. Lovely looking car in the best colour, blue something, but they usually trade in every 2-3years for a new car. They asked the garage how much they'd give for it against a 11 Mazda 3 and they said 7500. I personally think they are crazy and have finally persuaded them a diesel is ridiculous for them to consider. Not one solidarity thing has gone wrong with the 3 and....basically I'm going on a rant here.
Diesels carry a big premium over petrols now. For average driver a petrol will suffice and return a decent enough mpg. Diesels are not good at short journeys as you know yourself

Bobo78

Fuel consumption on Mazda 6 can get up to 11 liter per 100 km in city driving (through traffic), while on open road you should be getting around 7 to 8 liters with speed averaging from 110 to 130 kmh.

They are not that bad on fuel.
If you don't rev it high all the time you should easily see that fuel consumption.
For example i did consumption test in January by filling it up to brim and driving for 200 km and than filled it up again.
Was driving it quite gently and 80 percent city driving and I averaged around 9l per 100 km.

There is a good website where you can check fuel consumption for every car.

www.autoevolution.com

bazz26

Mid 30s mpg is quite good from a 1.8 litre large family saloon or hatchback. OP, to be honest if you are going from a diesel car to a petrol then you are not going to get a petrol car that will be as frugal as your old diesel.

gyppo

bazz26 wrote: »

Mid 30s mpg is quite good from a 1.8 litre large family saloon or hatchback. OP, to be honest if you are going from a diesel car to a petrol then you are not going to get a petrol car that will be as frugal as your old diesel.

Hi Bazz, I'd be happy with mid 30's mpg - it's pretty good for this class of car.
I realise I'm not going to get anything near as frugal as what I already have. However, I just want to ensure I don't get into bed with a raging alcoholic of a thing for the next 3/4 years.
I actually owned a 626 1.8 some years back which regularly returned 38-40 mpg which was excellent. However, the current models are a lot heavier, so mid 30s is good, as you say.

Rodin

I can get from Cork to Belfast and back on a tank of diesel

shawnee

unkel wrote: »

And did you decide against buying a Mazda 6 petrol because the fuel consumption was so bad?

BTW if you do 5k miles per year, the difference between 20MPG (huge gas guzzler) and 40MPG (frugal supermini) is about €15 per week

Plenty of fools have "traded down" their car for a smaller and / or more frugal one spending thousands in doing so and the savings in fuel are tiny...

On 5k miles per year that is almost 800 per year on fuel alone , not allowing for extra tax and insurance. On 10 k per year (average) that is 1600 which is quite a lot excluding extra road tax.:p