Mazda6 2016 GT fuel economy

F

flyingfaders

Member
:
mazda6 GT 2016
I have a 2016 6 GT with 3000k miles on it and I love it but the gas mileage seems low to me. I drive about 50/50 highway (70MPH) and stop and go rush hour traffic. I usually dont have sport mode on, but I do drive it like I enjoy driving (like you should!).

I am only getting about 28MPG, and 26MPG if I use the sport mode often.

What are you getting?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
I just got mine. I left for Atlanta on Thursday with only 40 miles on the car. I did about 270 miles round trip on the interstate and got 32. I was very aggressive on the way there with passing slow pokes on their right and blasts up to 90 mph. On the way back I was easier but still did not simply "cruise". I'm OK with my mpg given the newness of the car and my driving style on this trip.
 
Avg just under 32 mpg. 30 miles, all highway.
Avg speed is about 70 mph
I am using Plus Grade gasoline, I noticed a huge decline in performance using regular a couple fill ups ago. My avg mpg suffred too. Not sure what caused it (summer gas blends, heat, humidity, etc). So for the rest of the summer its Plus gas for me.
 
The car is designed for 87. A higher grade will just waste money. Octane is only there to prevent detonation. A lower grade octane actually has more burning power. Only use an octane high enough to prevent detonation. The engine designers know what they are doing.
 
I consistently get 33-37 MPG every tank and I use 87 with 10% ethanol(mandatory in Iowa). I have used premium 93 octane with no ethanol with same results...And that's mostly cruising 75-80 mph highway jaunts to work everyday.
 
I'm at 900 miles and averaging 32. This mostly commute miles in HORRIBLE SF Bay area traffic.
 
50Joe said:
The car is designed for 87. A higher grade will just waste money. Octane is only there to prevent detonation. A lower grade octane actually has more burning power. Only use an octane high enough to prevent detonation. The engine designers know what they are doing.
Click to expand...

The same could be said for suspension, intakes, exhaust, ect. We are auto enthusiast. We change sh!t. Lol
Even fuel.
 
UncleShrek said:
The same could be said for suspension, intakes, exhaust, ect. We are auto enthusiast. We change sh!t. Lol
Even fuel.
Click to expand...

That's not exactly true. If you leave the engine alone, run 87. All else is a waste. OEM suspension bits are subject to the bean counters and they only make them just good enough to get by. Whether it is a car or motorcycle that is usually the best single improvement you can make. I roadraced motorcycles for 13 years (won 5 National Championships). Suspension was always first to get addressed.

A tuner friend in Atlanta wanted to put the fuel debate to rest among supersport racers. The supersport specs in WERA call for basically no engine mods. He dynoed a Suzuki SV650 back to back on pump 87 and then pump 93. It made 2 hp more on the 87. Now, if you want to spend the big bucks for oxygenated VP Racing fuel then for sure you will make more power. The same bike would get 7-9 more HP from the VP "crack" fuel as some call it. But, that stuff is $15 - $20 per gallon.

It is true that regarding pump fuel 87 has the most "energy" in it. Octane does not equal HP. Typical methods of getting more HP are more compression, cam tuning, etc. The higher compression requires the octane to prevent detonation. Ways around this with high compression engine are ignition related and a few other tricks. Mazda has figured this out with their Skyactive Technology. It is a high compression engine but everything around it was designed for 87 octane. So, believe what you will but if you buy more than 87 you are simply pissing your money away.
 
Tell me the difference between summer and winter blends.
Regarding to pump gas.
Here in Texas the highest ROM is 91. Is it ROM or RAM?
Nah, RAM is Dodge.
 
I've got 2000 miles on my 2016 now. The best I have seen thus far is 36 mpg driving conservatively from Atlanta to Greenville, SC. Usually around 34 or 35 on the highway driving about 80 mph with A/C on and passing slow pokes sitting in the left lane. I do get about 32 or 33 in mixed driving. That's still good mileage but not near the claimed 38 highway mpg thus far.
 
Claimed 38 is at 55mph in perfect weather conditions and even elevation. Any change in tested conditions decreases maximum MPG achieved.
 
UncleShrek said:
Tell me the difference between summer and winter blends.
Click to expand...

The summer gas is more highly regulated (more stringent vapor pressure requirements to reduce evaporative emissions during warm months). Different regions have different weather and therefore different dates when the more stringent regulations kick in.

Contrary to popular opinion, the lower quality winter blends sold in most regions during winter months is not due to governmental regulations, but rather the lack of regulations. It is cheaper for refiners to make the winter blend but it has lower energy density. We get the good stuff when the vapor pressure regulations kick in for the warmer months.
 
I've been using sport mode and driving just back and forth to work and I'm barely getting 22mpg. 40/60 highway and streets. Does that sound normal?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
flyingfaders said:
I've been using sport mode and driving just back and forth to work and I'm barely getting 22mpg. 40/60 highway and streets. Does that sound normal?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Yes.
I don't have the option of Sport Mode, a good thing.
Try a tank out of Sport Mode and compare.
 
My commute returns 28mpg.
Highway 66% (10 miles). City portion is pure bump-bump slow traffic with many red lights in between for 5 miles.
Sports mode kills MPG!!! You pay at the pumps.
I once hold mph steady at 60-65mph on flat surface, I was able to get 42mpg.
One stretch of no-red-light 40mph road, I got 48mpg holding it at 40mph.
Mine has the iEloop.
 
There are so many variables. It seems that the mpg results advertised are indeed attainable and can even be surpassed.

HWY results are misleading for a few reasons. Maybe we need a FWY number?

On the future autonomous vehicles, think of how much different the fuel economy can be when you take the human driver, and human driver traffic out of the equation.
 
Last edited:
Please log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

E
Mazda6 2.5L petrol a good car? Any problems?
Replies
3
Views
2K
Buzzman12
B
B
2014~2021 Finally did my Mazda6 rear brakes
Replies
0
Views
2K
Buzzman12
B
arock712
Used 2016 Mazda 6i GT: Any concerns?
Replies
9
Views
4K
ceric
ceric

Latest posts

Back