Hey folks,

I'm looking to replace my 2004 3 hatch which has unfortunately developed the ticking of death. I am holding off on the 2016s in order to get the 2017 GT which comes with the 2.5L in the 6, the CX-5, etc...

I am a little worried by the new EPA estimates on the MPG of the Skyactivs, which if you haven't noticed, have taken an absolute dick punch down to 25/33. Can anyone who has the 2.5L in the 6 or Cx-5 or, especially, the 2016 3s models, let me know what their REAL efficiency has been?

Thanks much for your time,

navajas

 

I'm not sure why you're holding out for a 2017, as I understand it, there are zero changes between the 2016 and the 2017 Mazda3 s GT models.

We have a 2016 Mazda3 s Grand Touring 5-Door with the 2.5 liter Skyactiv engine and a 6-Speed manual and we are typically getting about 35 mpg in suburban driving and a tick over 40 mpg on the highway.

 

Well, holding our for two reasons. In my test drive the 2.0L GT felt like a duck. I was really disappointed. It felt more like my wife's 2 than my old 3.

Thats said, I think you're wrong about the 2017s. 2017 is doing away with all the "i" and "s" stuff, and the new GT package is basically a loaded 3s with a better grill (I like the badge off the hood lip better), higher res HUD, leather instead of that faux crap (I'd rather have cloth, but real leather will do) and so on. If you go to a typical dealer site, click "Future" vehicles, you can see the spec list for the 2017s, and thankfully the i vs. s nonsense has been done away with.

Regardless, there are NO 3s left where I live so it's moot.

Finally, those new fuel numbers; I didn't know if Mazda got caught over stating, if no one ever really was getting those Skysctiv numbers, etc... It's very nice to hear you're getting such great mileage from that car. I found this place "Fuelly" or something. Can't vet the data of course, but it looks like the average people are getting out of that 2.5L in the 3 is around 30.5. Even that's OK.

Thanks again for your time,

navajas

EDIT: For isntance, here's a link that has the new trim levels: http://www.umazda.com/models/mazda-mazda35door

The packages aren't there, but you can scroll the features. There's also some videos on YouTube of the new HUD and so on. Even the 2.0L has taken a 4 MPG hit to the estimate. I found an article about how / why the EPA numbers went down, but whatever. I think it's more of a cover our *** move than anything else.

 

Hmmm, our 2016 has pretty much everything you listed including the HUD, high res screen and real leather seating.

 

I have the same car as shipo. You are correct about the leatherette. Did not realize th '16 SGT's were not real leather. It's comfy though.

I check my onboard fuel average pretty much every drive because I'm trying to care more about my wallet. Cruising around 80mph I get 30mpg. Around 60mph I'm getting 35-37mpg. Also checked it during heavy rain today: 60mph for 15 miles, averaged 31mpg.

Have not done my actual over the course of the 12 gal tank yet.

 

Great, these replies confirm there's really nothing much to the EPA's new lower estimates.

shipo: It's the HUD that got the resolution / color upgrade, not the screen. And I know the 3s had the leather, but again, I can't get an S and ALL 2017 GTs come with a host of stuff that used to just be on the 's'.

Additionally the 17's have the GVC thing (which I'm actually not sure I want, I like leaning into my turns! but whatever), the newer steering wheel (with button layout I like better), the grill which I feel is improved, etc... Only drawback I see is the new electronic parking brake, but again, not a big deal and it saves space while reaching for the IT ****.

Here's a video of the '17 HUD side by side:
Thanks again for taking the time to check your data for me folks!

 

Interesting. Tiny styling differences are definitely improvements. Especially the side window turn signals. And the vastly superior button layout. But holy **** if I had to deal with a speeding warning on the HUD I would rip it off. Better be removable.

 

Our Mazda3 sGrandTouring showed 36-42 mpg on its first tank, depending on whether they topped it off, etc. Then 2 miles short of 40 mpg on the 2nd tankful. The hwy EPA on it is 37. We usually get hwy EPA plus 1 or 2 overall average and often more than hwy EPA (as Comsumer Reports generally does) on the hwy.

Ralph

 

Wow, that's amazing. Hmm. We're now actually leaning toward the 9 for space reasons, but am still undecided. Might make the purchase this weekend. In case you hadn't seen it, here's the official rundown on the 2017 3:

2017 Mazda3 Sedan & Hatchback Pricing - Inside Mazda

This is going to be a hard choice... :-/

 

I'm pleased to read that they're allowing what they used to call the Technology Package with the stick shift on the Grand Touring. Would have liked to have the i-ELOOP and auto braking.

Ralph