Not sure where your data came from, but here are their mileage ratings according to the above link...I don't see a 30 in the bunch....I get average around 30 out of my 2.0L, 4-cyl, 5-speed stickmazda3
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/ City/Hwy

Buick LaCrosse 17/27 not 30
BMW 525i 18/28 not 30
BMW 530i 18/28 not 30mpg
Chevrolet Monte Carlo 19/29 not 31mpg
Chrysler Sebring 19/27 not 30mpg
Honda Accord 18/27 not 30mpg
Kia Optima 20/28 not 30-34mpg
Lexus ES350 19/27 not 30mpg (and it requires premium gas)
Pontiac Grand Prix 18/28 not 30mpg
Saturn Aura 17/26 not 30mpg
Toyota Camry19/28 not 31mpg

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the EPA change the way it estimates gas mileage this year? If I remember correctly, the new method reduces the previous estimate by 1-2 gallons based on the car (to be more in line with realistic driving conditions), so maybe that accounts for the discrepancy in that list of cars vs. their current EPA rating.

 

EPA estimates are still based on a test that is performed which SIMULATES real world driving conditions, both city and highway. It doesn't account for people running their AC, or speeding, or driving hard, and it doesn't estimate a real world AVERAGE mpg, which is what everyone actually records.

I've got a 2000 Taurus with 97,000 miles on it...It averages 23/24 with me driving normally, but if I slow down to 70 mph on the freeway, I can get upwards of 27 mpg...if I drive all local roads, it goes down into the lower 20's. My wife's Mazda6 Sportwagon averages around 22 mpg, with 18" wheels/tires, which I feel if perfectly acceptable for the size engine/car.

Ifyou want a car that gets >30 mpg on an average tank basis, you have to look at 4-cylinder equipped vehicles that have around 150 hp and weigh around 2600-2800 lbs. This goes for all manufacturers.

I added the average mpg (based on 50/50 hwy/city driving)...I don't think his numbers were based on any kind of data whatsoever.

Buick LaCrosse 17/27 average 22 not 30
BMW 525i 18/28 average 23 not 30
BMW 530i 18/28 average 23 not 30mpg
Chevrolet Monte Carlo 19/29 average 24 not 31 mpg
Chrysler Sebring 19/27 average 23 not 30 mpg
Honda Accord 18/27 average 22.5 not 30 mpg
Kia Optima 20/28 average 24 not 30-34 mpg
Lexus ES350 19/27 average 23 not 30 mpg (and it requires premium gas)
Pontiac Grand Prix 18/28 average 23 not 30mpg
Saturn Aura 17/26 average 21.5 not 30mpg
Toyota Camry19/28 average 23.5 not 31mpg

 

??????????
I am a little perplexed at your reply. I don't understand it. Your reply says look under
www.fueleconomy.gov
That is where I got my figures from.
Page 8 and Page 9 have mid-size cars.
My figures were from the 2007 edition.
All figures were lowered for the 2008 edition.
The Mazda 6s was lowered from 27 to 25 highway.
I am looking at page 8 and page 9 of the 2007 edition.
That is where I got my figures from.
Please explain where your figures are coming from.
thanks

 

I was just looking at your figures. I see you are talking about "AVERAGE" economy. When I started my thread, I said that my BEST fuel economy at 65mph was 25.4mpg. I was not talking about "AVERAGE". I still think 25.4 highway is POOR for a mid-size auto. Looking at PEAK highway mileage is what I compare vehicles against. City driving is too sporatic to bother checking. Sometimes you are in heavy traffic. Sometimes not. A steady 400 mile trip or longer is the only way to compare mileage. Look at all of Mazda's competitors highway mileage. Most are better. The Mazda6s that I have is a great car. It is amazingly quiet on the highway. It handles great. It is the best looking mid-size car by far. Its only drawback is its fuel economy. Mazda should have made its 5th gear (or 6th in newer cars) much taller. The mileage is POOR.

 

I was using the 2008 figures, clicked on each car to get the highway/city ratings. If you had purchased your 6 with the 4-cylinder w/5-speed, you would be getting 30 mpg on the freeway. The mileage figures are clearly displayed on the vehicles when you buy them (or did you purchase used?)

Sounds like maybe you didn't do the research into the vehicle prior to purchase. You obviously rate ">30 mpg" much higher in importance than "looks, handling, & interior quietness" Had you purchased a 6 with the 4-cylinder you would be completely pleased with the car, but might complain about a lack of power.....not sure where acceleration places in order of importance for you.

Bottom line is that if mileage is your most important characteristic, go with a 4-cylinder & a manual transmission. I've gotten as high as 35 mpg out of my 3, even with driving 75mph.

 

I think that with the current price of gas, we are all a bit more conscious of fuel ecconomy (ah, remember the good old days of $0.99 gas? Seems like only yesterday...). And with that in mind, I would hope that Ford/Mazda and other manufactures will put out more efficient engine designs in the future (well ther are new gov. requirements so I guess the auto makers have no choice but to be efficient). Perhaps it's time for a Mazda6 Hybrid?

 

I thought a replied before but it did not seem to work. Sorry. My reply said that sstlaure with over 1500 posts missed the point of the thread in the first place. The thread was started as a question of pros and cons of the Mazda6. I said there were many pros. The only CON was the gas mileage. For that size of a car, it is POOR. 25mpg is poor for that size of a car. 93greenstrat mentioned that $.99 per gallon seemed like yesterday. Maybe the person shopping might find gas mileage more important. Looking at www.fueleconomy.gov there are many mid-size cars getting better mileage than the Mazda6s. Get over the fact that it gets POOR mileage and be happy that it is a nice car. I still think Mazda could put in a taller final gear to get better mileage. It ruins what could have been an almost perfect car.

 

25 mpg is Average for that size car with that size powerplant.

I did not miss the point of the thread. I did disagree with your opinion that 25 mpg is Poor mileage for a mid-size car. I then presented data which supports my point. I provided the link to the data used. I also stated that if you wanted the desired mileage (around 30 mpg)out of this size of car (of any brand), opt to purchase the 4-cylinder with the 5-speed stick-shift.

 

One last reply before I quit beating a dead horse. My daughter has a Toyota Avalon with a V6. They got 30mpg on their trip to Wisconsin Dells and back. My golfing friend has a new Hyundai Sonata with a V6. He got 31mpg on his trip to North Dakota and back. My brother has a Buick LeSabre and got 31mpg coming from Columbus, Ohio. I consistently got 30+ on my 1990 and 1996 Oldsmobiles. I got 27.6 on my 2000 Chrysler LHS going to Arkansas. My 2003 Corvette got 28.6 combined on a trip to Bowling Green, Kentucky in June.TheVettes with the 6-speed do better.My 2003 Mazda6 got 25.4 on a trip to Bismarck, ND last spring. Those are real world gas mileages. Notice: the Mazda6 was the worst of the bunch.
P.S.:ANYONE can look at the 2007 figures on www.fueleconomy.gov
Notice that there are a LOT of cars in that report that get 30mpg on the highway. There is no controversy.