Author Topic: Test Drive: 2012 Mazda3 Sport GS-Sky  (Read 4084 times)

Offline Mike

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Location: Oakville, ON
  • Posts: 3275
  • Carma: +89/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • Content Machine
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 1997 Subaru SVX Lsi, 2008 Suzuki SX4 Sedan
Re: Test Drive: 2012 Mazda3 Sport GS-Sky
« Reply #80 on: January 10, 2012, 10:47:12 am »

BTW: Accent's FE seems to be quite a bit off what Hyundai is advertising.

my current tank of fuel in my ET is at 7.5L/100km in 100% city driving and our current cold weather...i believe the car is rated at 9.3 city (or somewhere in that area)...i don't baby it, but certainly beat the snot out of it either...my ET doesn't have DI or anything special in it.

Good for you! You may be able to score some record breaking numbers with some of the "gas guzzlers" above. Based on the numbers posted by Mike, the Veloster is a good candidate.
LOL …. I could get 9.7 L/100km relatively easy from my Mazda3 with its old 2.3L I4.


yeah, my commute and driving style do not generate great numbers, but when comparing car to car you can see what gets good mileage and what does not.  The Hyundai 1.6L seems to get thirsty when the driving it hard.
= Today's Ride

Offline dirtyjeffer

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Location: London, ON
  • Posts: 1921
  • Carma: +19/-177
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2011 Hyundai Elantra Touring GLS, 2012 Kia Rio5 SX
Re: Test Drive: 2012 Mazda3 Sport GS-Sky
« Reply #81 on: January 10, 2012, 11:03:07 am »

BTW: Accent's FE seems to be quite a bit off what Hyundai is advertising.

my current tank of fuel in my ET is at 7.5L/100km in 100% city driving and our current cold weather...i believe the car is rated at 9.3 city (or somewhere in that area)...i don't baby it, but certainly beat the snot out of it either...my ET doesn't have DI or anything special in it.

Good for you! You may be able to score some record breaking numbers with some of the "gas guzzlers" above. Based on the numbers posted by Mike, the Veloster is a good candidate.
LOL …. I could get 9.7 L/100km relatively easy from my Mazda3 with its old 2.3L I4.


yeah, my commute and driving style do not generate great numbers, but when comparing car to car you can see what gets good mileage and what does not.  The Hyundai 1.6L seems to get thirsty when the driving it hard.
well, the point of my post wasn't to brag at my fuel economy (i don't really try to get great fuel economy, i just get it...my point was more about the fact that i get much better than the posted rates, and i would have thought the newer engine with more power, smaller displacement and DI would certainly be better...i suppose, i would have to drive one myself (so the driving patterns were the same) in order to compare them properly...FWIW, i averaged 10.0L/100kms in our 2007 Focus, which, oddly enough, had the same size engine and similar style (no DI, etc).

Offline Mike

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Location: Oakville, ON
  • Posts: 3275
  • Carma: +89/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • Content Machine
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 1997 Subaru SVX Lsi, 2008 Suzuki SX4 Sedan
Re: Test Drive: 2012 Mazda3 Sport GS-Sky
« Reply #82 on: January 10, 2012, 11:09:36 am »

BTW: Accent's FE seems to be quite a bit off what Hyundai is advertising.

my current tank of fuel in my ET is at 7.5L/100km in 100% city driving and our current cold weather...i believe the car is rated at 9.3 city (or somewhere in that area)...i don't baby it, but certainly beat the snot out of it either...my ET doesn't have DI or anything special in it.

Good for you! You may be able to score some record breaking numbers with some of the "gas guzzlers" above. Based on the numbers posted by Mike, the Veloster is a good candidate.
LOL …. I could get 9.7 L/100km relatively easy from my Mazda3 with its old 2.3L I4.


yeah, my commute and driving style do not generate great numbers, but when comparing car to car you can see what gets good mileage and what does not.  The Hyundai 1.6L seems to get thirsty when the driving it hard.
well, the point of my post wasn't to brag at my fuel economy (i don't really try to get great fuel economy, i just get it...my point was more about the fact that i get much better than the posted rates, and i would have thought the newer engine with more power, smaller displacement and DI would certainly be better...i suppose, i would have to drive one myself (so the driving patterns were the same) in order to compare them properly...FWIW, i averaged 10.0L/100kms in our 2007 Focus, which, oddly enough, had the same size engine and similar style (no DI, etc).

yeah, I have never driven a touring so I can't compare either...and the last Taurus I drive was a 1996 which was on its last legs and was getting horrid-my-engine-is-ready-to-die gas mileage

Offline gosteelerz

  • Auto Obsessed
  • ***
  • Location: Brampton, On
  • Posts: 644
  • Carma: +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • member
    • View Profile
Re: Test Drive: 2012 Mazda3 Sport GS-Sky
« Reply #83 on: January 10, 2012, 09:16:10 pm »
What is everybody's obsession with fuel economy?  My car gets 1 L/100 more than yours!  Congrats on you $280 annual savings.  I could coax 8.6 per hundred out of my 3 but end up around 10 per hundred.  I love the sound of motor being whipped a bit, along with the associated thrust.  Hand me the keys to your Civic, Elantra etc.. and they too will drink fuel at 9.5 or worse.

As for the Mazda rust issues all I gotta say is get it Krowned and keep it out of a heated garage.  My 2006 has been Krowned every year since 2009 and has escaped (so far) the dreaded problems.  I don't even wash it frequently.

Also, if you look at the 2010+ generation you will notice added protection in the inner fender lips.  My guess is that Mazda got tired of covering warranties and addressed the problem.

Offline vdk

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Location: Toronto, ON
  • Posts: 4882
  • Carma: +17/-12
  • Gender: Male
  • I try and stay limber, swim, run, ride motorcycles
    • View Profile
Re: Test Drive: 2012 Mazda3 Sport GS-Sky
« Reply #84 on: January 11, 2012, 02:49:32 am »
What is everybody's obsession with fuel economy?  My car gets 1 L/100 more than yours!  Congrats on you $280 annual savings.  I could coax 8.6 per hundred out of my 3 but end up around 10 per hundred.  I love the sound of motor being whipped a bit, along with the associated thrust.  Hand me the keys to your Civic, Elantra etc.. and they too will drink fuel at 9.5 or worse.


Agreed. I've always gotten 9-10L/100km in cars I've driven for more than a day (Rabbit, GTI, City Golf, 335i, Cobalt SS, Mazda 3, Forester, Fiesta). The only exception was a Fusion V6 AWD that would drink 13-14L/100km.

Offline Canadiain

  • Learner's Permit
  • *
  • Location: Quinte, On
  • Posts: 46
  • Carma: +3/-2
    • View Profile
Re: Test Drive: 2012 Mazda3 Sport GS-Sky
« Reply #85 on: January 11, 2012, 09:09:57 am »
What is everybody's obsession with fuel economy?  My car gets 1 L/100 more than yours!  Congrats on you $280 annual savings.  I could coax 8.6 per hundred out of my 3 but end up around 10 per hundred.  I love the sound of motor being whipped a bit, along with the associated thrust.  Hand me the keys to your Civic, Elantra etc.. and they too will drink fuel at 9.5 or worse.


People buying $20k cars tend to be cost concious, thats why we are looking at Civics and 3s and not Merc Cs and BMW 3s I suspect, so all those fill ups add up, as does the cost of annual rust treatments if you want to do that. I look for the best combination of total cost of ownership and driving experience that I can fit 2 adults and 2 kids into.

But there is also this thing called "The Environment", you might have heard of it ;)  Better fuel economy means less impact upon our natural resources, thats also a factor for some buyers.  Sadly not many of them are North Americans so the future will likely be grim anyway:(

Offline gosteelerz

  • Auto Obsessed
  • ***
  • Location: Brampton, On
  • Posts: 644
  • Carma: +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • member
    • View Profile
Re: Test Drive: 2012 Mazda3 Sport GS-Sky
« Reply #86 on: January 12, 2012, 08:27:24 pm »
What is everybody's obsession with fuel economy?  My car gets 1 L/100 more than yours!  Congrats on you $280 annual savings.  I could coax 8.6 per hundred out of my 3 but end up around 10 per hundred.  I love the sound of motor being whipped a bit, along with the associated thrust.  Hand me the keys to your Civic, Elantra etc.. and they too will drink fuel at 9.5 or worse.


Agreed. I've always gotten 9-10L/100km in cars I've driven for more than a day (Rabbit, GTI, City Golf, 335i, Cobalt SS, Mazda 3, Forester, Fiesta). The only exception was a Fusion V6 AWD that would drink 13-14L/100km.

The Fusion is about as Thirsty as my Dad's F150.  I got 20 MPG (US) in a rental V6 Fusion but no AWD.  The Forester does alright with AWD.

Offline gosteelerz

  • Auto Obsessed
  • ***
  • Location: Brampton, On
  • Posts: 644
  • Carma: +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • member
    • View Profile
Re: Test Drive: 2012 Mazda3 Sport GS-Sky
« Reply #87 on: January 12, 2012, 09:12:46 pm »
What is everybody's obsession with fuel economy?  My car gets 1 L/100 more than yours!  Congrats on you $280 annual savings.  I could coax 8.6 per hundred out of my 3 but end up around 10 per hundred.  I love the sound of motor being whipped a bit, along with the associated thrust.  Hand me the keys to your Civic, Elantra etc.. and they too will drink fuel at 9.5 or worse.


People buying $20k cars tend to be cost concious, thats why we are looking at Civics and 3s and not Merc Cs and BMW 3s I suspect, so all those fill ups add up, as does the cost of annual rust treatments if you want to do that. I look for the best combination of total cost of ownership and driving experience that I can fit 2 adults and 2 kids into.

But there is also this thing called "The Environment", you might have heard of it ;)  Better fuel economy means less impact upon our natural resources, thats also a factor for some buyers.  Sadly not many of them are North Americans so the future will likely be grim anyway:(

While I understand that people are cost conscious, there appears to be too much weight placed on fuel economy.  People are arguing over a litre per hundred which amounts to $280 a year.  If that amount is overly significant, then a used vehicle would make much more sense.  When buying new, your biggest expense is depreciation, which barely gets mentioned.

Oh yes, the environment.  While I do have a heavy foot I am sure my footprint is smaller than most.  My commute is only 5 Kms, live in modest, energy efficient house and it's been 4 years since boarding a plane for vacation.  Hell, I may even ride my bike to work in the summer.