Real fuel consumption and economy logo

Mazda 3 2013 fuel consumption

Mazda 3 from 2013 to 2016 real fuel consumption according to user reports is approximately 22% higher compared to advertised fuel consumption. For petrol engines real consumption is in average 15% higher, but for diesel engines is approximately 28% higher. Since 2013 the Mazda 3 average difference between owner-reported real-world fuel consumption and declared fuel economy has been similar to average.

Year-to-year deviations of actual owner-reported average fuel consumption from advertised values

YearGasoline carsDiesel cars
All carmakersMazda 3All carmakersMazda 3
2013+23%+22% +27%+41%
Show all years
2014+26%+22% +30%+41%
2015+27%+22% +33%+41%
2016+28%+22% +36%+41%

See below for the actual consumption of generations and versions of Mazda 3.

2013 - 2016

Mazda 3 2013 hatchback fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines39.9 MPG
5.9 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines33.8 MPG
7.0 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *+18%
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines52.9 MPG
4.5 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines37.6 MPG
6.3 l/100km
Average real diesel consumption difference *+41%

According to advertised fuel consumption, a Mazda 3 2013 with automatic transmission consumes on average 0.6 liters per 100 km or 14% more fuel than similar versions with manual gearbox. Based on user-reported real-world fuel consumption, this generation Mazda 3 with automatic transmission consumes around 0.7 litres per 100 km or 12% more fuel than a version with the same engine but a manual gearbox.

Compared to similar cars of other manufacturers, the Mazda 3 advertised fuel economy is among the best, beating more than 80% of other cars, but according to available user reports on actual consumption, real fuel economy is significantly above average.
The best real fuel economy in its class according to user reviews of all the modifications has modification with 2.0 petrol engine and manual transmission (MAZDA 3 2013 2.0 SKYACTIV-G 165 Hp 165 HP). However, of all modifications the best advertised fuel economy in its class has Mazda 3 with 2.2 petrol engine and automatic transmission (Mazda 3 2013 SkyActiv-D 2.2 Automatic 150 HP).

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
1.5 liter petrol engine
MAZDA 3 2013 1.5 SKYACTIV-G 100 HP manual 46.1 MPG
5.1 l/100km
36.8 MPG
6.4 l/100km+25%
Mazda 3 2013 SkyActiv-G 1.5 120 HP automatic 40.6 MPG
5.8 l/100km
32.2 MPG
7.3 l/100km+26%
1.6 liter petrol engine
Mazda 3 2013 SkyActiv-G 1.6 104 HP manual 39.9 MPG
5.9 l/100km
33.1 MPG
7.1 l/100km+20%
Mazda 3 2013 SkyActiv-G 1.6 Automatic 104 HP automatic 36.2 MPG
6.5 l/100km
2.0 liter petrol engine
Mazda 3 2013 SkyActiv-G 2.0 120 Hp 120 HP manual 46.1 MPG
5.1 l/100km
35.6 MPG
6.6 l/100km+29%
Mazda 3 2013 SkyActiv-G 2.0 120 Hp Automatic 120 HP automatic 42.0 MPG
5.6 l/100km
32.2 MPG
7.3 l/100km+30%
Mazda 3 2013 SkyActiv-G 2.0 150 Hp Automatic 150 HP automatic 37.9 MPG
6.2 l/100km
MAZDA 3 2013 2.0 SKYACTIV-G 155 Hp 155 HP manual 33.6 MPG
7.0 l/100km
MAZDA 3 2013 2.0 SKYACTIV-G 165 Hp 165 HP manual 40.6 MPG
5.8 l/100km
33.1 MPG
7.1 l/100km+22%
2.2 liter petrol engine
Mazda 3 2013 SkyActiv-D 2.2 150 HP manual 57.4 MPG
4.1 l/100km
Mazda 3 2013 SkyActiv-D 2.2 Automatic 150 HP automatic 49.0 MPG
4.8 l/100km
2.2 liter diesel engine
MAZDA 3 2013 2.2 SKYACTIV-D 150 HP manual 57.4 MPG
4.1 l/100km
39.9 MPG
5.9 l/100km+44%
MAZDA 3 2013 2.2 SKYACTIV-D Automatic 150 HP automatic 49.0 MPG
4.8 l/100km
35.6 MPG
6.6 l/100km+38%
2.5 liter petrol engine
MAZDA 3 2013 2.5 SKYACTIV-G 184 Hp 184 HP automatic 30.9 MPG
7.6 l/100km
30.5 MPG
7.7 l/100km+1%
MAZDA 3 2013 2.5 SKYACTIV-G 187 Hp 187 HP automatic 32.7 MPG
7.2 l/100km
30.9 MPG
7.6 l/100km+6%
2013 - 2016

Mazda 3 2013 sedan fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines41.1 MPG
5.7 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines33.8 MPG
7.0 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *+25%
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines55.7 MPG
4.2 l/100km

According to advertised fuel consumption, a Mazda 3 2013 with automatic transmission consumes on average 0.6 liters per 100 km or 15% more fuel than similar versions with manual gearbox. Based on user-reported real-world fuel consumption, this generation Mazda 3 with automatic transmission consumes around 0.7 litres per 100 km or 11% more fuel than a version with the same engine but a manual gearbox.

Compared to similar cars from other manufacturers, the Mazda 3 fuel economy is significantly above average. Of all modifications the best advertised fuel economy in its class has Mazda 3 with 2.2 diesel engine and manual transmission (Mazda 3 2014 2.2 SkyActiv-D 150 HP).

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
1.5 liter petrol engine
Mazda 3 2013 Sedan SkyActiv 1.5 120 HP manual 44.4 MPG
5.3 l/100km
35.6 MPG
6.6 l/100km+25%
Mazda 3 2013 Sedan SkyActiv 1.5 Automatic 120 HP automatic 40.6 MPG
5.8 l/100km
32.2 MPG
7.3 l/100km+26%
1.5 liter diesel engine
Mazda 3 2016 1.5 Skyactiv-D 105 HP manual 61.9 MPG
3.8 l/100km
Mazda 3 2016 1.5 Skyactiv-D Automatic 105 HP automatic 53.5 MPG
4.4 l/100km
2.0 liter petrol engine
Mazda 3 2014 2.0 SkyActiv-G 120 HP manual 46.1 MPG
5.1 l/100km
Mazda 3 2014 2.0 SkyActiv-G Automatic 120 HP automatic 42.0 MPG
5.6 l/100km
Mazda 3 2013 Sedan SkyActiv 2.0 165 HP automatic 37.9 MPG
6.2 l/100km
2.2 liter petrol engine
Mazda 3 2013 1.6 Sedan SkyActiv-D 2.2 104 HP automatic 37.3 MPG
6.3 l/100km
2.2 liter diesel engine
Mazda 3 2014 2.2 SkyActiv-D 150 HP manual 60.3 MPG
3.9 l/100km
Mazda 3 2014 2.2 SkyActiv-D Automatic 150 HP automatic 49.0 MPG
4.8 l/100km

* - Difference between advertised and user reported fuel economy has been calculated taking into account only those car versions for which information is available both on the fuel consumption specified by the manufacturer and reported by users.

User-reported fuel consumption may not accurately represent all users' experiences due to variables such as driving conditions, driving style, technical condition of the vehicle, and other circumstances. Thus, it should not be relied upon as a representative indicator.