Real fuel consumption and economy logo

Mazda 323 1998 fuel consumption

Mazda 323 from 1998 to 2001 real fuel consumption according to user reports is approximately 9% higher compared to advertised fuel consumption. Since 1998 the Mazda 323 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 323All carmakersMazda 323
1998+3%+4% +4%+12%
Show all years
1999+3%+4% +5%+12%
2000+4%+4% +5%+12%
2001+5%+5% +6%+12%

See below for the actual consumption of generations and versions of Mazda 323.

1998 - 2001

Mazda 323 1998 3 doors fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines30.3 MPG
7.8 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines29.4 MPG
8.0 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *+3%
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines36.2 MPG
6.5 l/100km

According to advertised fuel consumption, a Mazda 323 1998 with automatic transmission consumes on average 0.9 liters per 100 km or 12% more fuel than similar versions with manual gearbox. Based on user-reported real-world fuel consumption, this generation Mazda 323 with automatic transmission consumes around 0.9 litres per 100 km or 12% more fuel than a version with the same engine but a manual gearbox.

Compared to similar cars from other manufacturers, the Mazda 323 fuel economy is noticeably below average - at least two thirds of similar cars have lower fuel consumption. The best fuel economy in its class of all the modifications has one with 1.5 petrol engine and manual transmission (Mazda 323 1998 P 1.5i 88 HP).

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
1.3 liter petrol engine
Mazda 323 1998 P 1.3i 75 HP manual 31.8 MPG
7.4 l/100km
30.5 MPG
7.7 l/100km+4%
1.5 liter petrol engine
Mazda 323 1998 P 1.5i 88 HP manual 31.4 MPG
7.5 l/100km
30.5 MPG
7.7 l/100km+3%
Mazda 323 1998 P 1.5i Automatic 88 HP automatic 28.0 MPG
8.4 l/100km
27.4 MPG
8.6 l/100km+2%
2.0 liter diesel engine
Mazda 323 1998 P 2.0 D 71 HP manual 36.2 MPG
6.5 l/100km
1998 - 2001

Mazda 323 1998 fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines29.3 MPG
8.0 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines28.1 MPG
8.4 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *+4%
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines40.6 MPG
5.8 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines41.3 MPG
5.7 l/100km
Average real diesel consumption difference *+12%

According to advertised fuel consumption, a Mazda 323 1998 with automatic transmission consumes on average 0.8 liters per 100 km or 10% more fuel than similar versions with manual gearbox. Based on user-reported real-world fuel consumption, this generation Mazda 323 with automatic transmission consumes around 1.2 litres per 100 km or 15% more fuel than a version with the same engine but a manual gearbox.

Compared to similar cars from other manufacturers, the Mazda 323 fuel economy is slightly worse than average. The best fuel economy in its class of all the modifications has one with 2.0 diesel engine and manual transmission (Mazda 323 1998 2.0 DiTD 90 HP).

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
1.3 liter petrol engine
Mazda 323 1999 1.3i 75 HP manual 32.2 MPG
7.3 l/100km
30.5 MPG
7.7 l/100km+5%
1.5 liter petrol engine
Mazda 323 1998 1.5i 88 HP manual 31.4 MPG
7.5 l/100km
30.5 MPG
7.7 l/100km+3%
Mazda 323 1998 1.5i Automatic 88 HP automatic 28.7 MPG
8.2 l/100km
27.4 MPG
8.6 l/100km+5%
1.8 liter petrol engine
Mazda 323 1998 1.8i 114 HP manual 28.7 MPG
8.2 l/100km
28.7 MPG
8.2 l/100km0%
Mazda 323 1998 1.8i Automatic 114 HP automatic 26.1 MPG
9.0 l/100km
24.2 MPG
9.7 l/100km+8%
2.0 liter diesel engine
Mazda 323 1998 2.0 D 72 HP manual 36.2 MPG
6.5 l/100km
Mazda 323 1998 2.0 DiTD 90 HP manual 46.1 MPG
5.1 l/100km
41.3 MPG
5.7 l/100km+12%

* - 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.