23.5 mpg on 2.0 NC, help!

  1. My model of MX-5 is: 2010 2.0 sport tech
  2. I’m based near: London
  3. I’m looking for technical help or recommendations on: mpg

So I got the feeling that my fuel gauge was going down faster than I expected, so I calculated the mpg after my last top up and turns I only did 23.5mpg on my last 150miles, mostly A roads and city driving (AC on), which I get are not the best mpg conditions but still, I would have expected maybe 30 or just under based on the specs and what others seem to be getting.

Does it seem within the acceptable range for this engine?

If not, what could be the cause? I only got the car a month ago and it is pretty low miles, only 25k and serviced with Mazda every year following the maintenance schedule.

I thought maybe it could be the brakes binding but it doesn’t feel like they are, the rear wheels are not hot after driving and the front ones are just warm to the touch. That said, I’ve never experienced binding brakes before so I might be wrong.

There’s a few reasons for low or reduced mpg, I’d check the air filter element isn’t filthy, the spark plugs are in good condition, put some fuel system/injector cleaner into a fresh tank of fuel and check the tyre pressures are correct.

3 Likes

Hi
Take a look at your temp gauge, is it about 1/4 up, if so you need a new thermostat.
Not a difficult job and can be cheap if you DIY and buy a Ford part not Mazda.
Dont forget this is NOT an economical car, mine will only really do 33mpg and I think it is a pretty sorted car.
As previously mentioned a set of genuine plugs could help.

I don’t think it’s the car, more the conditions you are driving. City driving (London based) isn’t going to return decent economy.
My daily driver is supposed to return easily 50 mpg, 3 pot 1ltr Skoda, according to others and experts (some not) but it only achieves around 41-43 it tells me. That’s around what the ND1 gets local driving.

Look at the insides of the exhaust pipes. They should be clean and dry. If they are, don’t worry about it.

I posted some pics of clean exhausts here

If black and dry sooty when “properly warmed up” it’s running too rich.

If black and sticky it’s burning oil and may also be too rich.

When buying second hand cars the exhaust inspection was always top of my list of things to look at, and any poor health there was the first red flag for a walk-away. SWMBO likened it to how dogs always greet each other and enquire after each others diet and health.

2 Likes

Richard, I really think yours is the exception here. You’ve mentioned it before and for quite a while I’ve been doing impromptu inspections of Mk3 exhausts when I’ve seen one parked up and just about every one has some degree of carbon blackening around the exits. I wish I knew what is different about yours.

BTW The thread Richard linked has excellent advice

1 Like

City driving in London and you don’t give a percentage of time spent there. 24 mpg could be quite reasonable. It’s a two litre at least ten year old tech engine….

I didn’t bother to mention again V-Power being our fuel of choice for ages for better economy balancing the extra cost, with a smoother throttle response across a wider rev range and a cleaner engine as bonuses.

But then we all knew that. :grinning:

2 Likes

I have a 2010 2.0 Litre Powershift (6 - speed auto) and on a run I regularly acheive mid to late 30’s normal driving or low 40’s mpg on a run.

I agree with Richard FX in his comments, although I am not using V-Power but ordinary unleaded. I may well try V-Power to see if I can detect any performance improvements :wink:

I have done back to back long tests in diesel and petrol cars and there is no discernible difference in fuel economy with ‘posh’ fuel.
:heart:

1 Like

I think mine seems ok? Here is where it usually sits:

1 Like

Thanks for sharing that link, unfortunately I washed the car a few days ago so the tips were cleaned, but I took a pic of the inside of the exhaust pipes and they seem clean, what do you think?:

1 Like

Yeah that’s fair, I’d say 40% of the time was spent getting in and out of London.

2 Likes

No obvious problems showing inside the exhaust, it looks normal, so engine is probably OK.
:+1:

It’s not a car you buy for it’s fuel economy.
Fossil fuel engines are uneconomical due to them being strangled by emission regs, that’s why they’re being phased out. You can’t meet both criteria.

That’s one of the reasons i’ve always enjoyed properly modifying engines for track and/or occasional road use, once emissions are out of the equation you get to build something which is powerful, economical and a pure joy to drive.

2 Likes

That’s a fair point, I didn’t buy this car for the fuel economy, but I also didn’t expect it to be this low and want to know if there is something wrong with it while I still have a warranty from the dealer.

Although I disagree about fossil fuel engines being inherently uneconomical. My old Civic 1.8 could easily do 36-40mpg on average in the same circumstances and it is not a particularly fuel efficient engine either.

Thanks for the feedback though!

You’ve missed the point. You don’t know what that Honda would have done if it didn’t have to meet emission regs and it’s like comparing apples to oranges with an MX5.
If we didn’t have them then the amount of MPG you would get out of petrol/diesel vehicles would be staggering.
I’m glad we do have them, the World is a much cleaner place now, i’m just lamenting the ‘what ifs’.
It’s unlikely you know all the things put into an engine to make it meet regs, such things like running the engine deliberately rich to get the cat up to temp. There is a whole raft of things done other than the commonly known Cat and DPFs to help emissions which reduce MPG.

I remember taking the first properly built 2.5NC to a trackday and taking a few jerry cans of fuel with me thinking it would drink loads. We went all day on a tankful and took all the extra back with me.

1 Like

Wow! We normally get 40 to 42mpg from our 2.0 25th Anniversary- admittedly mainly on quiet roads and not driven hard, but even on long motorway runs we’ve never seen less than 38mpg. I calculate it brim-to-brim, but the trip computer is actually pretty accurate.

I get 37mpg from my NC1 1.8. I drive in a swift manner whenever I can but routinely shift up before 4K rpm. Using the torque rather than revs is my preference . Fuel economy affected by me being a ‘Billy no Mates’. . Maggie refuses to sit in it, let alone be ‘Meistered’:grinning_face:

2011 Kendo 2 litre here: I get ~40mpg on a run (at almost any legal speed), but down to 30-ish with short trips. I don’t do any city driving. I suggest you get out on a run out of town and measure it carefully - if you get less than 40 there may be an issue. From the on-board mpg display, its the cold starts that kill my fuel economy.

2 Likes