I’m interested in what “real world” fuel consumption the two engines produce in everyday driving by mx5oc owners who drive their cars mostly for fun and not frugality. Comparing the two engines the difference in size means that their dimensions are virtually the same so that their weight and efficiency overall should be closer than figures suggest?
Simon
Definitely for fun and I’m averaging 47 over 10,000 miles in a 1.5.
It hasn’t been on a Motorway yet
That’s really impressive Ian.
Between 2011 and 2015, my wife had an MX-5 2.0L Powershift coupe as a company car, and driving into work in Bristol, from Frome (about 25 miles each way) every day, she managed on average 32 mpg over the four and a half years we kept it. The best we ever achieved was 34 mpg on a holiday to Provence only a few weeks after we took delivery of the 5 - this entailed seemingly endless very enjoyable hours on French motorways - 130 kph with the lid off - lovely !
I seem to recall that, at the time, the official fuel consumption figures for our car was in the high 30s - perhaps 37 (ish), something like that, but we never got anywhere near that, and neither of us are exactly ‘boy racer’ material (both in our late 50s back then).
I’ve always been of the opinion that official fuel consumption figures are pure fiction, done under laboratory conditions, and bear little resemblance to what one can normally achieve ‘on the road’.
We now have another 2.0L MX-5, as a second car, this time a manual-transmission one, and fuel economy is better with this version. Having said that, we don’t expect it to be an economical drive - it’s for fun, and even if we only got 30 mpg out if it, we wouldn’t care.
Chris Phillips.
PS:- I have read on this forum, that using premium-quality petrol actually helps with fuel economy, as well as making the engine run better - after all, it is designed for high-octane juice. Being a second car, and only doing low mileages anyway, I only fill up perhaps once a month, but the next time I’m at the pumps, I’ll give it a go.
Mk4 1.5. 41.4 mpg over 18 months, car meter pretty accurate verified full to full at the pumps. My 2ltr sport tech averaged 40ish over 3years. Don’t understand why anyone would buy an Mx5 and drive it like a vicar, (apologies to vicars who use the go fast pedal).
47 mpg is a really good result especially if there has been some “hurl” when driving and savings made for some new mats etc.
Simon
Currently on 46.5 mpg. On a good run up to 51.4 going from Malvern to Stanstead and back. Keeping to the speed limits. Via the A14 a 3.5 hour drive.
I’m getting mid 40’s in my 1.5 after 3000 miles.
Some interesting numbers there Chris.
My dad used to get about 33mpg out of his MK3 Cortina, in 1979.
Not much improvement in almost 40 years then 
After 22k miles my 2.0 sport is averaging 42 mpg.
About 48MPG in my 1.5L - all sorts of driving conditions… 7,000 miles…
48mpg for our 2.0l. No town work or short journeys for us fortunately. I do not drive slowly but I am averse to using the brakes so tend not to rush up to situations preferring to plan and ease off in good time. I am a little naughty when it comes to bends and roundabouts and keep the momentum goings as long as I have good line of site, this where the fun is after all. 60 round a bend is so much more fun than 100 in a straight line.
Hello Keat63,
Most people reporting 48 mpg (or thereabouts) on this thread seem to have NDs, so perhaps it is on this particular incarnation of the MX-5 that Mazda have made the biggest improvement in economy. I was comparing emission figures a few weeks ago too, and compared to my NC 2.0L, the ND is almost miserly !
Chris Phillips.
My mileage is miniscule, 1800 miles in 18 months! My trips are no longer than 7 miles in each direction. The roads a mixture of dual c/w 70mph, “A” 55mph, “B” 40 & 50mph, un-classified “twistys” 60mph and urban 20 & 30 mph. Driven within those limits at speeds appropriate and safe for the road and the prevailing condtions, traffic, weather, road suface and visibility etc. and I’m getting 43mpg in my 1.5l
I kept a log of my fuel usage on a trip to Northumberland, proper brim to brim stuff each time. Over 900 miles it returned just short of 39 mpg, that’s for a Mk3 2.0l Sport
I was expecting 30’s something but pushing near on 40 mpg I was quite pleased.
You need to get out more - go for a road trip .
I’d love to, but responsibilities don’t allow - see profile. Not to worry, made the most of what’s available!
Pure entertainment! But 48 mpg is not to be laughed at either. Perhaps when planning a new route you will use the Sat Nav and select “Easy: Results in a route with fewer turns and no difficult manoeuvres”?
Simon
Jumps between 44.3 and 44.4 in 2.0 ND over 8000miles. Spirited with the throttle up to the speed limit.
On a related note, what do you fuel the cars with (Regular or Performance petrol)? Intuitively I’d think that higher performance engines would benefit from higher RON fuels but I’m not a chemical engineer.