Real Mazda 2 fuel consumption
Mazda 2 real fuel consumption by user reviews is approximately 18% higher compared to official consumption. For petrol engines real consumption is in average 17% higher, but for diesel engines is approximately 19% higher. Above consumption difference is the average for all Mazda 2 produced from 2003 to 2020. For Mazda 2 produced up to 2012 the difference in real fuel consumption by user reviews is on average +16%, while for those produced after 2012 it is on average +20%.
See below for the actual consumption of each generation and version.
Average difference between user reported and stated consumption
All carmakers average fuel economy difference between advertised and user reported
See below for the actual consumption of each generation and version.
2019
Mazda 2 2019
Average real petrol consumption difference: +9%
Real and specified fuel consumption and differences for specific Mazda 2 versions are shown in the table below.
| Modification | Claimed consumption | Real consumption |
|---|---|---|
| 1.5Mazda 2 2019 1.5 Skyactiv-G 75 HP MT | 5.3 l/100km | 5.5 l/100km+4% |
| 1.5Mazda 2 2019 1.5 Skyactiv-G 90 HP MT | 5.3 l/100km | 5.5 l/100km+4% |
| 1.5Mazda 2 2019 1.5 Skyactiv-G 90 HP AT | 5.9 l/100km | 6.1 l/100km+3% |
| 1.5Mazda 2 2021 1.5 e-Skyactiv-G 90 HP MT | 4.4 l/100km | 5.5 l/100km+25% |
| 1.5Mazda 2 2019 1.5 Skyactiv-G 109 HP MT | 5.1 l/100km | |
| 1.5Mazda 2 2019 1.5 Skyactiv-G 109 HP AT | 4.9 l/100km | |
| 1.5Mazda 2 2019 1.5 Skyactiv - G 112 HP MT | 5.4 l/100km | |
| 1.5Mazda 2 2019 1.5 Skyactiv - G 112 HP AT | 5.3 l/100km | |
| 1.5Mazda 2 2021 1.5 e-Skyactiv-G 115 HP MT | 4.4 l/100km |
2015
Mazda 2 2015
Average real petrol consumption difference: +21% Average real diesel consumption difference: +35%
Real and specified fuel consumption and differences for specific Mazda 2 versions are shown in the table below.
| Modification | Fuel | Claimed consumption | Real consumption |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.5Mazda 2 2015 1.5 75 HP MT | Petrol | 4.7 l/100km | 5.7 l/100km+21% |
| 1.5Mazda 2 2015 1.5 90 HP MT | Petrol | 4.5 l/100km | 5.5 l/100km+22% |
| 1.5Mazda 2 2015 1.5 90 HP AT | Petrol | 4.8 l/100km | 6.0 l/100km+25% |
| 1.5Mazda 2 2015 1.5 115 HP MT | Petrol | 4.9 l/100km | 5.7 l/100km+16% |
| 1.5Mazda 2 2015 1.5 MT | Diesel | 3.4 l/100km | 4.6 l/100km+35% |
2010
Mazda 2 2010
Average real petrol consumption difference: +20% Average real diesel consumption difference: +19%
Real and specified fuel consumption and differences for specific Mazda 2 versions are shown in the table below.
| Modification | Fuel | Claimed consumption | Real consumption |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.3Mazda 2 2010 1.3 75 HP MT | Petrol | 5.1 l/100km | 6.0 l/100km+18% |
| 1.3Mazda 2 2010 1.3 GT 84 HP MT | Petrol | 5.1 l/100km | 6.5 l/100km+27% |
| 1.5Mazda 2 2010 1.5 GT MT | Petrol | 5.8 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km+19% |
| 1.5Mazda 2 2010 1.5 GT AT | Petrol | 6.3 l/100km | 7.4 l/100km+17% |
| 1.6MAZDA 2 2010 1.6L MT | Diesel | 4.2 l/100km | 5.0 l/100km+19% |
2010
Mazda 2 2010
Average real petrol consumption difference: +21%
Real and specified fuel consumption and differences for specific Mazda 2 versions are shown in the table below.
| Modification | Claimed consumption | Real consumption |
|---|---|---|
| 1.3Mazda 2 2010 1.3 75 HP MT | 5.1 l/100km | 6.0 l/100km+18% |
| 1.3Mazda 2 2010 1.3 84 HP MT | 5.1 l/100km | 6.5 l/100km+27% |
| 1.5Mazda 2 2010 1.5 MT | 5.8 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km+19% |
2008
Mazda 2 2008
Average real petrol consumption difference: +19%
Real and specified fuel consumption and differences for specific Mazda 2 versions are shown in the table below.
| Modification | Claimed consumption | Real consumption |
|---|---|---|
| 1.5Mazda 2 2008 1.5 MT | 5.9 l/100km | 7.0 l/100km+19% |
2007
Mazda 2 2007
Average real petrol consumption difference: +20% Average real diesel consumption difference: +18%
Real and specified fuel consumption and differences for specific Mazda 2 versions are shown in the table below.
| Modification | Fuel | Claimed consumption | Real consumption |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.3Mazda 2 2007 1.3 75 HP MT | Petrol | 5.4 l/100km | 6.4 l/100km+19% |
| 1.3Mazda 2 2008 1.3 75 HP MT | Petrol | 5.4 l/100km | 6.4 l/100km+19% |
| 1.3Mazda 2 2007 1.3 86 HP MT | Petrol | 5.4 l/100km | 6.7 l/100km+24% |
| 1.3Mazda 2 2008 1.3 86 HP MT | Petrol | 5.4 l/100km | 6.7 l/100km+24% |
| 1.4Mazda 2 2008 1.4 CD MT | Diesel | 4.3 l/100km | 4.9 l/100km+14% |
| 1.5Mazda 2 2007 1.5 MT | Petrol | 5.9 l/100km | 7.0 l/100km+19% |
| 1.5Mazda 2 2007 1.5i AT | Petrol | 6.8 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km+18% |
| 1.6Mazda 2 2009 1.6 CD MT | Diesel | 4.2 l/100km | 5.1 l/100km+21% |
2006
Mazda 2 2006
Average real petrol consumption difference: +12% Average real diesel consumption difference: +13%
Real and specified fuel consumption and differences for specific Mazda 2 versions are shown in the table below.
| Modification | Fuel | Claimed consumption | Real consumption |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.2Mazda 2 2006 1.2 MT | Petrol | 6.3 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km+10% |
| 1.4Mazda 2 2006 1.4 MT | Petrol | 6.5 l/100km | 7.3 l/100km+12% |
| 1.4Mazda 2 2006 1.4 AT | Petrol | 6.4 l/100km | 7.3 l/100km+14% |
| 1.4Mazda 2 2006 1.4 CiTD MT | Diesel | 4.7 l/100km | 5.3 l/100km+13% |
| 1.6Mazda 2 2006 1.6 MT | Petrol | 6.7 l/100km |
2003
Mazda 2 2003
Average real petrol consumption difference: +12% Average real diesel consumption difference: +12%
Real and specified fuel consumption and differences for specific Mazda 2 versions are shown in the table below.
| Modification | Fuel | Claimed consumption | Real consumption |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.2Mazda 2 2003 1.2 MT | Petrol | 6.3 l/100km | 7.2 l/100km+14% |
| 1.4Mazda 2 2003 1.4 MT | Petrol | 6.5 l/100km | 7.4 l/100km+14% |
| 1.4Mazda 2 2003 1.4 AT | Petrol | 6.5 l/100km | 7.2 l/100km+11% |
| 1.4Mazda 2 2003 1.4 CiTD MT | Diesel | 4.5 l/100km | 5.3 l/100km+18% |
| 1.4Mazda 2 2003 1.4 CiTD AT | Diesel | 4.5 l/100km | 4.8 l/100km+7% |
| 1.6Mazda 2 2003 1.6 MT | Petrol | 7.1 l/100km | 7.7 l/100km+8% |
Real fuel consumption of other carmakers
The fuel consumption reported by users does not reflect the experience of all users, may be selective (depending on the driving conditions, driving style, technical condition of the car and other circumstances) and should therefore not be taken as a representative indicator.