Real world miata fuel mileage?

Ok. So I finally know the answer: Miata. Question: what's the real world (best case) mileage for an (NA or NB) Miata that's highway driven @65mph? I've taken a '97 on a road trip, and was dissappointed with the mileage...but I may have been going well over 65 at the time.

I'm currently driving a TDI golf that I LOVE for its economy, but which completely lacks any sort of driving involvement. A friend just bought a 2g MR2 as his commuter, and it got me thinking.

My options are: spend a bit of money on wheels/tires suspension and TDI output enhancers, or....wait for it.

Buy a Miata.
But I'll miss the 800 miles/tank. Note: I drive 5-600 miles a week. Gas prices are ~$5/us Gallon here.

Thoughts?

30mpg.

Edit- I got that with a '99, over about 175,000 miles. After that, I'm down to 28-29, but this summer it may come back....

And winter is 28.

1.6 miata can average 30mpg; 1.8 miata will average 27mpg. Not the best economy but pretty good considering how hard you can drive a miata.

In pure highway driving, I was able to eek 39-40mpg out of my 1990 1.6 when I was driving it from Florida to Maryland or vice versa. I'm told that it's currently getting 34mpg in combined driving.

That being said, it doesn't have sticky tires on it and isn't exactly being driven hard.

Ignore how many miles you get from a tank, that's a function of how big the tank is along with the efficiency of the car.

If you want better highway mileage as well as a quieter car, get a hardtop. 30 mph is a reasonable expectation on the highway, driving style will have an effect of course.

Crappy. They do fine in town and on back-roads (25-30 as stated by others is pretty easy), but they absolutely SUCK on a highway (70-80+). They are geared so low that the engine is spinning half way to redline to keep up with traffic, so freeway mileage takes a pretty nasty dive (I think I got 21-23ish?). The hardtop helps significantly though. So yeah, as long as you don't go over 65 you'll love it.

How tight are these things geared anyways? I was getting 35-38mpg out of the EGT with the same motor spinning 3800rpms @ 80mph. I don't really think the EGT is a very slippery shape, either.

Heh, I get about 19 out of mine.

92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: How tight are these things geared anyways? I was getting 35-38mpg out of the EGT with the same motor spinning 3800rpms @ 80mph. I don't really think the EGT is a very slippery shape, either.

Poorly. My '99 spins at 4000 rpm to go 72 mph. I would love to even have the EGT final ratio. Or better.

alfadriver wrote:

92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: How tight are these things geared anyways? I was getting 35-38mpg out of the EGT with the same motor spinning 3800rpms @ 80mph. I don't really think the EGT is a very slippery shape, either.

Poorly. My '99 spins at 4000 rpm to go 72 mph. I would love to even have the EGT final ratio. Or better.

Oh wow. So it's closer to the MX3 i've got, then. Which still got me 33mpg @ 80mpg.

That's pretty tight, though. Makes me want one more.

I get just under 30MPG in both my 90 (STS Mods) and my 97 (Stock with R package stuff) doing mostly highway at flow of traffic speeds.

When I had my NA's, they would get about 30mpg cruising at 70-75. Gearing is a killer on the highway, engine is spinning fast.

I don't do much highway driving with my current NC. Mostly country back roads, cruising at 50-60mph, with a few stop signs/lights here and there. I average right around 31mpg every tank.

92CelicaHalfTrac wrote:

alfadriver wrote:

92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: How tight are these things geared anyways? I was getting 35-38mpg out of the EGT with the same motor spinning 3800rpms @ 80mph. I don't really think the EGT is a very slippery shape, either.

Poorly. My '99 spins at 4000 rpm to go 72 mph. I would love to even have the EGT final ratio. Or better.

Oh wow. So it's closer to the MX3 i've got, then. Which still got me 33mpg @ 80mpg. That's pretty tight, though. Makes me want one more.

Totally awesome cars, but could be better commuters. Some complain about the engine buzz, but apparently it doesn't bother me.

30mpg is still pretty good for me, though.

"Normal" tires and a hardtop make it 100% better as a commuter than ST-category tires and a rollbar.

Hardtop for sure. RE: Keith's comment on "km's per tank". I agree: but it IS nice not filling up every three days. I average 50mpg: at 32mpg, the Miata would cost an extra $130/month in fuel. Ouch....
The price of fun?

I average 21-22 mpg. That's premium too. Stock Mazdaspeed Miata. Most of the miles are highway miles above the most economical speeds.

I think I got about 29 mpg on my first tank with mostly city driving.

I average 26-28 mpg combined driving (mostly 2 lane country roads into city). My last road trip from MI to DE and back netted me 30-31 mpg at 75+ w/ hardtop and Bridgestone Potenzas. I was limited to speed by a flat-spotted tire that would shake the car at 80...

djhives wrote: I do alot of highway driving in 4th gear -- 5th gear is overdrive...

Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't overdrive gears specifically made for... I dunno... highway driving?

I've always been disappointed in the mpg of the Miata. OK so the NA and NB was using an old mill from the 80's but still it is a tiny car. When driven conservatively I could get high 20's in my '94. I honestly haven't calculated what my '99 gets. But the fact that the NC isn't well into the 30's is pathetic isn't it? I know it is a sports car, and honestly I've never once considered mileage when looking for a Miata, but it just should be higher.

It would be nice if it got better mileage but you really don't think about it as you're driving around...not like I do in my Tahoe!

Last weekend I did the 1200 miles to www.bborr.com

27 mpg cruising 75-80 (2400 rpm or less)

302 Ford power.

it IS the answer.

In reply to djhives:

Its called downshifting. You roll along in 5th, then when you need more power, then shift into a lower gear. Why waste the fuel spinning the engine faster than you need to?

My 91 gets 28 mpg with this crap winter gas. Hopefully it gets better in the summer.

My NB got 29 mpg on a trip from upstate SC to PCB, FL.

I wasn't doing 65, the top was down and my forehead was level with the top of the windshield. I'm 6'4"

Very funny.

djhives wrote: Ill correct you -- over drive is for when you're "over" "driving" -- ie when you just want to sail along half asleep... Most of my miata driving on the highway is done in 4th gear (65mph zones) becasue theres much more power here and it makes passing a breeze -- when I get tired of driving and just want to chillax, I put it into overdrive 5th gear -- so it all depends on your driving style... I tend to drive in high rmps. I redline first gear all the time, etc... some dont do this... tends to be 2 types of drivers, those who like low rmps and those who like high rpms --- the former tend to FREAK OUT when you take their cars contunially to the redline/high rpm ranges....

Wow. Just... wow. I for one don't see any point whatsoever in adding all that extra wear and tear on the drivetrain grinding along in 4th gear rather than 5th when I can be there any time in a throttle blip and a stab of the clutch.

And I drive the living piss out of my Miata, which is why it only gets sub-20 mpg. But whatever, it's your car, have at it.

djhives, try bumping that tire pressure to 30 psi or so. You might be surprised at the improvement in handling and grip. 5th gear is handy too.

The 1.6 cars and the 1999-05 5-speeds both have pretty low gearing with a 4.3 rear. The 1994-97 cars have a 4.1 that I prefer - I think it's a pretty good match to the 5 speed. All the 1.8 cars use the same size ring and pinion so you have a number of options for changing the final drive, but if you go too high they get pretty sluggish.

Why are Miatas relatively poor in fuel economy? Engine tuning, gearing and aerodynamics. Mazda set it up like a sports car, not like an econobox. That meant making some compromises, most of which we don't complain about

Overdrive, of course, is a technical term referring to when the output speed is higher than the input speed.