Which is more fuel efficient, FD Civic 1.8 AT or the prevoius gen Mazda 3 1.6?

[extremeshot]

I'm planning to get one as a wife-mobile sometime middle of this year. I like the FD more but the Mazda 3 seems to be a more practical choice given it's lower re-sale value (lower entry price for me) and the slightly smaller engine. While on paper, the 1.8 should be eating up more fuel than the 1.6, I've heard a lot of comments about the 3 being matakaw sa gas and the 1.8 FD was being marketed as "2.0 power with 1.5 fuel efficiency".

Forget about all the other features since I like both cars and can live with either. It all boils down to fuel efficiency. So which is more fuel efficient? And how much is the margin?

[niky]

AT to AT, it's a wash in traffic, but if I recall, the Civic was better on the highway thanks to the fifth gear. Been a long time since I drove either.

[oj88]

I've never driven the Mazda 3. Though, I hope that the following resources about the Honda 1.8L engine might be able to help you in your decision.

This video best describes the Honda R18's features, including how it can achieve relatively good fuel economy for a 1.8L engine. Do know that the R18's i-VTEC mechanism doesn't work towards performance, rather, for fuel economy on highway runs.
Honda Worldwide

Some other "datasheets" you may be interested.

Technical Overview of Honda's new R18 i-VTEC Implementation
http://asia.vtec.net/Engines/R18A/index.html

[extremeshot]

Thanks for the inputs. Yes, I'm looking at an AT vs AT comparison. This will be primarily used for city driving so it looks like there's no real advantage for the Civic.

Please also share any real world fuel consumption of the two. Thanks!

Sent from my HTC Sensation XE with Beats Audio using Forum Runner

[Egan101]

*extremeshot - Please go check the Car Talk forum of Tsikot. Each manufacturer has their own section and it contains a thread for real world fuel consumption of cars from a manufacturer. See below thread for Honda cars.

http://tsikot.com/forums/honda-cars-...8/index67.html

[ghosthunter]

I'm planning to get one as a wife-mobile sometime middle of this year. I like the FD more but the Mazda 3 seems to be a more practical choice given it's lower re-sale value (lower entry price for me) and the slightly smaller engine. While on paper, the 1.8 should be eating up more fuel than the 1.6, I've heard a lot of comments about the 3 being matakaw sa gas and the 1.8 FD was being marketed as "2.0 power with 1.5 fuel efficiency".

Forget about all the other features since I like both cars and can live with either. It all boils down to fuel efficiency. So which is more fuel efficient? And how much is the margin?

Based on our family experience with the Mazda3 1.6L AT, the mazda3 have poorer fuel economy.

[rukawa11]

mazda 3,

madali masira pyesa at mahal ipagawa.
mabigat ang kaha
malakas sa gas, mabagal
mababa resale value

[1D4LV]

the choice would seem logical... the honda fd.
the 3 has a heavier body, making it less fuel efficient.
and madami akong kilala na mabilis daw masira ang ilalim... in fact one of my friends nagpalit kaagad ng shocks and bushings after the second year.

[extremeshot]

Yeah, I really like the FD better. What lured me to the Mazda 3 is it's price and I thought, more efficient smaller engine.

How about maintenance cost? I kinda thought it would be the same (I own a Honda but no idea on Mazda) but from the comments here, it looks like the Mazda is more expensive to maintain. Is it?

Sent from my HTC Sensation XE with Beats Audio using Forum Runner

[Egan101]

*extremeshot - a smaller engine does not mean better fuel efficiency. Big factor is the power-to-weight ratio. A small engine pulling a heavy body will need to exert more energy to keep it running on a steady pace. Some will say that the TOTL 2.0L Mazda3 models have the same fuel consumption as its lower-end 1.6L models.

[extremeshot]

*extremeshot - a smaller engine does not mean better fuel efficiency. Big factor is the power-to-weight ratio. A small engine pulling a heavy body will need to exert more energy to keep it running on a steady pace. Some will say that the TOTL 2.0L Mazda3 models have the same fuel consumption as its lower-end 1.6L models.

Agreed and that's one option playing in my mind right now -- so why not the Mazda 3 2.0? Any real world fuel consumption comparison between the Mazda 1.6 and the 2.0? I honestly don't mind the 2.0 (hey, it's loaded plus, they are selling for cheap because practical people tend to stay away from the 2.0 engine) but am afraid of the fuel consumption.

[Egan101]

Based on the Mazda fuel consumption database listed here in Tsikot (Car Talk -> Mazda Cars Talk), Mazda3 in either 1.6L or 2.0L models average between 7-8 Km/L. In worse traffic conditions, it could get lower based on the posts of Mazda3 owners. I bet the Mazda6 2.3L will be just a KM/L less efficient (6-7 Km/L) but you have a much better car.

On the other hand, the Civic FD 1.8L could get around 8-9 Km/L.

[extremeshot]

Based on the Mazda fuel consumption database listed here in Tsikot (Car Talk -> Mazda Cars Talk), Mazda3 in either 1.6L or 2.0L models average between 7-8 Km/L. In worse traffic conditions, it could get lower based on the posts of Mazda3 owners. I bet the Mazda6 2.3L will be just a KM/L less efficient (6-7 Km/L) but you have a much better car.

On the other hand, the Civic FD 1.8L could get around 8-9 Km/L.

I guess this post answers my question, thanks. But in doing so, it gave me more to think about. It will depend on my budget come mid-year and see what's the best car that budget can afford. Mazda6 ei? I can't say I'm not interested .

Sent from my iPad using Forum Runner

[mda]

I guess this post answers my question, thanks. But in doing so, it gave me more to think about. It will depend on my budget come mid-year and see what's the best car that budget can afford. Mazda6 ei? I can't say I'm not interested .

Sent from my iPad using Forum Runner

Under heavy traffic, the Civic FD gets between 7-8KM/L din, just FYI.

[Bitulo]

Yeah, I really like the FD better. What lured me to the Mazda 3 is it's price and I thought, more efficient smaller engine.

How about maintenance cost? I kinda thought it would be the same (I own a Honda but no idea on Mazda) but from the comments here, it looks like the Mazda is more expensive to maintain. Is it?

Sent from my HTC Sensation XE with Beats Audio using Forum Runner

To help you with more info. I drive a 2008 Honda Civic 1.8s. Normal city driving ko, with paminsan minsan hataw, fc is 8 to 9 km to a liter. With conscious sedate city driving, 9 to 10 km per liter. Highway driving mga 12 to 13 km to a liter. My car is automatic, stock rim and tires at normal 22psi air pressure, using 93RON E10 gasoline, and SAE 5W-40 engine oil. Tire pressure is crucial. With higher air pressure 23 or 24 psi, the fc is even better, kaya lang matagtag. I hope these info are useful to you.

[GTi]

Sa Civic ka na. The Mazda 3 1.6A/T is underpowered, which makes for both poor performance and fuel consumption.

[extremeshot]

To help you with more info. I drive a 2008 Honda Civic 1.8s. Normal city driving ko, with paminsan minsan hataw, fc is 8 to 9 km to a liter. With conscious sedate city driving, 9 to 10 km per liter. Highway driving mga 12 to 13 km to a liter. My car is automatic, stock rim and tires at normal 22psi air pressure, using 93RON E10 gasoline, and SAE 5W-40 engine oil. Tire pressure is crucial. With higher air pressure 23 or 24 psi, the fc is even better, kaya lang matagtag. I hope these info are useful to you.

Interesting. Thanks.

Sa Civic ka na. The Mazda 3 1.6A/T is underpowered, which makes for both poor performance and fuel consumption.

Yup, kinda leaning towards the FD ever since. Mas mura lang kasi yung 3 but It seems like the Mazda is cheaper than the FD for a good reason. Thanks.

Sent from my iPad using Forum Runner

[GTi]

Interesting. Thanks.




Yup, kinda leaning towards the FD ever since. Mas mura lang kasi yung 3 but It seems like the Mazda is cheaper than the FD for a good reason. Thanks.

Sent from my iPad using Forum Runner

The FD's not really not that much more expensive. You can get one for 300+k nowadays.

For the RORO, this might be a good read. The Roro less taken: Manila to Boracay, and beyond | Inquirer Business