rx8daniel

Tank between 2100 and 2400 - about 24 MPG. So my avg is probably about 22. I'll calculate exactly later.

Hercules

I'm averaging about 17-18mpg, because I have a lead foot... I'm past the break-in point too

rxeightr

Fill-up #4 results:

324.5 miles on 14.122 Gal = 22.98 mpg

90% highway, no revs past 6,000 rpm

compaddict

Third post down:

http://www.rx8forum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=7494

Vince

Hercules

I should add, almost all of my driving is CITY

And I rev past 6k all the time

DreamWarrior

Hey all, figured I'd report in on the 2nd tank:

249.1 miles using 13.343 gallons = 18.7 MPG.

My first tank (from above post) was

230.9 miles using 12.194 gallons = 18.9 MPG.

I'm pretty square with the average for mixed city/highway driving. However, I've still been "showing off" the car and it sits at idle for sometimes 5 minutes at a clip so that probably doesn't help...but it probably doesn't kill the MPG either. Well, still better or equal to the Camaro with better handling and similar accellaration so I'm still in love :D.

Anyway, my average so far would be 18.8 MPG, not bad at all!

If anyone is curious, I am getting much better aquinted with the shifter and becoming more and more willing to rev this thing to 6-7k, but rarely if ever do I find I need to. Typical driving on highways is 70 MPH with 6-7k shifts up the entrance ramps. I typically keep the car in 5th or 6th gear (with a constant 45 or so MPH being the cut off) at all times during city driving. During most city driving I shift at around 4-5k, unless I feel like playing and then it's 6-7k (that's more typical of my 2nd-3rd shift).

Well, enjoy everyone! But I think we can put the arguments about MPG to rest, IMO, because honestly I'm seeing equal performance vs. MPG to the Camaro with how I drive both cars. I'm sure I COULD have pushed the Camaro harder and it would have out accellarated (by very little) the RX-8. However, I would have also been "rewarded" with worse MPG doing so. So, my opinion is, yeah we're getting V-8 MPG, but we're getting it with V-8 performance (and better handling). :D

TJRX8

Right at 18 on my last tank of combined driving, mostly around town and I rarely shift before 5k. Haven't taken an extended highway run yet. (I have just over 700 miles).

boowana

I must say that I have been dissapointed with the gas mileage. I reflect back on the early claims of 20% improved gas mileage and suggestions of up to 30 MPG not so long ago. This car then has definitely missed the mark as far as I am concerned when it comes to fuel economy. I should be better technically speaking.
Other than that and one small adjustment problem with the passenger door light blinking on and off occassionally, the car is perfect in avey other way.

compaddict

A fuel tank that held three or four more gallons would be nice.. Just so the needle doesn't swing down so fast!
While at the Evolution driving school we averaged 10.x MPG and that was including driving between Seattle and Tacoma twice on the freeway.
I estimate that during the school the RX-8 got about 6 MPG!

Vince

Doctorr

Just refilled, the light came on and it took ten gallons to fill.

Worked out to just below 25MPG, (Imperial) 20.7 (U.S).

Mostly highway trips to work (17 miles @), so not too bad, I am presuming the computer is going to run a little rich during break-in...

Revs at 60mph are fairly high, right around 3000, (3100 at 100kph) in 6th gear.
.
.
.
doc

FritzMan

Down the road if you ever replace the clutch or something, you should research the cost associated to getting the Automatic's 4th (5th?) gear installed. It's a little better than the standard and probaby part of the reason why the auto does a little better MPG highway.

DreamWarrior

Don't think the plantary gear system of the automatic would be very adaptable to the manual transmission...but I think you meant gear ratio, not gear :D.

notdeafyet

I thought my first tank went at a surprising rate for 2 reasons:

1) I drove like an idiot, paying exactly no attention to any sort of gentle "break-in" philosophy...
2) The tank is smallish (I think 15.9 gallons?)

However, I now think there was a third reason: the rotary is in-fact not fuel effiecient relative to the boingers.

First tank went 240 miles with 14.26 gallons: 16.83mpg -- Lightyears better than my '79 LandCruiser with a 350... and the ride is more fun as well.

eccles

Just to add another data point, I finished my first full tank yesterday. 225.7 miles on 13.58 gallons: 16.62 mpg. This was about 50/50 city and country driving, though the rural driving was not highway cruising.

RX7 Guy

My 1987 RX-7 has averaged 20.5 MPG over the course of its 265,000 mile history...freeway driving has accounted for about three quarters of the miles & the AC has been on about half of the time.

Keep in mind that my 13B runs on 87 octane which (as per current AAA records) sells for 6.07% less than 89 octane & 7.60% less than 91 octane so your 18.5 MPG on 89 octane is going to wind up costing you 19.87% more than my 20.5 MPG on 87 octane.

Another way of looking at it is to say that a 18.5 MPG car that requires 89 octane incurs the same fuel bill as a 17.0 MPG car that can run on 87 octane. This of course ignores the environmental consideration where the goal is to minimize the number of gallons burnt. I'm not trying to take anything away from green thinkers, I just wanted to address the $$$ issue directly.

RotaryFan

I'm pretty jealous of your fuel economy. I pre-ordered the 8 in January, but decided against it and bought a Z.

My fuel economy is hovering about 17-18 mpg. I understand that I am on the throttle most of the time, but it's still disconcerting. I pay over $30 per fuel up.

If the 8 came pre-equipped with the mazdaspeed body kit and wheels, then I would have had a harder decision to make.

Enjoy your cars guys!!! Beautiful cars and a heavenly sounding engine.

BTW, I saw a heavily modded 3rd gen 7 that was completely gorgeous and sounded amazing. I would trade in my Z in a heartbeat for one of those monsters...there's just something about a rotary engine that's addicting...maybe it's the astronomical redlines and the scream of the engine.

rotary_it_up

My previous two tanks were:

-21.3 MPG with 90% highway driving

-19.1 MPG with 50% highway

My worst so far with a lot of 7000+RPM driving was 15.1 MPG.

Currently have 1600 miles on the odometer.

Good Duck

I'll keeping track of my miles and mpg down in my sig area. My first fillup:

- 170 miles and 10.408 gal = 16.3 mpg ~ 90% city

This is certainly different from my previous Civic of 28.04 mpg.

RX8-U-UP

Okay, here is my first 5 tanks of gas that have gotten me 944 miles. All of my driving has been in town, slow stop and go traffic, with A/C on all the time. Each tank under the same conditions have gotten better and better gas mileage, and I really have been driving it harder since the 600 mile point. So heres the results.

1st tank 16.3
2nd tank 16.22
3rd tank 16.02
4th tank 17.32
5th tank 18.21

Like I said, I know that I am driving it harder now that I did during break-in, but it keeps getting better. Happy driving.

RotoRooter

So my first tank gave me 19.0mpg.
My second tank gave me 18.5mpg

Yes, we are using alot of A/C and we are communting (stuck on idle here and there) but still I was hoping to be over 20 everyday and 24on highways/weekends.

I will report the first 5 tanks to give some more info.

tank

After my first tank I only got 14.7 mpg I wish I could say I've been drivin it hard and perhaps this is why but I have been keeping it under 5K, 40% cty, 60% hwy. I'm hoping my next tank will be a little better.

RX-Nut

When I first fire up my car, I warm it up for a good 5 minutes, sometimes shorter, sometimes longer depending on the temp gauge. I'm sure that whacks a lot of fuel... dont it?

BillK

Five minutes? Are you crazy?

No modern car needs more of a warm-up than the time it takes for you to buckle your seatbelt. Sit, start, buckle, go. If it's really cold out (say 20°F or below), perhaps give it 30 seconds, tops.

If you are letting the engine run for five minutes not only are you unnecessarily heating the emission control system but you may as well be tossing money out the window and spilling fuel destined for your tank on the ground at your next fill-up...

As far as regular economy goes, the sticker I saw at my dealer said 18 city/24 highway and most of the reports here seem pretty consistent with that...

Puppy1

First tank 19.85 (babyed it)
2nd 19.5 (mountian)
3rd 19.6 (lots of high reving)

daedelgt

Umm, no. If you run the car before it gets up to a decent temperature your just shortening the life span of the car. The oil isn't hot enough, and the seals have not expanded completely.