Real fuel consumption and economy logo

Mazda 6 2018 fuel consumption

Mazda 6 from 2018 to 2021 real fuel consumption according to user reports is approximately 17% higher compared to advertised fuel consumption. For petrol engines real consumption is in average 13% higher, but for diesel engines is approximately 22% higher. Since 2018 the Mazda 6 average difference between owner-reported real-world fuel consumption and declared fuel economy has been less than industry average.

Year-to-year deviations of actual owner-reported average fuel consumption from advertised values

YearGasoline carsDiesel cars
All carmakersMazda 6All carmakersMazda 6
2018+28%+17% +39%+24%
Show all years
2019+28%+17% +37%+24%
2020+27%+17% +36%+24%
2021+26%+17% +37%+24%

See below for the actual consumption of generations and versions of Mazda 6.

2018

Mazda 6 2018 sedan fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines32.2 MPG
7.3 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines31.8 MPG
7.4 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *+18%
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines50.5 MPG
4.7 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines40.4 MPG
5.8 l/100km
Average real diesel consumption difference *+23%

According to advertised fuel consumption, Mazda 6 2018 with automatic transmission have almost the same fuel economy as similar versions with manual gearbox. Based on user-reported real-world fuel consumption, this generation Mazda 6 with automatic transmission consumes around 1.1 litres per 100 km or 19% more fuel than a version with the same engine but a manual gearbox.

Compared to similar cars from other manufacturers, the Mazda 6 fuel economy is significantly above average. The best real fuel economy in its class according to user reviews of all the modifications has modification with 2.2 diesel engine and manual transmission (Mazda 6 2018 SkyActiv-D 2.2 184 Hp 184 HP). However, of all modifications the best advertised fuel economy in its class has Mazda 6 with 2.5 petrol engine and automatic transmission (Mazda 6 2018 SkyActiv-G 2.5 194 HP).

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
2.0 liter petrol engine
Mazda 6 2018 SkyActiv-G 2.0 145 Hp 145 HP manual 37.9 MPG
6.2 l/100km
31.8 MPG
7.4 l/100km+19%
Mazda 6 2018 SkyActiv-G 2.0 165 Hp 165 HP manual 36.2 MPG
6.5 l/100km
33.6 MPG
7.0 l/100km+8%
Mazda 6 2018 SkyActiv-G 2.0 165 Hp Automatic 165 HP automatic 37.9 MPG
6.2 l/100km
30.2 MPG
7.8 l/100km+26%
2.0 liter diesel engine
MAZDA 6 2018 / Atenza Sedan 2.0L SKYACTIV-D 165 Hp 165 HP automatic 53.5 MPG
4.4 l/100km
MAZDA 6 2018 / Atenza Sedan 2.0L SKYACTIV-D 184 Hp 184 HP manual 50.0 MPG
4.7 l/100km
44.4 MPG
5.3 l/100km+13%
2.2 liter diesel engine
Mazda 6 2018 SkyActiv-D 2.2 150 Hp 150 HP manual 53.5 MPG
4.4 l/100km
39.2 MPG
6.0 l/100km+36%
Mazda 6 2018 SkyActiv-D 2.2 184 Hp 184 HP manual 50.0 MPG
4.7 l/100km
44.4 MPG
5.3 l/100km+13%
Mazda 6 2018 SkyActiv-D 2.2 184 Hp Automatic 184 HP automatic 46.1 MPG
5.1 l/100km
35.1 MPG
6.7 l/100km+31%
2.5 liter petrol engine
MAZDA 6 2018 / Atenza Sedan 2.5L SKYACTIV-G 187 Hp 187 HP manual 27.0 MPG
8.7 l/100km
MAZDA 6 2018 / Atenza Sedan 2.5L SKYACTIV-G 187 Hp Automatic 187 HP automatic 29.0 MPG
8.1 l/100km
Mazda 6 2018 SkyActiv-G 2.5 194 HP automatic 50.0 MPG
4.7 l/100km
MAZDA 6 2018 / Atenza Sedan 2.5L SKYACTIV-G 227 Hp 227 HP automatic 26.1 MPG
9.0 l/100km
MAZDA 6 2018 2.5 / Atenza Sedan 2.0L SKYACTIV-G 250 HP automatic 26.1 MPG
9.0 l/100km
2018

Mazda 6 2018 wagon fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines36.2 MPG
6.5 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines31.3 MPG
7.5 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *+16%
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines49.0 MPG
4.8 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines39.2 MPG
6.0 l/100km
Average real diesel consumption difference *+25%

According to advertised fuel consumption, Mazda 6 2018 with automatic transmission have almost the same fuel economy as similar versions with manual gearbox. Based on user-reported real-world fuel consumption, this generation Mazda 6 with automatic transmission consumes around 1 litres per 100 km or 17% more fuel than a version with the same engine but a manual gearbox.

Compared to similar cars from other manufacturers, the Mazda 6 fuel economy is significantly above average. The best real fuel economy in its class according to user reviews of all the modifications has modification with 2.2 diesel engine and manual transmission (Mazda 6 2018 SportBreak SkyActiv-D 2.2 184 Hp 184 HP). However, of all modifications the best advertised fuel economy in its class has Mazda 6 with 2.0 petrol engine and manual transmission (Mazda 6 2018 SportBreak SkyActiv-G 2.0 145 Hp 145 HP).

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
2.0 liter petrol engine
Mazda 6 2018 SportBreak SkyActiv-G 2.0 145 Hp 145 HP manual 37.3 MPG
6.3 l/100km
31.8 MPG
7.4 l/100km+17%
Mazda 6 2018 SportBreak SkyActiv-G 2.0 165 Hp 165 HP manual 35.6 MPG
6.6 l/100km
33.6 MPG
7.0 l/100km+6%
Mazda 6 2018 SportBreak SkyActiv-G 2.0 165 Hp Automatic 165 HP automatic 37.3 MPG
6.3 l/100km
31.4 MPG
7.5 l/100km+19%
2.2 liter diesel engine
Mazda 6 2018 SportBreak SkyActiv-D 2.2 150 Hp 150 HP manual 52.3 MPG
4.5 l/100km
39.2 MPG
6.0 l/100km+33%
Mazda 6 2018 SportBreak SkyActiv-D 2.2 184 Hp 184 HP manual 49.0 MPG
4.8 l/100km
44.4 MPG
5.3 l/100km+10%
Mazda 6 2018 SportBreak SkyActiv-D 2.2 184 Hp Automatic 184 HP automatic 46.1 MPG
5.1 l/100km
35.1 MPG
6.7 l/100km+31%
2.5 liter petrol engine
Mazda 6 2018 SportBreak SkyActiv-G 2.5 194 HP automatic 34.6 MPG
6.8 l/100km
28.7 MPG
8.2 l/100km+21%

* - Difference between advertised and user reported fuel economy has been calculated taking into account only those car versions for which information is available both on the fuel consumption specified by the manufacturer and reported by users.

User-reported fuel consumption may not accurately represent all users' experiences due to variables such as driving conditions, driving style, technical condition of the vehicle, and other circumstances. Thus, it should not be relied upon as a representative indicator.