MENU
1 0 3 4 3 4

We are 103,000+ car owners sharing real-world car information.

Join Us

Ford Transit Connect vs. Mazda CX-3 MPG

Chart is based on 1 fuel economy reports for the Ford Transit Connect and 13 fuel economy reports for the Mazda CX-3.

Ford Transit Connect MPG

Ford Transit Connect Ford Transit Connect 2013 24.8 MPG Highway Percentage 35 percent
Year Body/Powertrain flat, hilly, or mountainousLand driving style: very light to "lead foot"Foot A/C use: none to heavyA/C constant stop and goTraf % many stops per mileCity % stop every mile or twoSub % fairly steady speedHwy % Hwy Spd MPG
2013 4dr Minivan 136-horsepower 2.0L I4
4-speed automatic FWD		 flat light light 0 5 60 35 65 24.8  

Return to top

This page shows only averages. See all the Ford Transit Connect fuel economy data.

Mazda CX-3 MPG

Mazda CX-3 Mazda CX-3 2016 28.0 MPG Highway Percentage 22 percent
Year Body/Powertrain flat, hilly, or mountainousLand driving style: very light to "lead foot"Foot A/C use: none to heavyA/C constant stop and goTraf % many stops per mileCity % stop every mile or twoSub % fairly steady speedHwy % Hwy Spd MPG
2016 4dr SUV 146-horsepower 2.0L I4
6-speed shiftable automatic AWD		 flat light none 0 68 11 22 60 28.0  

Return to top

This page shows only averages. See all the Mazda CX-3 fuel economy data.

Ford Transit Connect vs. Mazda CX-3 MPG

Unlike other fuel economy surveys, TrueDelta's Real-World Gas Mileage Survey includes questions about how and where a car was driven. So you can get an idea of the Ford Transit Connect and Mazda CX-3's where a car was driven. So you can get an idea of their real-world MPG based on how and where you drive a car.

See TrueDelta's information for all Minivans
See TrueDelta's information for all Ford models and Mazda models.

TrueDelta Reviews the Real Gas Mileage of the Ford Transit Connect

Ford Transit Connect Real Gas Mileage: Pros
YearComment
2014 With less size and weight and a smaller engine, the Ford Transit Connect does get better fuel economy than a conventional minivan...but its advantage isn't large. The Ford's EPA ratings--20 mpg city, 28 mpg highway--best the Toyota Sienna's by two in the city and three on the highway. But the Honda Odyssey is rated 19/28. On the other hand, the much smaller, much lighter Mazda5 only managed 21/28. What's going on? Well, the Ford is very tall, so even though it's narrower it's pushing nearly as much frontal area through the air. This especially matters on the highway. Also, the Transit Connect is not much lighter, 3,979 lbs. to the Sienna's 4,310. Two tons is a lot of weight for a 2.5-liter four-cylinder to motivate. In the real-world, a light foot in the suburbs could nudge the trip computer average to 27 (even 30 on one trip). The Odyssey's trip computer reported numbers about five below these, while the Sienna struggled to crack 20. Push the Transit Connect a bit harder, and the trip computer average dropped to about 23, still good for a vehicle its size. But was the trip computer accurate? The gas gauge needle fell much faster than these numbers suggested it should have. On a 70-mph highway, even the trip computer numbers were short of the EPA rating, about 25. The big minivans can do this well. Blame the Ford's frontal area. The Transit Connect's fuel economy advantage is chiefly in urban and suburban driving. see full Ford Transit Connect review
 

What Our Members Are Saying about the Real Gas Mileage of the Ford Transit Connect

None of our members have yet commented on the real gas mileage of the Ford Transit Connect.

Be the first!

What Our Members Are Saying about the Real Gas Mileage of the 2001 Mazda CX-3

None of our members have yet commented on the real gas mileage of the 2001 Mazda CX-3.

Be the first!