Fuel use claims exposed! The cars that used more fuel than they should revealed by real world fuel tests with the Mazda2, Suzuki Swift and Mazda CX-5 in the firing line

A fresh round of real world tests from the Australian Automobile Association (AAA) has detected several cars that use a lot more fuel than claimed.

As part of an ongoing testing program the AAA tested 14 popular new cars to determine real world fuel use and emissions. The AAA tests are done in real world conditions rather than lab circumstances used to provide claimed fuel use figures.

The Mazda2 was the worst performer of this current tranche, using 35 per cent more fuel than its official rating. This pushes its fuel use to 6.8L/100km up from 5.0L/100km.

This result is the worst variance recorded in the 84 cars tested by the AAA to date.

Next worst in the current testing group was the Suzuki Swift, which used 31 per cent more fuel than claimed. That is a big hit for the new car fitted with mild hybrid technology for the first time.

The Mazda CX-5 and the MG5 sedan were the next worst performers with 22 and 21 per cent increase on their claimed fuel use.

Head of the AAA, Michael Bradley, said this latest round of testing again shows just how important this program is to Australian consumers.

“While some cars perform as per the information at point of sale, our program is revealing that many, if not most, do not,” said Bradley.

“Testing cars in real Australian driving conditions will help sort the wheat from the chaff when it comes to cars delivering fuel consumption that matches their mandated laboratory test results, and it will act as a complementary audit regime for the NVES. 

“The Program is working with the NVES to help make the national vehicle fleet cleaner and more fuel-efficient,” he said.

It wasn’t all bad news, some cars performed as advertised and one achieved fuel use less than its claim.

The Isuzu MU-X and Nissan Patrol hit their fuel use bullseye and the Mitsubishi Outlander all-wheel drive was two per cent better than advertised.

Most of the cars tested were about three to 10 per cent worse than their claims.

Previous tests have thrown up poor results for several small SUVs. The GWM Haval Jolion and Chery Omoda 5 both performed 32 per cent above their claim and the Audi A3 real world fuel use was 21 per cent worse than advertised.

To see the full list of all 84 cars tested, go here