I used to average 28 combined on my MSM. Then after I installed the new clutch and replaced my failing fuel pump it went down to 24-26. I assume my fuel pump was running a bit lean.

A 4000 foot drop in altitude helps a lot there.

--Ian

I usually run 24mpg, last tank i ran almost 27mpg, all city.

Yea a real ECU will do wonders, the stock ECU in the MSM is a lot of smoke and mirrors.

The stock ECU in the MSM is the biggest POS I have driven. It holds the car back as long as it can until it unleashes what can only be described as the after burner. Throttle transitions feel disconnected and it had pockets of hesitation. The best part is once you add some parts to open up the breathing it just amplifies the problem by 10x. I really need to install my eMS2.

I just checked my mileage, and it's pushing 28-30. That's driving like a moonshiner, bouncing off the limiter several times a week at least. I do about 50/50 city/highway. I'm sure I could top 30 if I was gentler, but what's the fun in that?

I've never gotten higher than 26mpg in my MSM. No matter how i drive it. Pretty terrible when it's just as financially efficient to drive my damn Cherokee on long trips.

This is mind-boggling to me. I understand the M.netters getting 30 MPG, but not someone saying they drive "like a moonshiner" (great turn of phrase!).

Granted, I drive almost all city but I don't think I ever did much more than 25 MPG in my '94 even when it was stock. Then again, I am generally an automatic ~20% reduction in fuel economy in any car I drive due to an... enthusiastic driving style. :)

I doubt you'll do much better. I tried not driving like a douchbag, not reving the car, and not doing 80+ keeping up with traffic on the highway and I got worse gas mileage.

I actually noticed the same: I would get 26-28mpg consistently and driving like a grandma shifting at 2500 never going past like 10-20% throttle and all that has never actually given me any significant mpg increases.

I wonder how much MS would increase economy on an otherwise bone stock 01

I got 2-3mpg more driving my 97 after I put on the FM turbo kit and MS.

Depends, I've gained almost 2 mpg a a couple different stockish cars by just tuning their stock DFCO settings to be much more aggressive. No idea how aggressive the miata ones are, they certainly dont feel aggressive at all. Then you can normally eek out a couple more mpg by turning cruise spark to mbt on the dyno, more if you switch to lean cruise. I cant comment about the effects of this in a miata.

I've managed 38mpg doing 65-75 in 6th.

I'm curious how long the stock MSM ecu keeps the afr leaned out.

in what situation? like WOT? im sure it stays lean until 5K; find stock dynos.

In terms of per kpa vs rpm graph.

My MSM with intake and downpipe gets 26MPG all summer long. With the real ECU I have got over 33 on ~75mph road trips 3 different times. Driving carefully at 65mph, I could get 22 while pulling a 4x6 enclosed tire trailer. The stock ECU sucks.

Best I managed was 33.3mpg on a trip to Austin at 65-70mph. I even had the top down for an hour of that drive. That was stock 1.6, stock ecu, no turbo.

I haven't seen any hypermilers with aero mods around here. Maybe I just haven't noticed.

I get 25-26 mpg since Ive had this Miata. To the original post, Honestly if that thing got 60mpg I still wouldnt drive it lol. I will say that its interesting the way it sits and who knows what the end product might be.