The actual fuel consumption figures vary by variant and operational use. According to calculations by i6 group, the Boeing 787 family burns between 0.6 and 0.7 gallons per passenger per 100 km depending on model (-8, -9, or -10). The same source estimates that an Airbus A330-900neo typically uses about 0.65 gallons per passenger per 100 km in a standard multi-class layout with around 300 seats.
In terms of pure MPG statistics—assuming a typical occupancy rate—a Boeing 787-9 achieves approximately 76 miles per gallon per seat according to Simple Flying data. The Airbus A330neo is estimated at approximately 85–95 miles per gallon per passenger.
“MPG” in aviation usually refers to gallons burned per seat-mile or its inverse; this metric can shift significantly based on four main factors: stage length, seating density, payload mix (including cargo), and aerodynamic or structural efficiency of the airframe. For example, very long flights tend to favor the composite-heavy design of the Boeing 787 due to cruise efficiency, while medium-haul routes with high-density seating can see the A330neo match or surpass its rival in terms of fuel economy.
Condor positions its A330-900neo as an environmentally friendly flagship for medium-to-long haul holiday travel featuring dense seating arrangements that enhance seat-mile economics. Meanwhile, global network carriers prefer the Dreamliner for longer point-to-point routes where its aerodynamic advantages are most pronounced.
Airlines’ decisions between these two types often come down less to technological differences than acquisition cost, fleet commonality (such as pilot training), flexibility for different route profiles, and capital investment requirements.
Technical specifications show close similarities: both aircraft carry similar numbers of passengers in two-class layouts (around 290–300), have comparable maximum takeoff weights (over half a million pounds), and offer nearly identical ranges—4,470 miles for the A330-900neo versus about 4,680 miles for the Boeing 787-9.
Manufacturers tend not to benchmark each other directly on MPG because results depend heavily on specific missions flown by airlines rather than laboratory conditions or marketing materials alone.
Both aircraft represent major improvements over older models like earlier versions of the A330 or legacy Boeings such as the original triple-seven series or even narrowbody types stretched beyond their optimal range.
For travelers and airlines alike, both jets provide quieter cabins and reduced environmental impacts relative to predecessors. Experts generally agree that while the Dreamliner holds a slight edge on ultra-long-haul sectors under certain conditions, densified configurations or shorter missions may allow the A330neo to close—or even reverse—the gap in real-world operations.
As one summary notes: “If you forced a one-line verdict, the Boeing 787 typically delivers slightly better ‘miles per gallon’ per seat on long, fully comparable missions. However, the Airbus A330neo is close, so close that seat counts, mission length, and capital costs often matter more than the raw fuel-burn delta.”
Ultimately airline network strategy—matching aircraft capabilities with market needs—remains more decisive than small differences in MPG figures between these two modern widebodies.
Alerts Sign-up
