Mazda CX-5 diesel MPG

[bigi]

Per Wikipedia and few other actual review sites claim 51-52 MPG (US) for 2.2 Diesel CX-5.

Who would get one if this were made available in US of A?

 

[PricklyPete]

Per Wikipedia and few other actual review sites claim 51-52 MPG (US) for 2.2 Diesel CX-5.

Who would get one if this were made available in US of A?

Yes...perfect vehicle for my wife. I would also buy a Tiguan if offered with a similar diesel.

 

[Zap]

I like the new design language, but I still wouldn't get it.

Now, depending on the engine performance if they stuck it in a Mazda 3 or 6 with a manual transmission...

 

[SithSolo1]

This is my mother's next vehicle if the diesel ever makes it here. She'll be "upgrading" from an '09 Fusion.

 

[skyking]

I seriously doubt that mileage, given the aerodynamic deficit it has compared to a TDI.
I'd be happy with 45 MPG myself.

 

[bigi]

I seriously doubt that mileage, given the aerodynamic deficit it has compared to a TDI.
I'd be happy with 45 MPG myself.

What is this based on?

 

[skyking]

frontal area

 

[Sid59]

frontal area

With a targeted drag coefficient of 0.33, the CX-5 aims to be the most aerodynamic compact SUV in the field. - http://www.torquenews.com/1070/mazda-cx-5-debuts-la-auto-show-style

I wonder what the co-efficients are with other small crossovers in this segment.

 

[skyking]

I saw that.
0.33 is about as good as it gets. There are a few of the larger SUVs at 0.34

 

[ViviTheMage]

How much

 

[skyking]

Not here yet, but I'd guess low~mid 30's

 

[LTC8K6]

Sounds like it will again just break even with the gasoline engine.

 

[mwmorph]

It all depends on the testing cycle. Looking over the wiki page, it seems that it was tested under the EU cycle. The EU cycle compared to the US cycle, after already allowing for the 1.2-1 IMP to US gallon conversion is sill 20-40% offf depending on the motor and car. The A3 for example gets 48mp(US)g equalivent on the european cycle and 34 on the US cycle.

I predict the CX-5 will get something like 38MPG when it gets here, still great but not Prius numbers.

 

[skyking]

I went down and took a test-sit in both, a moonroof equipped and a standard.
I fit everywhere. I could set the drivers seat forward to a position I could drive for a while, and could then sit in the back behind it comfortably.
I have a very long torso and hit my head in the sloping back of most sedans, and up front with any moonroof installation.
Mazda got this as right as they could, IMO. :thumbsup:

 

[ThatsABigOne]

I went down and took a test-sit in both, a moonroof equipped and a standard.
I fit everywhere. I could set the drivers seat forward to a position I could drive for a while, and could then sit in the back behind it comfortably.
I have a very long torso and hit my head in the sloping back of most sedans, and up front with any moonroof installation.
Mazda got this as right as they could, IMO. :thumbsup:

No test drive?

If this car is too expensive for my taste, then I will just have to settle for MS3.

 

[Doppel]

Agree with skyking I don't see it getting mileage like that on the highway. Obviously in the city it would be lower still. You'll also pay more for that engine of course.

 

[angry hampster]

Depends on the price. IF the diesel is a $4-5k option, then absolutely not.

 

[LTC8K6]

The current Jetta TDI is EPA rated at 42 highway.

 

[skyking]

No test drive?

If this car is too expensive for my taste, then I will just have to settle for MS3.

Nope. It would be my wife's so why bother? She has to come check it out when she wants to. It just passed the first hurdle, one that is often failed.

 

[50 mpg by 2012]

Hopefully a contribution to the discussion ...

Pay special attention to MPG Estimates from Drivers Like You/sticker combined mpg for the US gasoline SkyActiv-G FWD Mazda3

Automatic (S6) 37.6/32 mpg(US) ttp://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=32057


6 spd MT 41/31 mpg(US) http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=32056

For a larger sample size, the 5DR ttp://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=32086

The EU (NEDC) combined mpg rating for the EU gasoline SkyActiv-G FWD Mazda3 is 37.2 and 42.2 mpg(Imp) combined for the Automatic (S6) and 6 spd MT respectively, about 30 and 35 mpg(US) combined. Is that close enough to EPA/USER values … ?

For the US SkyActiv FWD Mazda CX5 gasoline 6 spd MT 41/31 mpg(US)
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=32225

The EU diesel is rated 61.4 and 53.4 mpg(Imp) combined for MT and AT respectively. [No gasoline CX5 in the EU as far as I can tell.]

My best guess is that could translate to about 50 and 45 mpg(US) AVERAGE for MT and AT respectively with a light footed US CX5 SkyActiv-D user.

EU data source http://carfueldata.direct.gov.uk/

For comparison, US User Estimates versus sticker of VW/Audi diesels see
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do?action=browseList1&make=Volkswagen

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do?action=browseList1&make=Audi

Another good reference for US fuel economies back to 1984 is
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/powerSearch.jsp

Please let me know … IF … you see any errors or flaws in the logic.

 

[skyking]

plenty of errors. Too small a sample size, and the one with 8 vehicles was only 8% above the EPA number.
GO to fuelly and look at samples that are 100,000 miles or more of fuel logs, not estimates.

 

[LTC8K6]

When a vehicle is known for it's economy, people tend to try to get good economy with it, and these are the folks who tend to report. So, the reports can end up looking better than what you'll actually get.

 

[LTC8K6]

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=yourMpgVehicle&id=32211

This one, despite being 80% highway, didn't even approach the EPA numbers.

 

[50 mpg by 2012]

How many SkyActiv gasoline and diesel Mazda 3s and CX5s are listed on fuelly?

GO to fuelly and look at samples that are 100,000 miles or more of fuel logs, not estimates.

That does not necessarily make the ACCURACY better than "USER ESTIMATE". It just has the potential of more data points with greater uncertainty than those pre-screened for unreasonableness prior to inclusion in EPA's User MPG Estimates.

Keep in mind that the term "Estimate" is the result of all of the variability between drivers, environments, topology, and driving conditions (road, weather, and trafic).

Simply put ... there is NO ... SINGLE ... mpg value ... that fits ALL drivers in all conditions for a given vehicle model. Hence ... "Estimate".

As for the estimate 8% above sticker ... go look at the >2.5 Liter Det3 gasoline machines and see how many "USER ESTIMATES" reflect >8% below sticker mpg combined. I think you will find the range generally between 8% and 15% below combined sticker.

If you are really interested ... here is a technial paper to study on the subject: SAE Technical Papers #2011-01-0618 © 2011: "Predicting Individual Fuel Economy" by Lin, Z., and Greene, D. Oak Ridge National Laboratory

BTW, I have seen documentation indicting that there are far more than 35K vehicles in the "USER ESTIMATES" database accumulating mpg data, some at rates of 12K/year or more, some for many years. A good example is the Honda Civic, with multiple annual configuration going back to 1987 (25 model years).

sky ... I'll let you count the number of samples and data points for the Civic.

Don't get me wrong ... fuelly data is OK ... but, one would have to do a lot of statistical work on the data to approach the quality of EPA's Shared MPG Estimates, IMO.

However ... it is your choice ... I'm just sharing some of the "stuff" I have learned over 7 years of study ... take it or leave it ...

HAPPY MOTORING ....

 

[50 mpg by 2012]

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=yourMpgVehicle&id=32211

This one, despite being 80% highway, didn't even approach the EPA numbers.

That happens sometimes ...

But at least you took the time to look at the backup data.

Try the Power Search ... it even includes MSRP for 2010 and newer.

There is even a mobile APP for calculating and tracking your mpg.

More tools for your "toolbox".

I strongly agree with your point that drivers wanting "better fuel economy" usually tend to get it. And, drivers wanting "performance" usually don't. And that is one of those situations that makes it impossible to have a single set of Monroney sticker values for a vehicle that represents ALL drivers and situations.