CX-5 or CX-30?
#11
I had a similar situation in the choice between the CX-5 and CX-30. For me it came down to the size and turbo for the additional power of the CX-5. GTR or Signature The features are pretty much the same but the CX-5 is slightly larger and has more power. I/we decided on the CX-5 Signature. Picked it up last Friday and so far it is a good decision for us.
#12
Congrats. You'll love the CX-5.
#13
Just picked up a pre-owned CX-5 Grand Touring, myself.
So far, fuel economy is right about at the EPA estimates (~29 mpg highway, and about 25 mpg city). Impressed by how darned zippy it can be in "Sport" mode. Fairly comfortable, quiet. Prior owner had a nice, professional tinting job done that's an improvement. Have been through a couple of snow days, so far, and it's got confident, reliable handling on slick roads. (Easily improved with proper snow+ice tires, of course.)
Like it a lot, so far.
@bobm , still enjoying your CX-5?
So far, fuel economy is right about at the EPA estimates (~29 mpg highway, and about 25 mpg city). Impressed by how darned zippy it can be in "Sport" mode. Fairly comfortable, quiet. Prior owner had a nice, professional tinting job done that's an improvement. Have been through a couple of snow days, so far, and it's got confident, reliable handling on slick roads. (Easily improved with proper snow+ice tires, of course.)
Like it a lot, so far.
@bobm , still enjoying your CX-5?
Last edited by GAsierra; 01-19-2021 at 08:56 AM. Reason: spelling
#14
Just picked up a pre-owned CX-5 Grand Touring, myself.
So far, fuel economy is right about at the EPA estimates (~29 mpg highway, and about 25 mpg city). Impressed by how darned zippy it can be in "Sport" mode. Fairly comfortable, quiet. Prior owner had a nice, profession tinting job done that's a nice improvement. Have been through a couple of snow days, so far, and it's got confident, reliable handling on slick roads. (Easily improved with proper snow+ice tires, of course.)
Like it a lot, so far.
@bobm , still enjoying your CX-5?
So far, fuel economy is right about at the EPA estimates (~29 mpg highway, and about 25 mpg city). Impressed by how darned zippy it can be in "Sport" mode. Fairly comfortable, quiet. Prior owner had a nice, profession tinting job done that's a nice improvement. Have been through a couple of snow days, so far, and it's got confident, reliable handling on slick roads. (Easily improved with proper snow+ice tires, of course.)
Like it a lot, so far.
@bobm , still enjoying your CX-5?
#15
Funny you should ask because I have every intention of writing a review - good, bad and ugly - but actually there is nothing ugly about the CX-5 once I put some more miles on it, take it on a decent trip and maybe get some experience with snow. If I had to give 2 oversimplified impressions - one good and one bad it would be the very solid handling for the good and the very poor mpg - so far averaging ~ 22mpg in mixed driving for the bad.
(Noticed much the same on a 2012 Mazda3 as well. Great overall fuel efficiency, so long as much steady-state speed is the norm. Such as modest driving on city streets, highway miles. But the moment most of a day's driving involves stop-and-go, fuel efficiency plummets. Same with the CX-5, from what I have experienced so far.)
I've seen as high as 33-34mpg average for long stints at a steady 60mph on the highway, but that drops quite a bit once there's a noticeable amount of speed change, hills. Seems to average about 28-30mpg with "highway" driving, for me. Has been as bad as ~19mpg for a mostly stop-and-go several hours. About what I'd expect, more or less. My own average (across many days) is somewhere around 26 to 26.5mpg, give or take; has been for several tanksful.
Would love to compare an effectively turbocharged equivalent Mazda. I know some of their models are now coming with turbo. If done right, they might well address much of the efficiency drops.
Look at the bright side, though. An early 2000s VW Passat V6 AWD that I once had got ~28mpg on the highway, 10-14mpg for heavy stop-and-go driving (on premium gas), and single-digit fuel efficiency if lead-footing it around urban streets for a hours. Lots of power and grip, and quite comfortable, but awful fuel efficiency when giving it the gas.
#16
That's something I've noticed as well. At least, in a tankful of driving that involves heavy city and stop-and-go driving. The acceleration from slow speeds seems to be a killer on MPG.
(Noticed much the same on a 2012 Mazda3 as well. Great overall fuel efficiency, so long as much steady-state speed is the norm. Such as modest driving on city streets, highway miles. But the moment most of a day's driving involves stop-and-go, fuel efficiency plummets. Same with the CX-5, from what I have experienced so far.)
I've seen as high as 33-34mpg average for long stints at a steady 60mph on the highway, but that drops quite a bit once there's a noticeable amount of speed change, hills. Seems to average about 28-30mpg with "highway" driving, for me. Has been as bad as ~19mpg for a mostly stop-and-go several hours. About what I'd expect, more or less. My own average (across many days) is somewhere around 26 to 26.5mpg, give or take; has been for several tanksful.
Would love to compare an effectively turbocharged equivalent Mazda. I know some of their models are now coming with turbo. If done right, they might well address much of the efficiency drops.
Look at the bright side, though. An early 2000s VW Passat V6 AWD that I once had got ~28mpg on the highway, 10-14mpg for heavy stop-and-go driving (on premium gas), and single-digit fuel efficiency if lead-footing it around urban streets for a hours. Lots of power and grip, and quite comfortable, but awful fuel efficiency when giving it the gas.
(Noticed much the same on a 2012 Mazda3 as well. Great overall fuel efficiency, so long as much steady-state speed is the norm. Such as modest driving on city streets, highway miles. But the moment most of a day's driving involves stop-and-go, fuel efficiency plummets. Same with the CX-5, from what I have experienced so far.)
I've seen as high as 33-34mpg average for long stints at a steady 60mph on the highway, but that drops quite a bit once there's a noticeable amount of speed change, hills. Seems to average about 28-30mpg with "highway" driving, for me. Has been as bad as ~19mpg for a mostly stop-and-go several hours. About what I'd expect, more or less. My own average (across many days) is somewhere around 26 to 26.5mpg, give or take; has been for several tanksful.
Would love to compare an effectively turbocharged equivalent Mazda. I know some of their models are now coming with turbo. If done right, they might well address much of the efficiency drops.
Look at the bright side, though. An early 2000s VW Passat V6 AWD that I once had got ~28mpg on the highway, 10-14mpg for heavy stop-and-go driving (on premium gas), and single-digit fuel efficiency if lead-footing it around urban streets for a hours. Lots of power and grip, and quite comfortable, but awful fuel efficiency when giving it the gas.
#17
Ah. Strange, that it's not a bit better, then.
I hear you, on the Audi A4 AllRoad. They made a lot of great choices, on that platform. Not the most cost-effective maintenance regimen on those, nor on the VW Passat (which I used to have). But then, you know that about the Audis in general. Great cars. I considered the A4 and even the A3, when looking. (Even went to the Alfa dealer a couple of times, checking out the Stelvio. Boy, those were hard to say 'no' to.)
Definitely does. Had been hoping for ~18gal or so, given the increased size over the smaller sedans. But then, Mazda's definitely got in its DNA a desire to keep unneeded weight down, keep handling up, etc. Would prefer a ~450-500mi range instead of ~340mi, myself.
I hear you, on the Audi A4 AllRoad. They made a lot of great choices, on that platform. Not the most cost-effective maintenance regimen on those, nor on the VW Passat (which I used to have). But then, you know that about the Audis in general. Great cars. I considered the A4 and even the A3, when looking. (Even went to the Alfa dealer a couple of times, checking out the Stelvio. Boy, those were hard to say 'no' to.)
#18
Ah. Strange, that it's not a bit better, then.
I hear you, on the Audi A4 AllRoad. They made a lot of great choices, on that platform. Not the most cost-effective maintenance regimen on those, nor on the VW Passat (which I used to have). But then, you know that about the Audis in general. Great cars. I considered the A4 and even the A3, when looking. (Even went to the Alfa dealer a couple of times, checking out the Stelvio. Boy, those were hard to say 'no' to.)
Definitely does. Had been hoping for ~18gal or so, given the increased size over the smaller sedans. But then, Mazda's definitely got in its DNA a desire to keep unneeded weight down, keep handling up, etc. Would prefer a ~450-500mi range instead of ~340mi, myself.
I hear you, on the Audi A4 AllRoad. They made a lot of great choices, on that platform. Not the most cost-effective maintenance regimen on those, nor on the VW Passat (which I used to have). But then, you know that about the Audis in general. Great cars. I considered the A4 and even the A3, when looking. (Even went to the Alfa dealer a couple of times, checking out the Stelvio. Boy, those were hard to say 'no' to.)
Definitely does. Had been hoping for ~18gal or so, given the increased size over the smaller sedans. But then, Mazda's definitely got in its DNA a desire to keep unneeded weight down, keep handling up, etc. Would prefer a ~450-500mi range instead of ~340mi, myself.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Howie1
Mazda CX-5
29
06-10-2022 08:29 AM