General Category > CX-5

Fuel consumption

(1/47) > >>

BigAl:
I love almost everything about my CX5. The only thing I don't is the fuel consumption. I've had a bit of an ongoing battle with Mazda about this since I took delivery on 1st August 2012. Initial concerns about this were brushed aside on the basis that it was still being run-in. So, after about 6k miles, I started keeping detailed records. I've now done 32k miles and the average consumption over that period is just under 41MPG. Pretty poor for a vehicle that claims 54MPG. I know the official figures are not real-world and should only be used as a benchmark, but the CX5 (and the Mazda 6), both seem to be a long way out from actual figures according to Honest John's data - far more so that other manufacturers. They have tried to blame it on my driving style, which is complete nonsense (IMHO) as I've been able to match or exceed the official figures of all the cars I've had over the last 15 years. My last car was a Subaru Forester 2.0D, which did 45mpg and went back to the lease company with 76k miles on it - and was still on the original tyres.

Mazda UK told me that, if I were still having problems at the first service (they said that was when they considered it to be run-in), they would inspect the vehicle themselves. They promptly reneged on that when the time came. Also, they have told me that the published MPG/CO2 figures are for the 2.2D 150, but they use the same figures for the 2.2D 175! The regulations apparently only require one variant to be tested, which I find hard to believe.

What sort of consumption do others achieve?

Alan

rmvf:
I feel for you I recently had a mazda 6 2.0 ltr diesel 08 plate, and was only getting 44mpg, don't like the dpf risk and knew that I wasn't going to do a lot of miles so went for petrol we have done 10.5k now and computer avg is 34. That's 85% urban driving but we always use 6th gear when cruising.

I know that the figures they put out are done is a sort of lab.

wow 75 k on original tyres that's fantastic I once managed 50 k on Michelin mxv, also managed 28k on mazda 3 toyos and would have hit 30 if not for winter.

As for cx5 I will be surprised if we get 20k.

howardsathome:
Hi BigAl. 2 good topics Tyre Life and Fuel Consumption. My previous car was a Nissan Xtrail TD Sport 2003, I drove it for 99,500 miles over many road conditions but mostly Motorway/ A Roads. Overall Fuel consumption was 35 mpg, not bad for older diesel technology and not the best aero dynamics! Original 4 Dunlop Grantrek tyres achieved 60,000 miles with 2 changes front to rear. It also had a full size spare. It is no longer possible to move tyres front to back say every 20,000 miles now because of tyre pressure monitoring systems.
My CX-5 2.2 SE-l AWD is at 38 mpg after 4,600 miles. Not what I had hoped for with all the 'trick' technology. However, I am satisfied overall with the car, and think that it is good value for money compared to the competition. The nearest competition is the Honda CRV which is more expensive like for like and can only improve on the the CX-5 consumption in 1.6L Diesel 2WD form.

BigAl:
Interesting. I also had an X-Trail from 2003-6 - the earliest variant with the Renault diesel engine. I was averaging 41-2 MPG and the front tyres did 45000 before being changed. Never did change the rears - it went back to the lease company at 80000. At 32000 on the CX5, the N/S/F is approaching the wear indicator, but the others aren't too bad.

Not happy with the fuel consumption of the CX5, though. Their real world figures have a much larger variation to the official ones than most other marques. And I still find it hard to believe that they are allowed to test the 150HP version and publish those figures for the 175HP as well...

Alan

BigAl:
An odd one. Did a 360 mile round trip to Kent on Tuesday. Managed an indicated 51.8 mpg for the trip (had filled up and reset average MPG before setting out). Probably thanks to variable speed limits on M1 being set at 60 MPH from MK to the M25, then 50 MPH average speed cameras to the M11... It's now dropped 48, so will be interesting to see what it calculates at when refilled.

Alan

Update - on refilling, the trip computer was still indicating 48MPG. The calculated figure (more accurate) was 45.4.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version