Dangerous_Dan
Well-known member
Your mileage may vary...
If my Jag was getting 30 MPG on the highway I would send it in for service...
If my Jag was getting 30 MPG on the highway I would send it in for service...
Looks like EPA fuel economy numbers have been released for the CX-5 SkyActiv-D.
It's... it's not good.
https://fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=39777&id=40521&id=39781&id=40522
And for CO2 emissions (including upstream) and petroleum consumption...
That's brutal. (There's no smog ratings for the diesels yet.)
I'm averaging 37 mpg with my 535d. The knuckleheads at the EPA say it should be 30.
Just the opposite with our last gasser, a 2008 Buick Enclave. Combined was supposed to be 20. Couldn't get it above 18.
Change your figures by at least 30%. Diesel wins.
TM
My daughter's CT200h was supposed to average around 40 mpg per EPA. It didn't. It was closer to 48 mpg consistently. The CT200h as is the Mazda likely was designed for the European market where the mpg testing is different than the EPA.Agree. It is the 'diesel vs diesel' where Mazda is not winning right now. Let's see if Mazda manages to sell a few CX-5 diesels to the public and we start getting real life MPG to compare with the Chevy Equinox diesel.
I suspect Mazda's 6-speed automatic is hurting them, not having the right ratio, when most everyone else is moving to 8/9-speed automatics and CVTs.
The problem isn't what it actually does in real life, it's what's on paper. Right now the diesel CX-5 is an absolute crapshoot because 90% of the population isn't educated enough about cars (let alone diesel), to understand EPA figures are just estimates and a car can either under achieve or over achieveMy daughter's CT200h was supposed to average around 40 mpg per EPA. It didn't. It was closer to 48 mpg consistently. The CT200h as is the Mazda likely was designed for the European market where the mpg testing is different than the EPA.
The "American" diesels are likely designed for the EPA testing cycle, so engine parameters, transmission shift points, etc. are going to be different.
As a result, the Mazda may not do well on the EPA test cycle but be much better if you look at how it does in real life.
TM
I think that it's more indicative of the test not reflecting real world for hybrids and diesels. A lot of hybrids beat the EPA numbers because the are driven more on battery and also have the stop/start feature. Diesels have always done better because the test doesn't take into account the longer distance cruising that more diesel drivers do.My daughter's CT200h was supposed to average around 40 mpg per EPA. It didn't. It was closer to 48 mpg consistently. The CT200h as is the Mazda likely was designed for the European market where the mpg testing is different than the EPA.
The "American" diesels are likely designed for the EPA testing cycle, so engine parameters, transmission shift points, etc. are going to be different.
As a result, the Mazda may not do well on the EPA test cycle but be much better if you look at how it does in real life.
TM
Good points. The image of the mediocre published MPG numbers is not a good sign for Mazda to launch its diesel engine(s) in North America and compete successfully against the Equinox/Terrain diesel models.The problem isn't what it actually does in real life, it's what's on paper. Right now the diesel CX-5 is an absolute crapshoot because 90% of the population isn't educated enough about cars (let alone diesel), to understand EPA figures are just estimates and a car can either under achieve or over achieve
If I knew absolutely nothing about cars and walked into a mazda a dealer, I would more then likely buy the gasser based off the EPA fuel economy numbers, since the diesel is more then likely to be at least 1500 to 2000 more then the gasser and there is literally zero benefit if we're talking just about fuel economy
I'm really curious how many they sell, but when your diesel model has literally no advantage over the gasser in terms of economy (EPA rated), but costs more, I can't see how it will sell.
The very first gen? No idea, but I'm guessing not very well considering it was a v6 hybrid (no clue how they thought that would be a good idea).Good points. The image of the mediocre published MPG numbers is not a good sign for Mazda to launch its diesel engine(s) in North America and compete successfully against the Equinox/Terrain diesel models.
I am thinking of when Honda brought its hybrid Accord for 'performance boost' and the MPG was not that stellar. How well did it sell?
The biggest problem for Honda was that the extra purchase price of the hybrid far exceeded the potential savings. IIRC, it was in the neighborhood of 20-25 years. The other issue was that there was no way to tell the cars apart. That's actually part of why the Prius sold so well in it's earlier days. Everyone was able to recognize that you were making the commitment to "save the planet".Good points. The image of the mediocre published MPG numbers is not a good sign for Mazda to launch its diesel engine(s) in North America and compete successfully against the Equinox/Terrain diesel models.
I am thinking of when Honda brought its hybrid Accord for 'performance boost' and the MPG was not that stellar. How well did it sell?
Those are pretty good numbers. I know my lifetime average in the JSW is below that. For comparison, I'm at about 12k miles on my Ram ecodiesel and it's average is 22.4 mpg.Almost 20 k miles on our 18 equinox diesel and its average fuel economy according to fuelly is 42.1 mpg
It is a bit sad how bigger and bigger vehicles seem to be what Americans want. But economy cars like the Civic, Corolla, etc. still sell well. Too bad because the Cruze, Volt, Focus, and Fiesta were all decent cars. I see hard times coming for the big 3, again. I have a hard time envisioning GM's 1.6 diesel hanging around long in this market.The Cruze is getting axed because it's a car, not because of the diesel. And some media reports say that BMW may bring in a diesel in the new platform X5, even if they dump the diesel in the 3-series.
GM is also stopping production of the Volt, because people no longer want to buy cars. They buy trucks and SUVs. I find this a funny incompatibility between people saying they want to be "green" and drive electric, and then they use a 5,500 lb. pickup to drive to Starbucks.
Be that as it may, I think there's still a market for a small SUV with a diesel. I'm still holding out for Mazda. And Hyundai.
The same basic trans that the Gen 2 Volt uses is in the Hybrid Malibu, so I would imagine they would drop it in a plug-in CUV. Mary Barra keeps on saying she's committed to electrification.There was talk about GM putting the Volt technology package into a CUV platform. I wonder if that's still on the table or if it dies with the Volt.