Ask the Car People.SM


Mazda CX-5

404 messages,  Last post on Apr 27, 2013 at 8:56 PM

You are in the Mazda CX-5 Forum.

What is this discussion about? Mazda CX-5, SUV

    

Messages Page 2 of 41

#6 of 404 Re: 2013 Mazda CX-5 [bpizzuti] by aviboy97

Feb 15, 2012 (8:11 am)

Replying to: bpizzuti (Feb 14, 2012 10:18 am)
It'd probably generate more interest if the FE was a little higher with the slushbox
 
26/32/28 and 25/31/28 are not high enough? Look at the city and combined mileage. Higher than anyone else, and 3 more MPG's than the new CR-V.
 
Considering that the new EPA estimate window stickers now show the combined mileage estimates is large bold print and the city and highway estimates in small print, I believe the CX-5 will stand out. People will be drawn to the combined number, not the highway number. That's a major plus for the CX-5.

#7 of 404 Re: 2013 Mazda CX-5 [aviboy97] by bpizzuti

Feb 15, 2012 (8:53 am)

Replying to: aviboy97 (Feb 15, 2012 8:11 am)
26/32/28 and 25/31/28 are not high enough?
 
When the stick is so dramatically higher and yet the slushbox was touted as more efficient than any stick, CVT, or DSG out there, no, it's not enough. They made some sort of drastic change to push the stick's mileage up to 35 MPG territory, and no one seems to know what it is, and I want to if it was done in the tranny or the engine...and if the engine, why wasn't it done to the automatic? The way gas prices are inching up, this is very important to some.

#8 of 404 Re: 2013 Mazda CX-5 [bpizzuti] by aviboy97

Feb 15, 2012 (9:39 am)

Replying to: bpizzuti (Feb 15, 2012 8:53 am)
When the stick is so dramatically higher and yet the slushbox was touted as more efficient than any stick, CVT, or DSG out there, no, it's not enough.
 
So, let me get this straight.....a 3 mpg difference between the 6-speed manual and 6-speed auto is considered "dramatically higher" for highway economy, but when comparing the 6-speed auto to any other automatic from the competition, a 3 mpg advantage in overall fuel economy average is "not enough"? How does that make sense? If anything, the average fuel economy is far more important than highway economy.

#9 of 404 Re: 2013 Mazda CX-5 [aviboy97] by bpizzuti

Feb 15, 2012 (9:48 am)

Replying to: aviboy97 (Feb 15, 2012 9:39 am)
And just who does the CX-5 beat out by 3 MPG with the automatic? Last I checked it's right in-line with the 2013 Ford Escape and 2012 Honda CR-V, who are the primary competitors. If you try and throw up 3 year old designs I'll laugh in your face.
 
Highway FE is what gets advertised, for obvious reasons. That alone makes it important.

#10 of 404 Re: 2013 Mazda CX-5 [aviboy97] by m6user

Feb 15, 2012 (10:05 am)

Replying to: aviboy97 (Feb 15, 2012 9:39 am)
If anything, the average fuel economy is far more important than highway economy.
 
That depends. To the majority of people probably yes but to many the hwy mpg is more important as they use these vehicle as commuter vehicles. Many commutes are 95% hwy and sometimes fairly long so when people start figuring the cost of their commuting versus another vehicle the hwy mpg stands out as very important. You as a Mazda salesperson should understand that versus telling people that it isn't important. You'll notice that most advertising stresses the 40MPG HWY on these commuter cars so obviously the manufactures think it's important as well.
 
You shouldn't pooh-pooh legitimate questions. On one hand you say a couple of mpgs doesn't matter and then try to make your point by saying the combined mpg is a couple of mpgs better. Can't have it both ways.
 
When the Mazda3 Skyactiv slushbox gets better mpg than the stick and then the CX-5 comes and gets substantially less(yes 3mpg is substantial to the consumer, maybe not to the salesman) hwy mpg with the automatic people want to know why....not a "aren't you satisfied with what you're getting".
 
I have the same question with the new Acura ILX 2.4L stick. It is a smaller car with the same engine as the TSX but is going to be rated according to Acura press at about 20/29. The TSX with the same engine and a slushbox is rated at 22/31. How does that makes sense? Same with Mazda's numbers....it doesn't make sense and we would like someone to explain the reasons. If you don't know just say so but don't belittle the question.
 
I've also yet had anyone explain to me why the Mazda3s slushbox gets worse mpg than the Mazda6 with the same drivetrain but is a smaller, lighter car. I asume it is a gearing change in the tranny and maybe a little aerodynamics but darned if anyone I've talked to at Mazda dealer ships has a clue. I've even had a couple of salespeople say "Gee, I never noticed that. That's a good question". I don't how you can stand around on a salesfloor all day and not notice some of these things and not have some decent answers.

#11 of 404 Re: 2013 Mazda CX-5 [bpizzuti] by aviboy97

Feb 15, 2012 (4:26 pm)

Replying to: bpizzuti (Feb 15, 2012 9:48 am)
And just who does the CX-5 beat out by 3 MPG with the automatic?
 
The 2012 CR-V, that's who....
 
CX-5: 25 city / 31 highway / 28 combined (AWD)
          26 city / 32 highway / 29 combined (FWD)
CR-V: 22 city / 30 highway / 25 combined (AWD)
          23 ciry / 31 highway / 26 combined (FWD)
 
As you see, CX-5 has the new CR-V beat by 3mpg in city and combined.
 
Fuel economy for the 2013 Escape has not been released because the car is 6 months away.
 
Highway FE is what gets advertised, for obvious reasons. That alone makes it important.
 
The EPA is trying to eliminate the presumption that the highway economy is what they car will get, so they are trying to focus the buyer on the average. I think that is a good thing. I have never been a fan of advertising just the highway economy becuase it gives the buyer the assumption that is the expected overall economy, even though highway is stated.
 
For the record, I do not agree with the advertising by Mazda stating "35mpg" as a headliner for the CX-5, nor any other company that does the same.

#12 of 404 Re: 2013 Mazda CX-5 [m6user] by aviboy97

Feb 15, 2012 (4:35 pm)

Replying to: m6user (Feb 15, 2012 10:05 am)
That depends. To the majority of people probably yes but to many the hwy mpg is more important as they use these vehicle as commuter vehicles
 
That is true, but simply using highway economy alone as a measure in compairson is only telling 1/3 of the story. The CX-5 is 3mpg better than the new CR-V in 2/3's if the rating estimates. That's all I'm trying to say.
 
You as a Mazda salesperson should understand that versus telling people that it isn't important.
 
I'm not a Mazda salesperson.....
 
On one hand you say a couple of mpgs doesn't matter and then try to make your point by saying the combined mpg is a couple of mpgs better. Can't have it both ways.
 
I never said it didn't matter. Reread my posts.
 
When the Mazda3 Skyactiv slushbox gets better mpg than the stick and then the CX-5 comes and gets substantially less(yes 3mpg is substantial to the consumer, maybe not to the salesman) hwy mpg with the automatic people want to know why....not a "aren't you satisfied with what you're getting".
 
That is a valid question. I could dig into the gearing ratios and find out. I'll post back tomorrow about that....

#13 of 404 CX-5 mpg by m6user

Feb 15, 2012 (4:53 pm)

For the record, I do not agree with the advertising by Mazda stating "35mpg" as a headliner for the CX-5, nor any other company that does the same.
 
I agree too but that is what the manufacturers mention in their ads so it goes to my point about the importance of hwy mpg to the consumer. Perception is reality.
 
Any idea as to why the Mazda3 Skyactiv w/ slushbox gets better mpg than the stick and the CX-5 stick gets substantially better than the Skyactiv slushbox? When someone expects the CX-5 slushbox to do as good or better than the stick and it comes in substantially below it raises legitimate questions. I'm sure there is a good reason and I would think that a sharp Mazda salesperson could get that information.

#14 of 404 Re: CX-5 mpg [m6user] by bpizzuti

Feb 15, 2012 (6:02 pm)

Replying to: m6user (Feb 15, 2012 4:53 pm)
Not to mention I've been asking ever since the number came out, and I can't get an answer. And I DO actually work in the automotive industry...

#15 of 404 Re: CX-5 mpg [m6user] by aviboy97

Feb 16, 2012 (10:59 am)

Replying to: m6user (Feb 15, 2012 4:53 pm)
Here are the final drive ratios for the CX-5 vs the Mazda3 (skyactiv)
 
CX-5: FWD 6-speed: 4.705
          FWD automatic: 4.624
 
Mazda3: 6-speed: 4.105
               automatic: 3.893
 
I don't see a big different in drive ratios for the mtx and auto. There is also only a 72 lb difference between the mtx and auto as well. I will ask my rep if he knows...

Messages Page 2 of 41

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement