Latest (bad) news on US diesel and MazdaSpeed options...

[piotrek91]

That's it settle then, the 2.5l is better because it can get to 60 faster. That's the number one criteria with all CX-5 buyers of course!
I tend to think about the hassle of getting to 60, not how fast it gets there. I know that the diesel performance is certainly not the reason it is not being introduced to the USA, it would be nice if it was so that the debate had a bit more merit to it by people having driven both versions. Hopefully they introduce it but it doesn't look like it in the near future.

I recommend you read this article:
http://wardsauto.com/auto-makers/product-assault-scr-fix-behind-mazda-s-diesel-delay

Some relevant quotes:

CHICAGO – A bevy of new-product introductions, plus disappointment in performance, is what’s behind the continued delay in the U.S. launch of Mazda’s Skyactiv diesel, a top official says.

“We met all the regulatory environments on diesel but didn’t deliver the performance aspects we wanted. We decided to delay it to get it right.”

But O’Sullivan says aftertreatment technology likely will be used, but with an engineering focus toward boosting performance, not making the engine cleaner.

Most Americans will not pay a premium price over the 2.5L for a diesel that takes 9.4s to get to 62MPH with the automatic.
The Manual version is a different ball game, but we all know that's never going to happen.

 

[MikeM.]

I tend to think about the hassle of getting to 60, not how fast it gets there.

The "hassle" of getting to 60 mph?? (rlaugh)

That's what I think every time I press the accelerator 1/3 of the way to the floor to get to 60 mph, "man, this is such a hassle!"


You should have got an automatic transmission if you don't like to shift.

 

[SirWanker]

Torque is IMO very overrated. Performance is all about horsepower, curb weight and gearing.

True, horsepower will determine how fast a vehicle can go but torque will define how quickly that speed can be attained.
For city driving, I would consider torque a bigger factor than overall horsepower.

People who buy Diesel-powered vehicles tend to appreciate the daily practicality and fuel efficiency over the fun-to-drive factor.
IMHO Mazda should have brought over the diesel with manual only.

 

[Dr_Watson]

I tend to think about the hassle of getting to 60, not how fast it gets there.

The "hassle" of getting to 60 mph?? (rlaugh)

That's what I think every time I press the accelerator 1/3 of the way to the floor to get to 60 mph, "man, this is such a hassle!"


You should have got an automatic transmission if you don't like to shift.

The hassle wasn't in the shifting, more in the revs required to get there. For an overtake I prefer to use a single gear, be it 4th or 5th, with no need to downshift, hence no delay, instant push as soon you press the pedal. But again, unless you have driven both then you can't really comment.

I must say though, I did have more fun in the 2.0 MT a few years ago when I test drove one than the 2.5 AT last week.

I think I see why the diesel isn't coming to the US, sounds like it's not very welcome! But seriously, everyone's opinion will differ, I hope it does come so you can test it yourself. I disagree with the above about bringing it in manual, the AT is very nice to drive too.

 

[Srad600]

I'm personally a huge fan of high torque, in cars and bikes. HP is great, but if you want to feel like someone just strapped you to a locomotive, torque is where it's at.

 

[CC58]

I test drove a 2.5 a few days ago then a diesel automatic. The 2.5 was shocking, I couldn't imagine having to drive above 4000 rpm to get anywhere. Unless you have driven both, you don't really have any grounds to comment. Feel is everything when you are selling an SUV. How many people buy this car for performance based on numbers. Not many I bet, average age and lifestyle of most buyers would prove that.

You should have studied up on the 2.5L before test drive. If you want it to take off, you have to snap the gas half way to tell the computer to downshift and take off briskly. If you push it normally, the computer will try to save gas and won't downshift as you'd expect. There is also a button at end of gas pedal travel. If you punch gas pedal to floor you will hear a click. The button tells the computer take off like a scalded dog.

If you are in the mountains, its mandatory to use the shifter gate. You can control which gear you are in going up or down mountains making travel a joy.

 

[Dr_Watson]

Yeh, I know how it works, I had a 7 speed DSG box before in a golf with kickdown function. I tried all styles of driving, I tried the manual too which was fun, but made me think a complete manual would be a nice option, at least for European markets.

I did miss having paddles though, that would be more fun, my golf DSG had paddles and it was much more enjoyable than using the shifter. Then again, it's my wifes car and she would never dream of using paddles!

There were a lot of Mazda CX-3 and 6 versions at the dealer, the 6 has paddles and nearly every other Mazda I saw apart from the CX5 has a HUD too, I would really like to try that, half way to being an F16 pilot as I dream about!!

 

[MikeM.]

There were a lot of Mazda CX-3 and 6 versions at the dealer, the 6 has paddles and nearly every other Mazda I saw apart from the CX5 has a HUD too, I would really like to try that, half way to being an F16 pilot as I dream about!!

Shift paddles and Heads Up Display will not get you half way to an F16, more like about .01% closer. But you can dream. (sadbanana)

 

[MikeM.]

The hassle wasn't in the shifting, more in the revs required to get there.

It's not like you have to pedal real fast to use higher revs. I just push the accelerator at a faster rate if I want it to downshift. It's second nature, not a hassle.

 

[MikeM.]

I think I see why the diesel isn't coming to the US, sounds like it's not very welcome!

I would consider the diesel if it were cost effective but, until very recently, in my area diesel was considerably more expensive than gas. And with the added expense at purchase it just didn't make any sense. Now that diesel a few cents less expensive, I'd consider it (even though I fully expect the relative pricing to reverse within a year). But I still don't like the fact that it's more limiting as to where it can be refueled (not to mention that lingering smell that never seems to leave my hands after handling a diesel pump handle).

I would still miss the sportier nature of the gasoline power band.

 

[inlinev]

I was all gung-ho about getting a jetta TDI, but with the cost of diesel and the diesel engine upgrade my break even would have been around year 7...not worth it really. And considering most publications dogged the diesel jetta over the 2.0T, I didn't see the merit.

 

[Kedis82ZE8]

What is the oil/filter maintenance schedule of a diesel CX-5? How many quarts of oil does it take?

 

[IHeartGroceries]

Shift paddles and Heads Up Display will not get you half way to an F16, more like about .01% closer. But you can dream. (sadbanana)

No, in fact, I consider Mazda's Active Driving Display (lazy attempt at HUD) to be a nuisance. And paddle shifters add virtually nothing to driving experience. Though, the sweet little Skyactiv transmission certainly compliments paddle shifting.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

 

[old-school]

Folks that have driven the 2.0L, 2.5L, 2.2LD are trying to say driving the Diesel is more than the sum of it's parts. I like numbers on paper, but we bought the CX-5 from the drivers seat. I'll tip my hand to the folks that have driven a 2.5L and the 2.2LD vs numbers on paper. It would be kind a cool, in the land of the free, if we could drive a Diesel...

 

[Dr_Watson]

The HUD may be rubbish, but it would be nice to try it. My point was that cars half the CX-5 price have the option.

The main reason the diesel is special is that it does not behave like a typical diesel, I have owned many cars, mixtures of gas and diesel. This diesel is as quiet as the gas, has no turbo lag, and pulls to the red line.

Diesel is slightly cheaper than gas here. Although when buying a car, I have no thought about economy. I don't do many miles, I drive each version and buy the one I enjoy driving the most. Typical Swiss trait I guess. The debate is an interesting one, the Asian, Oz and German forums all have similar threads with a mixture of opinions. it seems to be very personal choice, some ex diesel owners really love the 2.5, some hate it!

 

[MikeM.]

It would be kind a cool, in the land of the free, if we could drive a Diesel...

The only thing stopping Mazda from bring the diesel CX-5 to our shores is customer demand.

 

[limleong]

Where are you getting your numbers?

The 8 secs, 0 - 100Kmh numbers for the 2.2 SA-D is from this real world review article comparing the Top of the Line CX-5 Diesel with the Audi RSQ3.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/motoring/news/article.cfm?c_id=9&objectid=11295176

Granted. While standard equipment such as VBOX may be used, the different testing methodology will yield different testing results.

 

[dergibog]

Here is just an observation. I believe I'm a minority in my neck o' the woods. The vast majority of people driving this car are women and old retirees (hence the shweet wheels I had to put on for seperation).
I seriously believe that demographic could care less about a diesel engine & I think Mazda is smart enough to know that.

 

[otapnam]

Here is just an observation. I believe I'm a minority in my neck o' the woods. The vast majority of people driving this car are women and old retirees (hence the shweet wheels I had to put on for seperation).
I seriously believe that demographic could care less about a diesel engine & I think Mazda is smart enough to know that.

I think theyre starting to push more for dads, especially with the new commercial - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpmmF88f8HY

it just needs a little more power which we hope is coming sooner than later

 

[dergibog]

^true, agreed.^