CX-5 MPG with Turbo vs NA?

K

kone

:
19 CX-5 Signature
Wife drives a 19 Signature that I absolutely love, so does she. When I went to replace my car (06 Outback beater) I didn't want another CX5 so I got a new Outback XT w the little turbo. I'm not sure I'm keeping it though. Real world the turbo is thrashy and unrefined, a lot of the gee-whiz technology is glitchy, and most important to me the mpg is low. I cannot get anything above 21 no matter how hard I try, or don't try. Hence this post.

Since I bought the Outback right, I'm toying w idea of trading it on another 5 (it's a superior car in every way but cargo room). Now we get a consistent 23-24 from or 5 Signature, obviously it has the turbo. EPA #s don't show it but I'm wondering if the non-aspirated base 2.5 "generally" gets better mpg than the turbo in the real world? I know the Mazda turbo is different design but most little turbos are less efficient than their NA siblings. Fuelly seems to bear that out for the CX5 but it's very difficult to tell.

Any info?
 
Two reasons for the small mpg penalty for the CX-5 turbo are the small exhaust restriction imposed by the turbo and the lower compression ratio. Both can reduce mpg under steady state running as in highway driving. Of course under boost the turbo uses more fuel as it makes more power.

I am surprised that the OP gats such low mileage with his Outback, the EPA numbers are 26/33 mpg. 21 mpg on the highway makes me think that something is wrong with his Subaru.
 
kone said:
Wife drives a 19 Signature that I absolutely love, so does she. When I went to replace my car (06 Outback beater) I didn't want another CX5 so I got a new Outback XT w the little turbo. I'm not sure I'm keeping it though. Real world the turbo is thrashy and unrefined, a lot of the gee-whiz technology is glitchy, and most important to me the mpg is low. I cannot get anything above 21 no matter how hard I try, or don't try. Hence this post.

Since I bought the Outback right, I'm toying w idea of trading it on another 5 (it's a superior car in every way but cargo room). Now we get a consistent 23-24 from or 5 Signature, obviously it has the turbo. EPA #s don't show it but I'm wondering if the non-aspirated base 2.5 "generally" gets better mpg than the turbo in the real world? I know the Mazda turbo is different design but most little turbos are less efficient than their NA siblings. Fuelly seems to bear that out for the CX5 but it's very difficult to tell.

Any info?
Click to expand...
Here’s EPA fuel economy rating comparison:

A87CF2B1-6C29-45BC-93D1-1AD249DC43F0.jpeg


Since it only comes with AWD on CX-5 2.5T, when you compare it to a 2.5L AWD it should have 2 ~ 3 mpg disadvantage.

In the real world a CX-5 2.5T should have less consistency on MPG depending on driving style from different person. If a driver makes the turbo spinning all the time, the gas mileage would be a lot worse than EPA ratings. On the other hand, I myself can never get close to the EPA ratings from my 2016 CX-5 2.5L AWD, especially on the highway. My CX-5 usually gets 24.5 ~ 25.5 mpg in city, and 27.5 ~ 29.5 (driving below 70 mph) on the highway.

And I agree with CarpeDiem, your 22 mpg (even on the highway) is way off the EPA ratings (23/30/26 city/highway/combined) on a 2021 Subaru Outback 2.4T AWD. Something is wrong. Otherwise a Subaru Outback 2.4T AWD should get a bit better gas mileage than a CX-5 2.5T AWD under most driving conditions.
 
Last edited:
yrwei52 said:
And I agree with CarpeDiem, your 22 mpg (even on the highway) is way off the EPA ratings (23/30/26 city/highway/combined) on a 2021 Subaru Outback 2.4T AWD. Something is wrong. Otherwise a Subaru Outback 2.4T AWD should get a bit better gas mileage than a CX-5 2.5T AWD under most driving conditions.
Click to expand...
You'd think something is wrong, huh? Nope. It might not be broken in yet @ 2500 miles, or winter fuel and temps, but I have yet to see anything above 21.X and it's not unusual as there seem to be a lot of folks doing similarly low. I'd say my normal driving is 20% highway/50% rural/30% suburban. I drive like I have a dozen eggs under my right foot, coast whenever terrain allows, and fight not to allow the turbo to kick in.
 
I used to daily a 2018 Outback 2.5 Premium but returned it and leased a 2020 Outback XT Limited for my mom. The new Outback is a very nice place to sit and I think it's a great car, but in the city I haven't been able to get it above 21 mpg (27 hwy). That number feels bad, but even in my 2019 CX-5 non-turbo I can only muster 24ish mpg in the city (30ish hwy). Better, yes, but not substantial enough for me to sell off the Outback, assuming mpg is the only factor I care about. I think the Outback is more comfortable, has excellent ground clearance, and the cargo area is better suited for long items and car-camping (if you're into that). On the downside, the Outback(s) are not engaging to drive in the slightest, unless you like excessive pitch, roll, numb steering, and the engine that sounds like gravel when you ring it out :p. Comfort and practicality are the Outback's highlights, where the CX-5 is better suited for driver involvement, efficiency, and is (subjectively) better looking.

If you aren't enjoying the Outback, sell it. Life is too short to drive a car you don't enjoy. I personally would avoid owning two of the same car, though. I think it's valuable to get new car ownership experiences, and when you want to blast in the CX-5T, swap cars with your wife for the day!
 
I only got 27 mpg on the highway with my 2016 CX5 2.5L AWD, with winter tires mind you ...
I don't know if that's normal but I think you lose mpg on the highway with winter tires.
 
We have a 16 Touring (NA) and a 19 Reserve (Turbo) and they both average around 24 in mostly suburban driving. On the highway both get a little bit over 30 mpg.
If I drive like my grandma I can get 33 out of both of them.
 
wlong01 said:
We have a 16 Touring (NA) and a 19 Reserve (Turbo) and they both average around 24 in mostly suburban driving. On the highway both get a little bit over 30 mpg.
If I drive like my grandma I can get 33 out of both of them.
Click to expand...

I'll have to test without winter tires and no wind because I figured 26 was a bit on the lower end ...
 
kone said:
I know the Mazda turbo is different design but most little turbos are less efficient than their NA siblings. Fuelly seems to bear that out for the CX5 but it's very difficult to tell.
Click to expand...
On Fuelly.com, you can apply a filter to specify exactly what CX-5 you want. It’s easy to look at turbo equipped models or naturally aspirated models.

I think Fuelly.com is the definitive source to go to when deciding what gas mileage a vehicle will likely get.

Link: https://www.fuelly.com/car/mazda/cx-5
 
Yeah I was looking at that site as well, there it seems a combined of 26/27 mpg is norm.

I basically fueled up to a full tank, drove 150 miles, then fueled up to a full tank
and then calculated to be about 27 mpg, while driving about 80 mph speeds ...

Since I just bought the car, I don't know what oil is in it, I assume the correct 0W-20 :)
 
escape75 said:
Yeah I was looking at that site as well, there it seems a combined of 26/27 mpg is norm.

I basically fueled up to a full tank, drove 150 miles, then fueled up to a full tank
and then calculated to be about 27 mpg, while driving about 80 mph speeds ...

Since I just bought the car, I don't know what oil is in it, I assume the correct 0W-20 :)
Click to expand...
27 is pretty much what I get on my 16,5 GT 2.5 NA. A bit less with snows, a bit more on summer road trips. Home driving is freeway, suburban, city in that order.

Pretty darn consistent. I use radar cruise extensively after jack rabbit starts. Lots of coasting to hypermile.

Total Stats Gal Miles MPG
Total 21- 25.865. 685.8 26.51 snows
16-18 Totals 868.533 24100.3 27.75
19-20 Totals 953.796 26276.4 27.55
Grand Totals 1848.194 51062.5 27.63
Home Total 1340.938 37000.7 27.59

19-20 trips 217.0 6007.9 27.69
16-18 trips 290.256 8053.9 27.75
Tot road trips 507.256 14061.8 27.72
 
Without a commute, and mainly driving to the grocery store or out to the trails (running/hiking), I’ve gotten about 19 mpg average for the first 3,500 miles of ownership. I haven’t really had anything more than a 30 mile highway trip yet, so that and lack of a commute skews the average.

I know how I drive. I am 0% surprised by my low economy. I also run nothing but 93.

Most fun I’ve had in a car since my ‘05 RX-8, and that thing routinely got ~15 mpg.
 
Last edited:
I have just shy of 10,000 miles on my 2019 CX 5 GT-R with the turbo engine. My average mileage on the gauge shows 24.2 MPG. I live in the mountains and make many short trips. I'm doing a lot of coasting going down, and driving pretty hard coming back up so I'm sure that skews the consumption.
I have made quite a few freeway runs of about 200 miles round trip at 75 MPH and got 27 MPG on those drives. I run top tier 91 octane exclusively.

I figure 27 MPG for a vehicle of its size and weight and poor aerodynamics to be pretty acceptable for a highway average. But it sucks gas around town.

Edited, corrected to 24.2 MPG average for 10,000 miles
 
Last edited:
I have a 2021 Grand Touring, non-turbo, non-AWD. It has 755 miles total miles. The dash gauge shows an overall 26.3 mpg. That’s about 60% hwy/40% city, flat Illinois winter driving. I’m hoping it improves a couple of mpg as it gets more broken in and as the temperature increases with the season change.

DwightFrye, I don’t think your overall mileage sounds that bad given your mountain driving and the fact your car has the turbo. The mpg on your highway runs sound great to me.
 
I’m testing what the mileage gauge says on the dash vs. calculated mileage. Only 3 fill ups so far, so nothing conclusive, but my calculated mileage seems to be 1-2 mpg less than the gauge shows. Time will tell how accurate the guage is.

I am wondering if any other folks have checked to see how accurate the dash mpg guage is.
 
Please log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
  • Question
New CX-5 Pre Test Drive Question
Replies
3
Views
482
Bulldog Dad
B
J
Help me decide! 2023 CX-50 GSL or CX-5 Turbo
Replies
18
Views
4K
cxha
cxha
M
CX-5 Changes 2019 vs 2024?
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
yrwei52
yrwei52

Latest posts

Back