I am looking to get the last 2013 CX-5 my dealership has? I have test drove and don't mind the less HP motor. It is a AWD Touring with Moonroof/Bose package and Tech package. The MSRP is $29180 and they offered it to me for ~$26100. I also plan on driving this car 20,000 miles a year for the next 5 years. Is the Total Confidence(5y/60000miles) plan for $1200 worth it. Thanks in advance for the help.
2013 CX-5 Touring AWD Deal
- Thread starter Jay78412
- Start date
You get 3yr/36kmiles from factory so you're paying $1200 for a 2yr/12k warranty. I was offered a 7yr/75k mile warranty for $1300. I declined bc from the Mazdas I've owned, I've never reached repairs above the $1300 so I'm still in the positive if a repair that is out of warranty comes up. Plus powertrain warranty is 5yr/50k miles, that should cover most major repairs outside of regular maintence.
TreyP
2018 Soul Red AWD Touring CX-5
For only a grand more you should be able to get a 2014 Touring AWD with the 2.5, it seems silly to me to not go that little bit further for a much better car. Of course, you will have the infamous iPod problem if you do.
TreyP
2018 Soul Red AWD Touring CX-5
I'm currently getting just under 30 mpg with AWD and the engine isn't done breaking in yet, so it is still climbing. That works for me with AWD.
You would also get a better trade in value when the time comes with a 2014 Touring (or GT)
Last edited:
If you don't need more power than the sweet little 2.0L provides then a bigger engine offers no advantage. In fact it just costs more to run and makes the car handle worse (an extra 100 lbs. between the front wheels). Plus, the range is less and it costs more upfront.
Bigger is not always better.
TreyP
2018 Soul Red AWD Touring CX-5
...And the trade in is better, and the MPG difference is marginal at best, and the ride is more enjoyable when you're not worrying about getting flattened trying to merge onto the highway.
And if ANY car notices a mere 100 lbs difference it is not worth being on the road. But keep telling yourself these things until you save up for a new one.
And if ANY car notices a mere 100 lbs difference it is not worth being on the road. But keep telling yourself these things until you save up for a new one.
kelvincheu
Member
2.5L engine is bigger in size and heavier than 2.0L, but 2014 model had overall lighter weight by some 100kg. It's in the specs.
According to all the specs I've seen, the 2014 2.5L weighs over 100 lbs. more than the 2013 2.0L:
Edmonds.com:
2013 FWD 2.0L curb weight 3272 lbs. http://www.edmunds.com/mazda/cx-5/2013/features-specs.html?sub=suv&style=101421362
2014 FWD 2.5L curb weight 3375 lbs. http://www.edmunds.com/mazda/cx-5/2014/features-specs.html?sub=suv&style=200459302
2013 AWD 2.0L curb weight 3426 lbs. http://www.edmunds.com/mazda/cx-5/2013/features-specs.html?sub=suv&style=101421365
2014 AWD 2.5L curb weight 3532 lbs. http://www.edmunds.com/mazda/cx-5/2014/features-specs.html?sub=suv&style=200459303
Where do you get your "specs" from?
Trade in? I've NEVER traded a car in and don't plan on ever doing so. Even if I did, I would not buy a car for it's trade in value, I would buy the car I wanted. That's the oldest mind game in the history of car buying, justifying extra expenses in terms of higher resale/trade-in value. But cars are depreciating assets and the options depreciate along with the value of the vehicle. In general, the more you spend, the more it costs you. And if the price of gas jumps up suddenly, the 2.0L will hold it's relative value even better.
By looking at hundreds of real world mpg figures, compiled by real owners of both the 2.0L and the 2.5L, I'm seeing a considerable difference in fuel consumption, around 7-8% more fuel on average used by the larger engine. Considering that I make my living as an investor I find that kind of difference worth considering, especially knowing that both engines get you there just as quickly on public roads. If we were racing on a racetrack I would concede the extra fuel consumption of the larger engine would offer significant benefit (in terms of lap times) but not on public roads.
I don't have to worry about getting flattened while merging because I have good driving skills and the 2.0L is actually pretty peppy if you know how to use it. But I acknowledge that the larger engine could be an advantage for a beginning driver or for any driver who is too timid to get the most out of the 2.0L.
The CAR won't notice 100 more lbs. but a decent driver will definitely feel 100 lbs. of extra weight, all other things being equal. This is not unique to the CX-5.
What kind of ridiculous statement is that? I buy all my cars/motorcycles with cash and have for decades. If I wanted a 12 cylinder Ferrari I could buy it tomorrow (but it wouldn't get me where I was going any sooner). In any case, the OP stated in the opening post that he does not mind the lower HP rating of the 2.0L engine. And I think that shows a certain amount of admirable thrift (especially if one is in that period of life in which they are working towards building a retirement that is timely while still being financially robust enough to fully enjoy the freedoms that come with retirement).
To the original poster:
I think that sounds like a good deal. Personally, I would pass on the extended warranty and invest the money for your retirement. As already mentioned the new car already comes with a 3 year 36,000 mile warranty and you would be quite unlucky to get that much out of it between 36,000 and 60,000 miles. Modern cars are so much more reliable than in the past.
TreyP
2018 Soul Red AWD Touring CX-5
lol....ok.
Based on the above quote, you must be starving. While it is true that a car is almost always a depreciating asset, that doesn't mean that one shouldn't discount the best trade in (or better yet, resale) value when buying a car.
This I agree with. Saving money is never a bad idea, and we all have different thresholds of what is acceptable to obtain that goal.
Ive averaged out over 34mpg on 19k miles of driving on the 2.0 fwd. Replicate that on the 2.5. Probably more like 30-31 at best.
What is that in dollars? about $300/year cheaper. Extrapolated further we see $1500 savings after 5 years and $3000 after 10. Are those few extra hp really worth this cost?
TreyP
2018 Soul Red AWD Touring CX-5
To me, absolutely without a doubt. I look at it a different way, 30 MPG with AWD and a performance level that I am comfortable with is easily worth an extra $25 per month by your calculation.
My calculation, based on my annual driving and average local price per gallon is even better, coming in at $13.48 per month, and $161.76 per year:
Engine
2 liter: MPG: 30 Miles/yr: 11000 Gallons/Year: 366.6666667 Price/gal: $3.75 Annual: $1,375.00 Monthly: $114.58
2.5 ltr: MPG: 34 Miles/yr: 11000 Gallons/Year: 323.5294118 Price/gal: $3.75 Annual: $1,213.24 Monthly: $101.10
$161.7647059 difference per year
$13.48039216 difference per month
Last edited:
I have a question that hasn't been asked yet that I can see; what car are you coming from, and are you expecting similar performance?
I have a 2014 CX-5 Touring AWD. I chose this model because I came from a 2011 Mazda3 Sport with the 2.5L engine. I drove plenty of 2013 CX-5's and never bought one for one specific reason: It felt awful. Coming from a 2.5L MZ3, I couldn't handle a 2.0L CX-5. I even hated getting it as a loaner. Couldn't merge the same way, couldn't drive the same way. As soon as they made a 2.5L CX-5 I was sold. I just got it a few weeks ago. It has less than 1500 miles on it and my average mpg is around 30. I drive 10 miles per day to and from the office and then around town. I took a few hundred mile road trip and noticed a significant jump in mpg.
Anyways, to each their own, but I couldn't get used to the 2013 model CX-5 when I was used to a more zoomy ride. The AWD model felt even worse with the extra weight and the 2.0L. I love my 2014....even with the annoying iPod connection and inability to shuffle songs over BT on my iPhone.
I have a 2014 CX-5 Touring AWD. I chose this model because I came from a 2011 Mazda3 Sport with the 2.5L engine. I drove plenty of 2013 CX-5's and never bought one for one specific reason: It felt awful. Coming from a 2.5L MZ3, I couldn't handle a 2.0L CX-5. I even hated getting it as a loaner. Couldn't merge the same way, couldn't drive the same way. As soon as they made a 2.5L CX-5 I was sold. I just got it a few weeks ago. It has less than 1500 miles on it and my average mpg is around 30. I drive 10 miles per day to and from the office and then around town. I took a few hundred mile road trip and noticed a significant jump in mpg.
Anyways, to each their own, but I couldn't get used to the 2013 model CX-5 when I was used to a more zoomy ride. The AWD model felt even worse with the extra weight and the 2.0L. I love my 2014....even with the annoying iPod connection and inability to shuffle songs over BT on my iPhone.
Of course the actual figures will vary widely based upon how many miles one drives (the more one drives the bigger the savings become) but I like the way you look at the long term picture.
One of the oldest tricks in the book is to break down costs by the month to make them seem less significant. Even the American hero Benjamin Franklin did this when he was trying to convince the early American colonists to subscribe to worthy public projects such as a city hospital or to raise funds for the defense of the colony to purchase cannons, guns and other supplies to equip volunteers for common defense or a library so the residents who, singly, could only afford a book or two could obtain a wide variety of knowledge compiled by the modern authors of the day and thus, improve their lives. He would even break down the monthly subscription cost to the cost per day in an effort to make the cost sound affordable. In this way he greatly improved the lives of early Americans.
However, in personal financial affairs, Franklin was hugely instrumental in instilling thrift, as a means to wealth and a good life, in the early American populace. He did this primarily through his immensely well read Poor Richards Almanac which he published every year for many years. Americans loved it and the great effect it had on early America cannot be over emphasized. The very success of the American Revolution may not have been possible without this embedded wisdom. Pithy expressions such as "A penny saved is a penny earned" and "Early to bed and early to rise makes a man healthy, wealthy and wise" would embed themselves in the American psych and be handed down for generations to come. He was adamant in his advice to avoid personal debt, the only exception being land which was cheap in the day and could be worked to secure a good income. Unfortunately, his wise advice is eroding with time. Franklin himself became a very wealthy man. Born poor, he did not do this through inheritance or charging high prices to people who were desperate, but by reducing his personal expenses to the bare minimum and working diligently, providing needed goods and services, saving as much as possible through the years. He started this path of thrift and saving and investing early in life and, even though hard money was extremely scarce in those days, through steady persistence he became quite wealthy by age 40 and by age 50 he was truly a man of power and influence and his finances strong enough he could devote his life to causes dear to his heart without worry of where the next dollar would come from. If not for Benjamin Franklin and the fact that he had free time in his later years to devote to the cause of the American Revolution, Americans to this day might still be British subjects, subservient to the King. The secret to personal freedom is tightly controlling the balance between the income and the expense and the best way to do this is have an eagle eye on the expense side of the ledger.
Unfortunately, now the motto seems to be "Spend early, spend often, there will be more where that came from". Most Americans have so much debt they cannot imagine themselves ever debt free and think nothing of adding a little here and there (after all, I work hard and I deserve nice things, right?). I can afford it, never mind that my savings is in shambles. The best one is "no worries, it will add to the resale value, I am making the wise financial decision by upgrading to the most expensive trim level", LOL! These people will never be rich unless they inherit it from their daddy (and even then it will likely be gone long before they are in their graves).
Apologies for the long ramble but I do admire the diligence practiced by those who know the value of a dollar here, a dollar there, especially when practiced over the long term.
Just to let you know I am going from a 2011 Nissan Juke SV. It was a fun car to drive but to small with the new addition to the family. I do mostly highway driving about 20,000 a year. I drove both the 2013 and 2014 CX-5 Touring and didn't think the increased cost was worth the HP. I ended up getting the 2013 CX-5 Touring with Bose/Moonroof, Tech package, and XM for $26000 with a MSRP of $29100. I couldn't get close to those same specs in a 2014 in this area. This is a car that my company with pay me a monthly amount($~400 after taxes) and 23 cents a mile. So MPG is important to me. After my first highway trip of 300 miles I got 32mpg. I did end up getting the extended warranty but might cancel it. I plan on keeping this car for 5 years and with work and personal miles I expect to have over ~100,000 miles on it by then. Thanks for everyones input. I look forward to chatting with you all in the future.
TreyP
2018 Soul Red AWD Touring CX-5
I've always liked the Juke, but I couldn't live with that small of a storage area, especially in a CUV.
Congrats on the CX-5 purchase, I"m sure you'll love it as much as we all do.
Last edited:
New Threads and Articles
-
2017~2025 CX-5 Dead except tail light allegedly hit by lightning
- By copyoncall
- Replies: 0
-
-