The criticisms about the price seem a little harsh to me. Given the the diesel only comes in top-level signature trim, the premium for the diesel is about $4K above the gasoline signature trim 2.5t. This isn't totally out of line - in all vehicles where you can get the save basic vehicle with either engine, the diesel always commands a premium, generally in the range of $2K-$5K.
And seldom does the diesel version offer more power than the competing gas version. The one thing the diesel version generally does much better on is fuel mileage - this has always been the tradeoff. Do you want to pay the extra cost up front for the long-term payback in reduction in fuel cost? Generally, it pans out only folks who drive BIG miles. But this is the area where Mazda truly screwed the pooch (in addition, to the interminable delays, of course). They produced a diesel version of the CX-5 at about what you'd expect with respect to price and performance, but for some reason, totally lost the plot on fuel mileage. Something happened in the development that caused them some major issue with respect to meeting USA emissions and they had to sacrifice fuel mileage to finally get the vehicle certified. Maybe the VW fiasco has made them so gun-shy of gaming the emissions tests, that they felt they couldn't risk even doing the normal optimizations typically done by all mfgs (gas and diesel) to have the car squeeze past the emissions tests?
In any event, I'm going to withhold final judgment until we see some testing of the new car. Tests of CX-5 diesel vs. gas in non-USA markets have consistently preferred the diesel and I wouldn't be surprised if the diesel gets some love in US testing. If the car is significantly nicer to drive, I could see throwing an addition $4K into the deal even if it does mean the total fuel/DEF expense is about a wash.
- Mark
And seldom does the diesel version offer more power than the competing gas version. The one thing the diesel version generally does much better on is fuel mileage - this has always been the tradeoff. Do you want to pay the extra cost up front for the long-term payback in reduction in fuel cost? Generally, it pans out only folks who drive BIG miles. But this is the area where Mazda truly screwed the pooch (in addition, to the interminable delays, of course). They produced a diesel version of the CX-5 at about what you'd expect with respect to price and performance, but for some reason, totally lost the plot on fuel mileage. Something happened in the development that caused them some major issue with respect to meeting USA emissions and they had to sacrifice fuel mileage to finally get the vehicle certified. Maybe the VW fiasco has made them so gun-shy of gaming the emissions tests, that they felt they couldn't risk even doing the normal optimizations typically done by all mfgs (gas and diesel) to have the car squeeze past the emissions tests?
In any event, I'm going to withhold final judgment until we see some testing of the new car. Tests of CX-5 diesel vs. gas in non-USA markets have consistently preferred the diesel and I wouldn't be surprised if the diesel gets some love in US testing. If the car is significantly nicer to drive, I could see throwing an addition $4K into the deal even if it does mean the total fuel/DEF expense is about a wash.
- Mark