Displeased with mileage

[Unobtanium]

I agree. Just grasping at straws.

Here in CA our pumps have recovery system that sucks out any overfill when you top-off, a lot of people don't understand you're only refilling the gas stations tank. So if you're trying to squeeze in an extra half gallon you're only wasting fuel and money.

On my cx5 four wheel drive anything above 65mph highway gets under 26 miles per gallon.

Seems like I'm doing OK by your standards.

 

[Unobtanium]

The 85MPH speed limit you speak of in Texas has only been around a couple years.
If you always set your cruise to the speed limit as you claim, I doubt that any of your older cars ever saw 85MPH.

Cruise control is never the most fuel efficient way to drive.
All cruise control systems are reactive. They don't predict terrain and they are not smooth with the throttle. An attentive drive should always be able to get better fuel economy than cruise control at any average speed.



What tires did you get? Different tires have significantly different rolling and air resistance. At least you stuck to OEM size I hope?



Some other factors to consider:
The CX-5's under-report mileage and speed by about 1%. If you're speedo is showing 80MPH you're really going almost 81
Many speedometers significantly over report speed. You're speedo might be showing 80, but you're really going 77.

This is an important factor. You've actually traveled 1% more distance than your ODO indicates and you've done so 1% faster than your speedometer indicates.
Your famously fuel efficient G20 may have over reported speed, so while you thought you were going 80 you may have been only doing 78.
As I'm sure you know, speed is the single largest factor affecting fuel consumption so 1% here and 2% there can make a significant impact.


You state that your v8 Jeep was able to match its highway fuel economy rating on long trips, but the CX-5 is not able to do so.

As others have said:
The CX-5 is not a good high speed cruiser because it has a large frontal area.. but so did your Jeep.
However,
The EPA highway test cycle involves a LOT of acceleration and deceleration.
Compared to the Jeep, the CX-5 does not use much fuel to accelerate because it's light.
The heavy Jeep uses ALOT of gas to get all that mass up to speed, but once it's there the V8 only uses maybe 20% more than the CX-5.

TLDR:
Adding weight to a car DOES NOT have a big impact on a cars steady speed highway fuel economy, but it has a large impact on the EPA HWY rating.
I really wish the EPA would just publish a simple steady speed fuel economy at various speeds (say 45, 65 and 85) instead of using overly complicated test cycles.

I actually drove very slow. I drove my others 80 to 95 on road trips. I was trying hard to get nice mileage on the mazda.

Based on multiple radar signs at 60 mph my speedo is over reporting by 1mph max.

I have OEM sized continental lx20 crosscontact ecoplus tires.

 

[xtrailman]

The 85MPH speed limit you speak of in Texas has only been around a couple years.
If you always set your cruise to the speed limit as you claim, I doubt that any of your older cars ever saw 85MPH.

Cruise control is never the most fuel efficient way to drive.
All cruise control systems are reactive. They don't predict terrain and they are not smooth with the throttle. An attentive drive should always be able to get better fuel economy than cruise control at any average speed.



What tires did you get? Different tires have significantly different rolling and air resistance. At least you stuck to OEM size I hope?



Some other factors to consider:
The CX-5's under-report mileage and speed by about 1%. If you're speedo is showing 80MPH you're really going almost 81
Many speedometers significantly over report speed. You're speedo might be showing 80, but you're really going 77.

This is an important factor. You've actually traveled 1% more distance than your ODO indicates and you've done so 1% faster than your speedometer indicates.
Your famously fuel efficient G20 may have over reported speed, so while you thought you were going 80 you may have been only doing 78.
As I'm sure you know, speed is the single largest factor affecting fuel consumption so 1% here and 2% there can make a significant impact.


You state that your v8 Jeep was able to match its highway fuel economy rating on long trips, but the CX-5 is not able to do so.

As others have said:
The CX-5 is not a good high speed cruiser because it has a large frontal area.. but so did your Jeep.
However,
The EPA highway test cycle involves a LOT of acceleration and deceleration.
Compared to the Jeep, the CX-5 does not use much fuel to accelerate because it's light.
The heavy Jeep uses ALOT of gas to get all that mass up to speed, but once it's there the V8 only uses maybe 20% more than the CX-5.

TLDR:
Adding weight to a car DOES NOT have a big impact on a cars steady speed highway fuel economy, but it has a large impact on the EPA HWY rating.
I really wish the EPA would just publish a simple steady speed fuel economy at various speeds (say 45, 65 and 85) instead of using overly complicated test cycles.

the Mazda I have reads high on the speedo, same as every other car I've owned, maybe cars in the UK are different?

I compare my speedo reading to both a handheld Garmin and the built in Tomtom, both nav units show exactly the same, which is always lower that the speedo read out.

 

[piotrek91]

the Mazda I have reads high on the speedo, same as every other car I've owned, maybe cars in the UK are different?

I compare my speedo reading to both a handheld Garmin and the built in Tomtom, both nav units show exactly the same, which is always lower that the speedo read out.

You have the Diesel, so it has a completely different speedometer/odometer calibration.
I don't care enough to check it myself vs GPS, but this review reports that the 2.0L 6MT version under-reports speed by 1.5MPH at 60.
http://www.cleanmpg.com/forums/showthread.php?p=344084

I actually drove very slow. I drove my others 80 to 95 on road trips.

I call BS on yours cars getting the MPG you claim at that speed. I don't think it's possible for any car to even get its EPA HWY rating at 80-95.

I was trying hard to get nice mileage on the mazda.

Based on multiple radar signs at 60 mph my speedo is over reporting by 1mph max.

I have OEM sized continental lx20 crosscontact ecoplus tires.

Your tires look like they should be just as efficient or maybe better than OEM, so that's ruled out as a factor.
Next time you do a road trip, reset your AVG. speed when you fill your tank, reset your AVG. MPG and take a look at those numbers when you've arrived at your destination. That way if you're sick of trying to get good fuel economy you can at least try to get a high avg. speed.

I hate to rub it in, but my CX-5 reported 37MPG at 72MPH avg. on a recent 170mi drive.

I have noticed that on longer trips the CX-5 always gets excellent fuel economy (over 30MPG at 80MPH) until the first pit stop. However, after I turn the HOT motor off and back on in a few minutes the engine feels a little down on power and the fuel economy is no longer as good. My pet theory is that the engine adjusts some parameters differently after a HOT start and never quite gets back it its most fuel efficient mode of operation.

 

[xtrailman]

The engine under the bonnet has nothing to do with the calibration or accuracy of the cars computer.

 

[piotrek91]

The engine under the bonnet has nothing to do with the calibration or accuracy of the cars computer.

I think the speedometer runs off of the transmission output shaft speed sensor.
The diesel has a different transmission with a different final drive ratio, so a different calibration might be required.

Even if it does run from the ABS sensors, it's possible that in the UK speedometers are purposely set to over report speed.

 

[Unobtanium]

I think the speedometer runs off of the transmission output shaft speed sensor.
The diesel has a different transmission with a different final drive ratio, so a different calibration might be required.

Even if it does run from the ABS sensors, it's possible that in the UK speedometers are purposely set to over report speed.

My car over-reports speed, too. 'Murica!

 

[Unobtanium]

You have the Diesel, so it has a completely different speedometer/odometer calibration.
I don't care enough to check it myself vs GPS, but this review reports that the 2.0L 6MT version under-reports speed by 1.5MPH at 60.
http://www.cleanmpg.com/forums/showthread.php?p=344084



I call BS on yours cars getting the MPG you claim at that speed. I don't think it's possible for any car to even get its EPA HWY rating at 80-95.



Your tires look like they should be just as efficient or maybe better than OEM, so that's ruled out as a factor.
Next time you do a road trip, reset your AVG. speed when you fill your tank, reset your AVG. MPG and take a look at those numbers when you've arrived at your destination. That way if you're sick of trying to get good fuel economy you can at least try to get a high avg. speed.

I hate to rub it in, but my CX-5 reported 37MPG at 72MPH avg. on a recent 170mi drive.

I have noticed that on longer trips the CX-5 always gets excellent fuel economy (over 30MPG at 80MPH) until the first pit stop. However, after I turn the HOT motor off and back on in a few minutes the engine feels a little down on power and the fuel economy is no longer as good. My pet theory is that the engine adjusts some parameters differently after a HOT start and never quite gets back it its most fuel efficient mode of operation.

Why? They were loafing along at 1800-2200rpm at that speed, which is a happy place for a big V8. The G20, it was pretty buzzy at 80. I probably did most of the highway driving in it at around 75. Same for the 370Z.

The point is, my average speed with my CX5, per the computer, was in the 60's.

One thing I WILL say for my CX-5, is I really REALLY love the low highway RPM for a 4-cylinder.

 

[Unobtanium]

I hypermiled 30.4mpg out of it. Average speed 58mph (a few blocks at 40 in the city), and about 30 miles highway. Cruise off. Coasting up hills accelerating down hills. Pissing off everyone else on the road. Slow as a dog. Averaging 2 to 3 mph under the flow of traffic (58 to 72mph is what I averaged in the 60 and 70mph areas )....but I rid get the advertised mileage. This was a round trip so I saw both sides of each hill. Yes....it does do what the sticker says. Yes. If you drive like that on a daily basis you're probably not someone I would ever consider allowing to drive on a road trip. Screw that. I'll take my 26 to 28 mpg and actually relax and enjoy the trip.

 

[MikeM.]

I hypermiled 30.4mpg out of it. Average speed 58mph (a few blocks at 40 in the city), and about 30 miles highway. Cruise off. Coasting up hills accelerating down hills. Pissing off everyone else on the road. Slow as a dog. Averaging 2 to 3 mph under the flow of traffic (58 to 72mph is what I averaged in the 60 and 70mph areas )....but I rid get the advertised mileage. This was a round trip so I saw both sides of each hill. Yes....it does do what the sticker says. Yes. If you drive like that on a daily basis you're probably not someone I would ever consider allowing to drive on a road trip. Screw that. I'll take my 26 to 28 mpg and actually relax and enjoy the trip.

Of course the 2.0L engine with 6 speed auto and AWD allows you to relax and enjoy the trip while returning over 30 mpg. Or, you can hypermile it and get 35-37 mpg. I'm not sure why people feel they need such powerful engines these days. It's not like you're going to arrive any sooner.

 

[Unobtanium]

Of course the 2.0L engine with 6 speed auto and AWD allows you to relax and enjoy the trip while returning over 30 mpg. Or, you can hypermile it and get 35-37 mpg. I'm not sure why people feel they need such powerful engines these days. It's not like you're going to arrive any sooner.

I do arrive sooner. Because I can exploit gaps in traffic that prevent adding minutes to my commute waiting. 184hp in a 3600# vehicle is totally anemic. 155 would be even worse. Yes they both "work" but I've been nervous before where I used to take merging for granted. Might makes right with busy traffic during rush hour.

 

[piotrek91]

Why? They were loafing along at 1800-2200rpm at that speed, which is a happy place for a big V8. The G20, it was pretty buzzy at 80. I probably did most of the highway driving in it at around 75. Same for the 370Z.

The point is, my average speed with my CX5, per the computer, was in the 60's.

One thing I WILL say for my CX-5, is I really REALLY love the low highway RPM for a 4-cylinder.

Good point. The large, heavy V8's tend to be under rated by the EPA for HWY cruising.
They use a lot of gas to get up to speed, but once they are there they are decently efficient. The newer high speed HWY test has a lot of acceleration and deceleration, so it unfairly favors light weight cars (CX-5) and hybrids.

I hypermiled 30.4mpg out of it. Average speed 58mph (a few blocks at 40 in the city), and about 30 miles highway. Cruise off. Coasting up hills accelerating down hills. Pissing off everyone else on the road. Slow as a dog. Averaging 2 to 3 mph under the flow of traffic (58 to 72mph is what I averaged in the 60 and 70mph areas )....but I rid get the advertised mileage. This was a round trip so I saw both sides of each hill. Yes....it does do what the sticker says. Yes. If you drive like that on a daily basis you're probably not someone I would ever consider allowing to drive on a road trip. Screw that. I'll take my 26 to 28 mpg and actually relax and enjoy the trip.

I think the #1 factor that impacts fuel economy is not how you drive but where you drive.
Guys like MikeM and IcedTheater live in areas where there's likely a lot of open, low speed roads and it's easy to get excellent mileage. Others live in Texas and drive at 80mph and wonder why they don't get 33MPG and others live in NYC and their car idles half their life.

Of course the 2.0L engine with 6 speed auto and AWD allows you to relax and enjoy the trip while returning over 30 mpg. Or, you can hypermile it and get 35-37 mpg. I'm not sure why people feel they need such powerful engines these days. It's not like you're going to arrive any sooner.

Well.. there was one time that I was driving my CX-5 into a 30+MPH headwind on my way to the Las Vegas area. It was late at night and I needed to get up at 7AM the next morning for a canoe trip down the colorado river, so every minute of sleep was valuable. I kept the car in 4th-5th gear and my foot close to the floor for most of the drive. Fighting 30+ MPH headwinds while climbing numerous hills at high speeds really gave the motor a workout.
In this one isolated case, an extra 30HP would have definitely gotten me to my destination quicker and would have made for a more comfortable drive.

 

[MikeM.]

They use a lot of gas to get up to speed, but once they are there they are decently efficient. The newer high speed HWY test has a lot of acceleration and deceleration, so it unfairly favors light weight cars (CX-5) and hybrids.

While I agree the newer EPA drive cycles return lower mpg numbers for cars that are overweight and the previous drive cycles returned numbers that were higher (even more unrealistic) because most people live in/near cities and travel during peak periods so there is a lot of accelerating and braking going on. Sure, if you are on a vacation tour of the National Parks west of the Rockies the earlier EPA drive cycles would more accurately reflect reality. But most miles are commuter miles so the newer EPA cycles better reflect the mileage most people can expect. And that is the point of the ratings. So, no, it doesn't unfairly favor lighter cars - it reflects the reality that a big heavy tank is going to consume a lot more fuel if you are regularly changing speeds.

I think the #1 factor that impacts fuel economy is not how you drive but where you drive.
Guys like MikeM and IcedTheater live in areas where there's likely a lot of open, low speed roads and it's easy to get excellent mileage. Others live in Texas and drive at 80mph and wonder why they don't get 33MPG and others live in NYC and their car idles half it's life.

Very good points. Idling, braking and high speed freeway traveling are the three biggest culprits of excessive consumption.

Well.. there was one time that I was driving my CX-5 into a 30+MPH headwind on my way to the Las Vegas area. It was late at night and I needed to get up at 7AM the next morning for a canoe trip down the colorado river, so every minute of sleep was valuable. I kept the car in 4th-5th gear and my foot close to the floor for most of the drive. Fighting 30+ MPH headwinds while climbing numerous hills at high speeds really gave the motor a workout.
In this one isolated case, an extra 30HP would have definitely gotten me to my destination quicker and would have made for a more comfortable drive.

You might want to reconsider your strategy below:

btw..
The cross bars take only a few minutes and no tools to uninstall/reinstall.
Despite the easy installation I always keep mine on. The wind noise and fuel economy difference are negligible.

The effect of roof racks, cross-bars and even roof-mounted sport pods is relatively negligible for slow speed driving (excepting the negative handling aspects of having extra weight so high up). But at higher speeds the effects of this roof drag is often grossly under-estimated and especially when talking about 30 mph headwinds!

This is why I keep a clean roofline whenever possible.

 

[CX-5um]

Of course the 2.0L engine with 6 speed auto and AWD allows you to relax and enjoy the trip while returning over 30 mpg. Or, you can hypermile it and get 35-37 mpg. I'm not sure why people feel they need such powerful engines these days. It's not like you're going to arrive any sooner.

Sure you do, you get to the next stoplight sooner lol. Another thing is to memorize the time in between lights during different parts of the day. For instance on my way home from work there's this 8 mile stretch of city blocks in which the sweet spot is traveling at around 35-40 mph to obtain minimal breaking and hard takeoffs. At this speed I hardly fully stop and I'm just cruising by. Meanwhile other bozos peel off at the light and swerve through traffic only to get ahead by one car by the next stoplight. Sometimes by the time I reach them the light turns green and basically rinse and repeat for a few blocks. Funny thing is most of the time they end up needing to stop and wait to make a turn at an intersection while I just pass them by.

 

[piotrek91]

So, no, it doesn't unfairly favor lighter cars - it reflects the reality that a big heavy tank is going to consume a lot more fuel if you are regularly changing speeds.

What I mean is that it's easier to exceed the EPA HWY number at high speeds in a heavy car than in a light car.

Imagine a CX-5 that weight 3300lbs.
That CX-5 is rated at, say 30MPG HWY.
You take it for a road trip at 70MPH and you are thrilled to get 30MPG just as you expected.

Now imagine that the 2017 CX-5 is released and it's made of super strong, light weight unobtanium. The curb weight is now an amazing 2300lbs. The drivetrain remains the same, but the HWY MPG rating shoots up to 35MPG. Of course, you go out and buy the 2017 model (who wouldn't want a 2300lb cx-5?).

You take your shiny new 2300lb CX-5 for the same road trip as your old one at 70MPH.. and you get 31MPG and you end up a little disappointed just like OP here did.

I really wish the EPA would release consumption figures for steady speed cruising similar to this:
http://www.cleanmpg.com/forums/showpost.php?p=344423&postcount=51

You might want to reconsider your strategy below:
The effect of roof racks, cross-bars and even roof-mounted sport pods is relatively negligible for slow speed driving (excepting the negative handling aspects of having extra weight so high up). But at higher speeds the effects of this roof drag is often grossly under-estimated and especially when talking about 30 mph headwinds!

This is why I keep a clean roofline whenever possible.

I don't always know when the cross bars will come in handy. I would rather use a likely negligible amount of extra gas on a daily basis than have to make an extra trip back to Home Depot to bring home some over-sized object.

 

[madar]

I do arrive sooner. Because I can exploit gaps in traffic that prevent adding minutes to my commute waiting. 184hp in a 3600# vehicle is totally anemic. 155 would be even worse. Yes they both "work" but I've been nervous before where I used to take merging for granted. Might makes right with busy traffic during rush hour.

Exploit gaps in traffic....guess that means you weave in and out a lot...

 

[Unobtanium]

Exploit gaps in traffic....guess that means you weave in and out a lot...

No. It means I live in an area with insane amounts of traffic and if you don't get your ass out of the driveway, you can sit there for 15 minutes wishing. Traffic from the light 1/4 mile away backs up in the turn lane well past my apartment drive way.

 

[madar]

No. It means I live in an area with insane amounts of traffic and if you don't get your ass out of the driveway, you can sit there for 15 minutes wishing. Traffic from the light 1/4 mile away backs up in the turn lane well past my apartment drive way.

I know the feeling, makes me wish I had a mini helicopter sometimes.

 

[Unobtanium]

Good point. The large, heavy V8's tend to be under rated by the EPA for HWY cruising.
They use a lot of gas to get up to speed, but once they are there they are decently efficient. The newer high speed HWY test has a lot of acceleration and deceleration, so it unfairly favors light weight cars (CX-5) and hybrids.

I think the #1 factor that impacts fuel economy is not how you drive but where you drive.
Guys like MikeM and IcedTheater live in areas where there's likely a lot of open, low speed roads and it's easy to get excellent mileage. Others live in Texas and drive at 80mph and wonder why they don't get 33MPG and others live in NYC and their car idles half their life.




Well.. there was one time that I was driving my CX-5 into a 30+MPH headwind on my way to the Las Vegas area. It was late at night and I needed to get up at 7AM the next morning for a canoe trip down the colorado river, so every minute of sleep was valuable. I kept the car in 4th-5th gear and my foot close to the floor for most of the drive. Fighting 30+ MPH headwinds while climbing numerous hills at high speeds really gave the motor a workout.
In this one isolated case, an extra 30HP would have definitely gotten me to my destination quicker and would have made for a more comfortable drive.

My Mazda under-delivers in city driving, as well. None of my other vehicles did. Especially the Jeep. It got about 15.5-16mpg on my daily commute, if I was gentle. The 370Z managed around 19ish. The WS.6 Trans Am, about 17-18. The G20, 25mpg, and the Z06, well, I never drove it to work. That was for fun! But I seem to recall around 19mpg when I got stuck in traffic) I average 22-23mpg in the city in my Mazda, and what I mean by city, is my daily commute, which is about 3-ish miles 50% highway, 50% 40mph city streets.

 

[Unobtanium]

I know the feeling, makes me wish I had a mini helicopter sometimes.

Yeah, you think "Town of 55 thousand in NW Arkansas", and you think "What traffic?!" Well. I would honestly rather hit San Antonio in rush hour. In fact, I did last week, and it was much less of a pain. That's the only downside I have found so far living in this Forbes/Fortune 500 magnet of an area. Otherwise, crime is stoopid low, and cost of living is NOTHING! It's very nice. My Mazda dealer here washes my vehicle each time I'm there for ANY type of service, and I get free snacks. It feels like the BMW dealership back home, lol (I was going to buy an M3 once, but decided on something else, but I did visit, and BMW...they do a show-room right!)*slight side-track*