Does your MPG meet your expectations?

[frenchbiker]

Comparison 2016 Hyundai Tucson vs. Mazda CX-5

http://www.autoguide.com/car-comparisons/2016-mazda-cx-5-vs-2016-hyundai-tucson

The Tucson is rated at 24 mpg in the city and 28 on the highway, while the CX-5 is rated at 24 and 30. Real-world testing on an identical drive route came back with a combined 29.4 mpg for the Hyundai and 27.4 for the Mazda.

 

[yrwei52]

What nonsense. The quoted numbers are listed on window stickers which are federally mandated and regulated. Nobody "adjusts prior to publishing", this would be quite illegal.

See what happened on Hyundai more than a year ago?

Another example:

EPA Fuel Economy Ratings:

2015 Honda CR-V FWD: 27/34/29 City/Highway/Combined
2015 Honda CR-V AWD: 26/33/28 City/Highway/Combined

2016 Honda CR-V FWD: 26/33/29 City/Highway/Combined
2016 Honda CR-V AWD: 25/31/27 City/Highway/Combined

There is no differences between 2015 and 2016 Honda CR-V since the facelift with a new direct injected Earth Dreams 2.4L and CVT for MY 2015. But Honda elected to lower the EPA ratings for 2016 CR-V. Remember car manufactures do the fuel economy testing according EPA's test cycles, they can tweak the EPA numbers whatever they want.

I believe Mazda has programmed CX-5 getting the best fuel economy just for EPA test cycle, especially for highway rating, hence the real-world fuel economy suffers.

VW can lie on emissions for their diesels. Mazda can lie on CX-5 sales brochure for Real-time Traffic Alert on Navigation System; and don't forget Mazda also lied on horsepower rating of its RX-8 rotary engine. What else they wouldn't do???

 

[MikeM.]

It appears the fuel economy of the 2.0L meets or exceeds owners expectations while that of the 2.5L mostly disappoints.

 

[Kedis82ZE8]

Perfectly content with my 70/30 Hwy/City average of 28 MPG.... heck even pulling my 800 pound utility trailer over the pass it still gives me 20-21 MPG.

 

[Unobtanium]

Comparison 2016 Hyundai Tucson vs. Mazda CX-5

http://www.autoguide.com/car-comparisons/2016-mazda-cx-5-vs-2016-hyundai-tucson

The Tucson is rated at 24 mpg in the city and 28 on the highway, while the CX-5 is rated at 24 and 30. Real-world testing on an identical drive route came back with a combined 29.4 mpg for the Hyundai and 27.4 for the Mazda.

Pretty much. Mazda fails to deliver in the real-world vs. their window stickers, on this particular product.

 

[Unobtanium]

It appears the fuel economy of the 2.0L meets or exceeds owners expectations while that of the 2.5L mostly disappoints.

Seems to be the trend. That said...knowing now what I know, would I have gotten the 2.0? NO! NO NO NO NO!

 

[CC58]

It appears the fuel economy of the 2.0L meets or exceeds owners expectations while that of the 2.5L mostly disappoints.

So far, seventeen 2.5L owners say "meet or exceed" with only one FWD malcontent.
The AWD owners don't seem happy. Lesson ... all that extra weight and reciprocating mass hurts mpg.

I routinely get 32mpg in mountain driving, and 27mpg on freeway. You can get rated 32mpg in right conditions.
Around town I average 25mpg.

 

[Unobtanium]

So far, seventeen 2.5L owners say "meet or exceed" with only one FWD malcontent.
The AWD owners don't seem happy. Lesson ... all that extra weight and reciprocating mass hurts mpg.

I routinely get 32mpg in mountain driving, and 27mpg on freeway. You can get rated 32mpg in right conditions.
Around town I average 25mpg.

Why can't Mazda get that AWD right?

 

[MikeM.]

Why can't Mazda get that AWD right?

Yes, we know you don't like the CX-5 AWD. But of all the 25 AWD owners who answered the survey so far, 13 said the AWD MPG met or EXCEEDED their expectations (which is a majority).

 

[CC58]

Why can't Mazda get that AWD right?

Primary use of AWD to reduce wheelspin on hard launches could explain reduced mpg, and a broken rear end.

 

[ALafya]

Honda lowering their EPA estimates could very well be the result of fixing their vibration issues:
http://www.torquenews.com/1574/2015-honda-cr-v-vibration-fix-may-result-lower-fuel-economy

I don't think they can "tweak the EPA numbers", this is called lying and is illegal. They must follow the test exactly as specified and use these numbers.
They can, however, make the vehicle get peak results at the test cycle, such that varying slightly from it will vary slightly in consumption. This is not illegal and is not lying. However, I can see why people would get upset. However, this is probably not the case here, because many owners think that the CX-5 meets or exceeds their expectations.

I did notice that the SA gets peak efficiency in a somewhat narrow set of parameters and even a slight increase in throttle pressure takes the engine out of that zone. This means that driving style, speed, wind, temperature, even smoothness of road surface can impact how frugal can the engine be.
Also, when people say "highway" it means many different things. My commute is mostly on a highway. But this highway can be close to a parking lot on rush hour. It is not the same as the highway I take on weekends.

 

[yrwei52]

Why can't Mazda get that AWD right?

And how many CX-5 AWD owners can get EPA highway rating at 30 MPG?

 

[Unobtanium]

Yes, we know you don't like the CX-5 AWD. But of all the 25 AWD owners who answered the survey so far, 13 said the AWD MPG met or EXCEEDED their expectations (which is a majority).

You're right. As long as auto manufacturers shoot for >50% satisfaction, they're going to be successful (boom01)

 

[Unobtanium]

Primary use of AWD to reduce wheelspin on hard launches could explain reduced mpg, and a broken rear end.

Wait a minute...are you saying that a 4 cylinder with a micro-tq converter is capable of "a hard launch"? SERIOUSLY!? Did I just read that correctly?

Also, no, that is not what broke my diff, and there will be a thread about the diff on my Mazda once the situation is fully resolved. Expect it later tomorrow.

 

[MikeM.]

And how many CX-5 AWD owners can get EPA highway rating at 30 MPG?

I've filled my tank 79 times and kept track of fuel/mileage for every tank for the last 3 1/2 years. It's very rare that I have a tank BELOW 30 mpg! And that includes plenty of non-highway driving. The only thing that puts me below 30 mpg is a lot of winter driving with warm-ups to defrost the windshield and melt ice or extensive off-road driving in low gears. I don't know of any other AWD vehicle of this size that can touch it.

 

[frenchbiker]

I've filled my tank 79 times and kept track of fuel/mileage for every tank for the last 3 1/2 years. It's very rare that I have a tank BELOW 30 mpg! And that includes plenty of non-highway driving. The only thing that puts me below 30 mpg is a lot of winter driving with warm-ups to defrost the windshield and melt ice or extensive off-road driving in low gears. I don't know of any other AWD vehicle of this size that can touch it.

You have a 2.0L engine, which could explain the higher number. The sticker on my 2016 2.5L AWD GT advertised 30mpg highway and I have NEVER come close to it, driving very conservatively. The road test by Autoguide never hit 30mpg highway w/ a 2.5L AWD either.

Drive my car and show me how you hit 30mpg. I want to see it.

My Harley Ultra Classic hits an average of 32mpg on flat highways, at the same constant speed of 65mph w/ cruise. It's at least 2,000lbs lighter than the CX-5, it's far more aerodynamic, and it has a V-Twin 1.7l engine developing around 90HP.

I am even pleasantly surprised that the mpg on the CX-5 is only 15% less.

Like I said, I'm satisfied with the gas mileage of my 2.5 AWD but nonetheless, it never reached what my window sticker specified, which is the object of this poll.

 

[erhayes]

2014 2.5 FWD: MEETS OR EXCEEDS 80% OF THE TIME. Ed

 

[123373]

2.5 AWD touring averaging 24.2mpg. Considering I cruise regularly at 80mph on highways, and always punch it from dead stops, I can't complain. Doing the same thing to my old pathfinder netted me 15mpg. Also gas is so cheap right now, it's the last thing I worry about while driving. The mpg test ratings are (tread mill) bogus anyway as no one drives 55mph on highways and takes their time babying their cars to get up to speed.

 

[jcpharm]

2.5L AWD EPA estimate is 26 mpg combined and i get 26.2 mpg combined (after 13k miles) so i said MEETS my expectations.

 

[craigo]

You have a 2.0L engine, which could explain the higher number. The sticker on my 2016 2.5L AWD GT advertised 30mpg highway and I have NEVER come close to it, driving very conservatively. The road test by Autoguide never hit 30mpg highway w/ a 2.5L AWD either.

Drive my car and show me how you hit 30mpg. I want to see it.

My Harley Ultra Classic hits an average of 32mpg on flat highways, at the same constant speed of 65mph w/ cruise. It's at least 2,000lbs lighter than the CX-5, it's far more aerodynamic, and it has a V-Twin 1.7l engine developing around 90HP.

I am even pleasantly surprised that the mpg on the CX-5 is only 15% less.

Like I said, I'm satisfied with the gas mileage of my 2.5 AWD but nonetheless, it never reached what my window sticker specified, which is the object of this poll.

To clarify, the object of the poll is not if it reaches sticker, but if it reaches expectation. If you understand that the stickers are from the EPA's generic tests that cover a range of scenarios that may not exactly apply to you, you can have a lower number and still meet or even exceed expectations.

I've never matched the sticker because my driving style is enthusiastic in the city and I drive long, high speed trips on the highway. So I expect lower numbers, especially in the winter.