MPG- US or Imperial?

[joemon1984]

first of all, forgive my ignorance. I bought this new 2014 mazda CX5 GT and few months ago and was unhappy as it was giving only 22-23 mpg. Today only I figured out that I was using an online calculator which was in US gallon. I tried the imperial one and Voila..!!!! I am getting 28-29 MPG which I am happy with.

Question is - Is the MPG Mazda and everybody except me talking about is in Imperial gallon or US gallon.?


I am in Canada as an immigrant and not at all used to the Gallon/MPG measures. I am only used to l/100km or km/liter


Thanks

 

[ALafya]

The US MPG for 2.5L / FWD is 32 Highway / 25 City. 2.5 / AWD is 30/24.
Imperial measures are used in the UK.

Use this converter to get it in the units you are familiar with:
Google Calculator

Yes, 22~23 is low.

 

[bluefan]

GT means the AWD in Canada, no? 22-23MPG is about right according to the EPA. Mix in other factors like different brands of gas, climate, road conditions, extra weight inside vehicle etc... I've been hovering between 9.5L to 10L since I got mine last month, which is about right. Still in the break in period so still in the phase where I'm trying out different fuel brands.

 

[joemon1984]

thanks for the info. I am in Regina, SK and our driving conditions are pretty much same. yes, GT is awd and 9.5- 10L is what I am also getting. I used shell gas for last 2 fill up. will try different brands soon.

 

[131035]

I've been majorly disappointed with mileage, which seems to be false advertising. I just drove about 300km from Calgary to Edmonton at a very consistent 110 kph and averaged 8.3L/100km (AWD GS). That's a far cry from the listed 6.6 highway. Have you guys experienced significant increases with break in? If not, I'm going to have to have words w Mazda, as thats not the figure I signed up for.

 

[bluefan]

I've been majorly disappointed with mileage, which seems to be false advertising. I just drove about 300km from Calgary to Edmonton at a very consistent 110 kph and averaged 8.3L/100km (AWD GS). That's a far cry from the listed 6.6 highway. Have you guys experienced significant increases with break in? If not, I'm going to have to have words w Mazda, as thats not the figure I signed up for.

Remember EPA ratings are based on tests of the vehicles inside a controlled lab.

Also, isn't the AWD rated at 31MPG for highway? Which is more in line with your number.

I average 9L/100KM going from Winnipeg to Steinbach, and that was with some heavy prairie winds.

 

[phoned]

If you look at http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml you'll see why the EPA estimates are so good. Highway is well below the speeds you're going (and no wind resistance)

 

[shunt]

since getting mine at the end of October I'm at 13L/100
!

 

[TreyP]

I'm very happy with the MPGs. Before the cold hit, I was getting 29.9 USG , and that number was still climbing at ~ 8000 miles break in. That is mixed highway and city, driving moderately most times, aggressively occasionally, with the Touring AWD. If the OP is getting only 29 Imperial gallons (22-23 USG), something is wrong, or they drive very aggressively or in a harsh climate perhaps.

 

[sirx7]

I am not pleased with mileage at all i drive around edmonton only (city km) and the best i got is 13.8L/100km
i reset and drove for another week and got 14.5l/100km
it only has 800km on it, is this normal for new engine?

 

[pjensen641]

I've been majorly disappointed with mileage, which seems to be false advertising. I just drove about 300km from Calgary to Edmonton at a very consistent 110 kph and averaged 8.3L/100km (AWD GS). That's a far cry from the listed 6.6 highway. Have you guys experienced significant increases with break in? If not, I'm going to have to have words w Mazda, as thats not the figure I signed up for.

8.3l/100k is just about right. 28.4 MPG (US). It is very cold right now. In my experience, a 10-15% reduction in mileage is common in the winter. The air is much more dense, so aero drag is higher. Plus the engine loses much more heat and operates in in-efficient ranges for longer periods. Snow adds to drag too! You will never get the 6.6l/100k. In the US, our EPA test procedure for highway is 70-90kph and in warmer temperatures. It rated the 2.0 liter 2wd with manual at 6.6l/100k (35MPG). Even with US ratings, one must drive very conservatively to meet the maximum highway estimate!

I would sooner blame the Canadian govt test procedures than Mazda. Obviously the highway test procedure grossly overestimates real world.

I found this article Link

Real world, you should expect 7.8l/100km (30MPG) highway, and 9.5l/100km (24 MPG) city with no headwind and reasonable speeds.

Edit - oops crossed my MPG ratings

 

[dad of jon]

44+ mpg (imperial) around town for me. 2.2D 150ps

 

[nathanw]

I am getting about the same with my 2.2D 150ps. I was a bit disapointed as they were saying 50+ in the garage but I put that down to being new. One additonal advantage will be the extra oil the diesel CX5's can appear to produce, but that is a different thread.

 

[Surfsup]

Fuel efficiency, as said already, is largely subjective (just like blower-door tests). The results can swing widely with adjustments to the parameters. Were you driving into a headwind? 15-20mph winds make a 60mph drive an 80mph drive, seriously affecting MPG. If you drove 300km, did you check your tire pressure first? Were you carrying anything on a roof rack etc?

 

[nathanw]

For me it is way too soon to give an average MPG. It seems to be getting better with similar types of journey (5 mile trips to school, 10 mile trips to work etc). We have only used 3 tankfulls so far and the MPG has been getting close to 48MPG. (43 & 47MPG being the previous readings). I would say the car itself is fantastic being a great all-rounder in terms of performance, economy, space, specification & cost. I hope it matches the last Mazda we had for reliability and fun as well (A MX-5).

 

[metalfab]

Milder climate here in Vancouver but, more hills and traffic. I do 60HWY/40City driving. On my 4th tank now and the previous 3 tanks are between 9.3L and 10L per 100KM. I use Chevron 87 (always do). There is zero reason to use higher octane: if the car is not mapped for it, it won't make a difference ...other than make a hole in your wallet.

 

[Beefy]

Milder climate here in Vancouver but, more hills and traffic. I do 60HWY/40City driving. On my 4th tank now and the previous 3 tanks are between 9.3L and 10L per 100KM. I use Chevron 87 (always do). There is zero reason to use higher octane: if the car is not mapped for it, it won't make a difference ...other than make a hole in your wallet.

Shell 91 is the only way I can easily avoid ethanol

 

[metalfab]

Shell 91 is the only way I can easily avoid ethanol

I agree on the Ethanol, it should be taken out of any grade of octane. Chevron's 94 has no Ethanol but the current price locally is $1.49 CDN(!)

A little OT but going back 15+ years gas prices didn't change daily or even monthly. Now, if there is a change in the wind gas prices go up/down. Such a game the oil companies play; oh, there is a hurricane, oh, this time a conflict in the middle east, oh, Walter pulled the wrong level at the refinery, etc.

 

[dad of jon]

300 mile round trip today 61.0 mpg imperial and that was with a regen (well it would be with a 300 mile journey )

ave speed 40 mph

 

[VE7FW]

Beefy, I am here in Vancouver as well, same CX-5 GS AWD, and I am getting almost EXACTLY the same mileage as you. Coquitlam to UBC and back 40 k each way and plus every day. I use ESSO regular grade (87). Here is the Canadian site for mileage ratings... I don't know where they pull these numbers from...

http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/fcr-rcf/public/index-e.cfm