Took First Road trip in our 2018 CX-5..36.1 MPG!

[yrwei52]

Same driver doesn't mean same driving.

Both CX-5s are his DD to work. And the MPG figure is not just short period of time, but more than a year of experience. Different CX-5 with different MPG, nothing else has changed.

Again, each vehicle coming out of factory will have different engine performance and efficiency. Thats a fact!

 

[Kaps]

Eh? I think you got that backwards as the Gen 2 weighs more and is slower than Gen 1.

Weight does hurt FE - mostly for city. For highway - 17 is more aerodynamic as it has less ground clearance by 1/2 and inch and the car itself is shorter as seen from the cargo cu ft reduction. Profile is more aerodynamic as well. Thats one reason it does well at 70 mph fuel economy wise than Gen1.

 

[ColoradoDriver]

Both CX-5*s are his DD to work. And the MPG figure is not just short period of time, but more than a year of experience. Different CX-5 with different MPG, nothing else has changed.

Again, each vehicle coming out of factory will have different engine performance and efficiency. That*s a fact!

Fair enough, just posing another idea as I drive very differently now then I did say 5 years ago...or even 3 years ago.

 

[Puyapim]

In my experience so far, the fuel economy drops once you hit 70 mph or so. 55-60-65 is much better.

Also the throttle sensitivity plays a big role. Just taking off slight pressure with my foot increased fuel economy on the meter while the speed remains constant. I see this mostly on speeds upwards of the high 30s.

 

[Xeler8ing]

Very impressive. Wondering how an AWD hit those numbers. Is it the cylinder deactivation? (scratch)

Their profile says 2018 CX-5 so yes it does have cylinder deactivation

 

[Guest2019C20]

Observed MPG in winter, with AWD 2.5, no wind, both directions averaged

Mph mpg
35 44
40 47
45 40
50 38
55 34

 

[123373]

Mph mpg
35 44
40 47
45 40
50 38
55 34

Down hill coasting both directions perhaps You may need to apply for Smithsonian institution induction and Guinness world record for your CX5 with those numbers! Have you ever compared the actual gas used to miles traveled, verses what the computer is stating? I have had my CX5 for 5 years and never get more than 24 MPG*s, using this method as the computer is FOS.

 

[Unobtanium]

Weight does hurt FE - mostly for city. For highway - 17 is more aerodynamic as it has less ground clearance by 1/2 and inch and the car itself is shorter as seen from the cargo cu ft reduction. Profile is more aerodynamic as well. Thats one reason it does well at 70 mph fuel economy wise than Gen1.

The CoD of the 2017 is 0.01 lower than for the 2015...I'd rather not give up ground clearance for that. I don't know how frontal area compares between the two, but I presume it's similar enough that we can just rely on CoD to tell the tale.

 

[CX5Nut]

Here is a question...with auto makers trying to get the best MPG one of the ways they do it is to make the car as light as possible. Have you ever noticed the weight of a 2018's hood?? Really heavy! Wonder why Mazda did not make the hood out of aluminum, like other do (my BRZ has a really light weight aluminum hood).

 

[Unobtanium]

Here is a question...with auto makers trying to get the best MPG one of the ways they do it is to make the car as light as possible. Have you ever noticed the weight of a 2018's hood?? Really heavy! Wonder why Mazda did not make the hood out of aluminum, like other do (my BRZ has a really light weight aluminum hood).

Maybe t hey got tired of Gen 1 CX5 owners complaining about it flopping around and fluttering.

 

[Fishah]

60-90 minutes? Gimme some of what you're smoking. We drove from Canada to Ohio this June and over the drive (700miles+) you might be able to shave an hour off your time. That is provided that you never slow down from 70-80 miles an hour, ever. And that's based on a 700 mile trip.

The difference between a 220 mile trip at 60mph and 70mph is 39 minutes.

Math is fun.

And the difference between 50 and 85?

It's ok, I'll wait until you realize that I'm actually right

 

[Kaps]

Down hill coasting both directions perhaps You may need to apply for Smithsonian institution induction and Guinness world record for your CX5 with those numbers! Have you ever compared the actual gas used to miles traveled, verses what the computer is stating? I have had my CX5 for 5 years and never get more than 24 MPG*s, using this method as the computer is FOS.

Those are steady state instantaneous mpg read outs. That does not mean you will get those numbers unless you drive 20 miles at each of those speeds (so the speeding and slowing part of the mpg curve wont matter much).
That is totally believable - but any deviation from a gentle cruise will pull those numbers down. I dont think 24 mpg for AWD is that great but its hard to compare when people and their commutes can change so drastically.

 

[Xeler8ing]

Here is a question...with auto makers trying to get the best MPG one of the ways they do it is to make the car as light as possible. Have you ever noticed the weight of a 2018's hood?? Really heavy! Wonder why Mazda did not make the hood out of aluminum, like other do (my BRZ has a really light weight aluminum hood).

Simple answer... $$$$

 

[Guest2019C20]

Down hill coasting both directions perhaps You may need to apply for Smithsonian institution induction and Guinness world record for your CX5 with those numbers! Have you ever compared the actual gas used to miles traveled, verses what the computer is stating? I have had my CX5 for 5 years and never get more than 24 MPG*s, using this method as the computer is FOS.

Those numbers accurately reflect the DIFFERENCE in MPG at various road speeds, and at 55/65 MPH, are within 1 MPG of what long (60 mile) trips produce.

I thinks it's obvious who is FOS, here...

 

[123373]

Those numbers accurately reflect the DIFFERENCE in MPG at various road speeds, and at 55/65 MPH, are within 1 MPG of what long (60 mile) trips produce.

I thinks it's obvious who is FOS, here...

Awe did I upset you and hurt your feelings..... When you calculate the amount of gas you used compared to the miles you drove, you can brag and call me more names.

 

[dougal]

And the difference between 50 and 85?

It's ok, I'll wait until you realize that I'm actually right

2 hours and 20 minutes. Good luck doing 85 on Long Island.

 

[Jo_Bob6000]

I just did a 5500km road trip from Newfoundland to New York, I averaged 8.5l/100km(about 27-28mpg).

Not bad considering my lead foot. But it was a whole lot of fun!

 

[Xeler8ing]

Not bad at all!

 

[Corbin628]

Just finished my first "road trip" in my 18 From CT to NJ on mostly the Merritt Parkway which if any of you know is very twisty and has lots of elevation change. I averaged 35.2 over 314 miles at an average speed of probably around 60 using the ACC. I'm extremely impressed!

 

[Xeler8ing]

(thumb)