Mile Per Gallon!!!! [Archive]

sp535

02-17-2008, 09:01 PM

Dear all,

My cx9 Touring has 1800 mile for past 2.5 month and still have city/highway combined 13mile per gallon.

The dealer told me it will start to break-in (what does that mean anyway?) from 12,000 mile or so.

my previous car was Jaguar XJS V12 with 10mpg. I dont want to feel the same after selling my precious Jag with this lovalble CX9.

Please kindly advise whether this is normal or what to do to achive 16-18 mpg at least. by the way, I am using 87 regular unleaded.

Thank you.

Durfdaddy

02-17-2008, 09:14 PM

Well...I can't say for sure because I drive a CX-7. After I had a flash done my mileage went down from an average of 19-20 to 16-17. I even saw 15 one time! I am using high octane for the turbo and that is hard to deal with.

I had them make sure ALL flashes were up to date and that got my mileage back up to 19-20. I even saw 21 today on the HWY!! Good times...

As far a break in time, I never had one as far as mileage. I am not sure how much I trust Mazda with my questions. These are new probs for them too.

CX9 SportOwner

02-17-2008, 11:33 PM

Even very poor driving shouldnt yield anything near 13. I drive our '9 the way it was engineered to be, fast, and always get 20 to 21 combined.

AussieCX9

02-18-2008, 05:54 AM

Dear all,

My cx9 Touring has 1800 mile for past 2.5 month and still have city/highway combined 13mile per gallon.

I feel your pain sp535!

I have just look at an online conversion calculator to measure US MPG as I only understang litres/100klms here in Australia.

This is my findings.....When I bought my CX9 2 months ago the economy was running at 9.4 miles to the US gallon.

Now I have traveled city/hwy 3000klms and my reading is at 11.7 miles to the US gallon.

Mazda reckon I dont have a problem because my fuel economy is getting better....what fuel economy??(piss)

I will let it go for another 1000klm but if there isnt any real improvement my Mazda dealership will definately hear me coming(fight)

l-miwa

02-18-2008, 10:31 AM

Please kindly advise whether this is normal or what to do to achive 16-18 mpg at least...

There are a number of things that can affect your mileage:

Cold weather - Do you let your CX-9 warm up (using gas) before driving? It's a good idea, but it sucks gas. Even if you don't, the idle mixture and rpm are set higher while it warms up, also using more gas. I find that my mileage has dropped by about 2mpg just due to the colder weather.

City / suburb / highway - If you do a lot of downtown, stop every block driving, you'll be doing well to get 9-10mpg. In the suburbs with stops every half mile or so, I get about 14mpg, driving VERY conservatively. On the highway (at 70mph), I've gotten 21mpg a couple times. So depending on your mix of driving, your mileage will vary greatly.

Cruise control - The computer can modulate the gas pedal much more smoothly than I can. Thus it gets better gas mileage than I do! I use it on the interstate, I use it in the city, I use it whenever I'm maintaining a constant speed for any length of time. Definitely helps the gas mileage.

Trip computer - I installed a ScanGuage II (takes only a couple minutes to plug it in) and having the instant mpg feedback helps remind me to keep my foot out of the pedal when it isn't necessary. Just watching the mileage plummet to 4mpg is painful! You'll also be able to see where you're losing the mileage. If you're seeing 13mpg at constant speed on a flat road, there is definitely a problem!

All that said, if you're still getting mileage much worst than you expect, take it back to the dealer and see if there's something wrong. A problem with any one of a number of sensors could have the engine running richer than necessary.

ceric

02-18-2008, 02:48 PM

I'll say being lead-footed is probably the major cause of low MPG.

I got (mixed 50/50% city/highway)
- 16.5mpg (1st tank)
- 16mpg (2nd tabk)
- ? (3rd, ongoing)
For a vehicle that is 4500lbs, these are good numbers.

I keep up with traffic and not trying to be 1st all the time to reach the next light.
Trying to time the traffic lights will also help MPG.

njerald

02-18-2008, 07:19 PM

There are a number of things that can affect your mileage:

Cold weather - Do you let your CX-9 warm up (using gas) before driving? It's a good idea, but it sucks gas. Even if you don't, the idle mixture and rpm are set higher while it warms up, also using more gas. I find that my mileage has dropped by about 2mpg just due to the colder weather.

City / suburb / highway - If you do a lot of downtown, stop every block driving, you'll be doing well to get 9-10mpg. In the suburbs with stops every half mile or so, I get about 14mpg, driving VERY conservatively. On the highway (at 70mph), I've gotten 21mpg a couple times. So depending on your mix of driving, your mileage will vary greatly.

Cruise control - The computer can modulate the gas pedal much more smoothly than I can. Thus it gets better gas mileage than I do! I use it on the interstate, I use it in the city, I use it whenever I'm maintaining a constant speed for any length of time. Definitely helps the gas mileage.

Trip computer - I installed a ScanGuage II (takes only a couple minutes to plug it in) and having the instant mpg feedback helps remind me to keep my foot out of the pedal when it isn't necessary. Just watching the mileage plummet to 4mpg is painful! You'll also be able to see where you're losing the mileage. If you're seeing 13mpg at constant speed on a flat road, there is definitely a problem!

All that said, if you're still getting mileage much worst than you expect, take it back to the dealer and see if there's something wrong. A problem with any one of a number of sensors could have the engine running richer than necessary.

Run your tires about 4 psig higher than your manual says will help a little.

Force-1

02-18-2008, 07:50 PM

My 20 mile commute to work is 75% hwy, 25% city, and I am averaging about 18.5 MPG in my 3 month old AWD GT.

I have made 2 R/T runs to Denver (900 miles) at average 80 MPH, and gas mileage is about 21. Okay with me, considering my CX-9 replaced an Escalade that got 14-15, no matter where I drove.

sp535

02-24-2008, 05:06 PM

O.K. after the lamp issue, low mileage, I changed from Guiffree Mazda to Manhattan Mazda. And they did all checkup to find out any error causing low mileage.

While I was happy to see them taking care of the car, we could not find any reason for the low mileage. The mechanic suggested to monitor some more cycle for fuel filling vs mileage and asked me to get back to him.

bill42

03-09-2008, 09:43 AM

Well I just calculated my milage again using the fill-up to fill-up method, and my milage is getting worse- 13.5 mpg on the last tank which was 80% city driving. I have about 4000 miles on the engine so I would say it is broken in. I don't drive really slow but I also don't floor the car at every stop light. I know I could baby the throttle and get 15mpg, but I wanted to see how my mileage would be if I just drove the way I am used to driving. (my last car was a small volvo wagon with a turbo 4, and it got about 17 mpg when I drove it this way for city driving)
I knew the car would be bad but I never knew I wouldn't even get 250 miles on a 20 gallon tank!
I guess it is my driving, but man if I drove the car like I used to drive as a teenager I bet it would get 10mpg.
Anyway I still love the car. I guess I am complaining because there is really nothing else I can complain about this car.

AreYouWithMe

03-09-2008, 06:04 PM

I got my 08 Touring Wednesday night (Former Exec car with 7k miles). I drive 100 miles to / from work and averaged 20 MPG on the first half tank on mixed highway / local.

CX9 SportOwner

03-10-2008, 10:31 PM

There MUST be something wrong with your car. I LOVE taking off from lights fast, pass hard, fly around corners and curves (rails), and STILL average 20 to 21.

bill42

03-11-2008, 09:57 AM

Just when I am about to accept that it is normal that my car gets 13.5mpg, the two posts above open up the mystery again. Are you all calculating you mileage by dividing miles driven by gallons added to top off the tank?
If so, then perhaps you others who get 20mpg have the lighter 2 wheel drive CX-9 which also has less friction than my heavy 4600 lb. AWD model.
Also, I drive mostly around town, from light to light, and I only get past 4th gear on the weekends. Therefore I rarely take advantage of the tall 6th gear overdrive.

To back up my low mileage, let me point out that MotorTrend seems to get similar mileage when they test crossovers of the same size as the CX-9. Their actual mileage is always less than the new EPA ratings. Compare this to the 2 posts above who say they are getting the highway EPA 20mpg for mixed driving... something just doesn't add up.

AreYouWithMe

03-11-2008, 01:12 PM

Are you all calculating you mileage by dividing miles driven by gallons added to top off the tank?

If so, then perhaps you others who get 20mpg have the lighter 2 wheel drive CX-9 which also has less friction than my heavy 4600 lb. AWD model.
Also, I drive mostly around town, from light to light, and I only get past 4th gear on the weekends. Therefore I rarely take advantage of the tall 6th gear overdrive.

Yes I have the FWD model and calculated it total miles driven from fill-up to fill-up divided by total gallons added. My driving is about 30% pure highway, 40 - 50% "back roads" with a few lights and stop lights, and 20 - 30% more "in town" driving with traffic. I am routinely in 5th and 6th gear at 40-50 MPH on the back roads. My tranny upshifts at very low speeds.

I also drive conservatively and don't go Mach 5. I'm going to fill up tonight. I'll let you know what the MPG is.

astraelraen

03-11-2008, 01:19 PM

I dunno about people getting 20+ mpg, but if you expect to get much better than 15-18mpg with a 4500lb AWD vehicle you are lying to yourself. It doesn't matter if its got a v6 or a v16, it weighs 4500lbs and has additional drivetrain friction of AWD.

ceric

03-11-2008, 03:25 PM

Are some people talking British gallon here? It is bigger than US gallon, you know.
I also don't see how one can get 20mpg in city driving. For highway, one should be able to get 20-22mpg by following traffic and maintaining nearly constant speed.

I have AWD and loaded with accessories (hitches, racks, etc.).
I have been getting 16mpg (+/- 0.5) in SF Bay Area (mixed city/highway/traffic jams)
In city driving, weight is a major factor affecting MPG.
In highway driving, it is the wind resistance (drag coef x cross section area) and tire friction.

CX-9 has drag coef of 0.36 and the OE tires are pretty wide (at 245 vs 225 on Hondas).
0.36 is good but not great. Some CUV has drag coef of 0.32.

(heat loss and power train loss are present is both situations).
Anyway, 13.5mpg is not normal to me.

SydneyGuy

03-11-2008, 05:17 PM

I've had my CX-9 for about 6 weeks now. Over that period the car computer tells me I have averaged 14.7 litres/100km. Doing the conversions using US gallons (3.79 litres = 1 US gallon) that equates to 15.47mpg average for the 6 weeks.

That figure is 10% worse than the mileage I used to get with my 5.7 litre V8 SS Commodore.

Note that I never use the air conditioning so that 15.47mpg figure would probably be something like 14-14.5mpg if I did use it.

With petrol hitting A$1.50/litre this week in Sydney (US$5.23/gallon) it is going to cost a lot to run this car for the next 4 years .......

hss_Rao

03-11-2008, 07:34 PM

It is around 5 weeks since I bought my CX9 sport FWD. Filled gas 4 times.
1st - 17.5 (87 Oct - 20% highway)
2nd - 16.25(93 Oct - 100% city)
3rd - 17.2(93 Oct - 100% city)
4th - 19.4(87 Oct - 20% highway)

Now I have around 1200 miles, but what I saw was the engine oil is close to the lower hole in the dip stick, probably 8 mm above the lower hole , and as I live in NJ, still using heater and no A/C.

Does anyone have this kind of oil consumption or what are your observations?

Force-1

03-11-2008, 07:39 PM

hss_Rao

03-11-2008, 07:49 PM

I just filled up about an hour ago, and got 18.2 MPG on this tank, city/highway driving. Loaded AWD GT.

I noted my oil was close to the add mark last week, so I threw in about 3/4 of a quart. The vehicle has about 4100 miles on it, factory oil still in the block.

BTW I forgot to mention this. I have not driven over 55MPH in the frst 1000 miles, but the oil color is getting dark brown (kind of going towards black), comparing to my 06 Maxima-it retails the golden yellow color even at 3000 miles. What was the color of the oil before you topped it.

Force-1

03-11-2008, 08:43 PM

BTW I forgot to mention this. I have not driven over 55MPH in the frst 1000 miles, but the oil color is getting dark brown (kind of going towards black), comparing to my 06 Maxima-it retails the golden yellow color even at 3000 miles. What was the color of the oil before you topped it.

It was dark, but not real dark. That's okay, as the oil is trapping contaminants like it's supposed to. Dark can be good.

AreYouWithMe

03-11-2008, 08:45 PM

Update:

I went 295.5 Miles on 15.7 US Gallons (18.8 MPG). FWD CX-9 Touring. It may be lower as I had the HVAC set for "Full Auto" which doesn't seem to turn off the A/C and there was a bad traffic back-up on an otherwise clear road.

Or maybe I "got on it" a little more :-)

Here is a thought: do you have the roof rack? Could that adding mored drag?

jabba

03-11-2008, 08:57 PM

That figure is 10% worse than the mileage I used to get with my 5.7 litre V8 SS Commodore

I just want to say this: I adore my 64, my Commodore 64!

OK, feel free to yell at me now.

Force-1

03-11-2008, 09:20 PM

That figure is 10% worse than the mileage I used to get with my 5.7 litre V8 SS Commodore.

I don't think that's unusual. My 400HP C6 Corvette gets about 21MPG city, 28MPG highway. That's better than my CX-9 or Cadillac STS.

CX9 SportOwner

03-11-2008, 09:48 PM

FWD and AWD are not going to get particularly different mileage under normal driving. If you're not engaging the AWD, there is little difference, since the system is essentially FWD. The estimated 1mpg less is from the extra weight of the rear drive system. Ours is FWD, but I drive the car hard and fast (SO fun) and still get about 20 mixed. If I drove all highway conservatively I could probably get close to 25 mpg. Not sure why others are getting such lousy mileage. Maybe you have a stowaway.

AreYouWithMe

03-12-2008, 08:17 PM

i wonder, does the car "learn" how you drive and adjust settings including shift points? With some cars you can pull a fuse to force it to relearn your driving technique.

chief_wiggum

03-13-2008, 07:49 PM

Always an interesting conversation when people compare fuel economy. I stumbled across this website;

http://www.fueleconomy.gov

actually pretty interesting for a government facilitated website. If you take the time to register you can add your vehicles to 'your garage' and log your fuel economy. What I find most interesting is they show the EPA standard and then what other registered people are getting. You log your driving style and type of driving you do (city vs. hwy). I've found it useful as I look to possibly get a new vehicle in the future (CX-9 in the running). It looks like there are people providing data on 07s, but none yet on the 08.

bzebra

03-13-2008, 07:51 PM

I constantly get between 17 mpg in the city and 22 at best on the highway but usually with a mix of driving 18 mpg

CX9 SportOwner

03-13-2008, 09:43 PM

It learns, yes. I wouldnt recommend 'pulling a fuse' just drive it.

100$ GUY

03-15-2008, 02:37 PM

jabba

03-15-2008, 04:06 PM

My wife is the main driver, and last fillup she got 15.4 mpg, with mostly city driving.

This is consistent with what people are getting with SUVs in this class. Ah well...

AreYouWithMe

03-16-2008, 09:34 AM

I just filled up again (commute is 100 miles / day). 19.5 MPG. 20% pure highway, 20% "in-town" and 60% "rural" roads with the occassional stop light or stop sign. On the rural back roads I barely touch the gas and average 40 - 50 MPH.

I now drive the speed limits (well, mostly) to save gas. Instead of doing 80 - 85 on the highweay I'll do 65 - 70.

CX9 SportOwner

03-16-2008, 02:23 PM

20mpg mixed driving? mmmmmmm whats the mix composition?

5 %city and 95% highway.... hahaha.

Thats the way I might believe that mpg number, of course having a FWD.

Taking off fast everytime, passing hard, crazy all day long all days of your life, yeah right you´re gonna get better gas mileage. Yeah right....
time wise I'd say close to 50-50.

Latest mileage. 18 gallons used.
A week of my wife stop and going to and from work twice a day, then a winding mountain road/2-way road to Phoenix (100 miles, love the curves), city traffic, then 80mph from 1000ft back up to 5200 ft on the interstate, with a bit more winding highway at the end, and another day of wife to work.
18.44MPG

caspeed

03-26-2008, 01:37 PM

I'm coming up on 3,000 miles on a CX-9 front wheel drive. My worst tank was 16mpg and that was all city stop and go. The best tank was 22 on the highway 55-60 because of traffic. I am getting 18ish in normal driving with some highway and some city.

This is 3-5 miles per gallon better than my old SUV.

BTW I tried coasting down a hill and the RPMs are higher in neutral than in 6. Why would this happen?

Mike

JCS

03-26-2008, 04:42 PM

After reading through all the comments about MPG on this board and others, it appears that there is a much larger difference in MPG between the AWD and FWD models than the official numbers indicate.

It seems that the FWD model gets 18-21 combined MPG and owners are generally happy. The AWD model gets 13-16 (or less) and owners are not happy.

Just my observation.

camrycev6

03-26-2008, 04:45 PM

I was going to say... Isn't the CX-9 a pretty big boy? Seriously? What can you expect at best? 16? 18?

ux149

03-26-2008, 10:37 PM

I was going to say... Isn't the CX-9 a pretty big boy? Seriously? What can you expect at best? 16? 18?

My 2002 Escade averaged 18.5 in mixed driving and 22 on the highway. YES!!! I expected better than 16!

bill42

03-27-2008, 10:38 AM

I did expect to get better than my now consistent 13.5 mpg, because I trusted the newly revised EPA rating system that rates the AWD at 15 city. Yes, you might say how silly of me to trust the EPA ratings, and my response is that I matched the old EPA ratings on my previous car- a very economical volvo v40 wagon. I also match the EPA ratings of my other car, a 2004 M3- and both of these other cars were rated using the old EPA rating system. As many of you know, the new EPA system of 2008 is more accurate, with lower mileage numbers, than the old system. So if I have always been able to match the more optimistic EPA ratings on my other cars, then yes, I assumed that I would be able to match the EPA rating of my new CX-9.
That being said, I think I know why I am getting only 13.5 mpg...
When I accelerated briskly in my lighter cars, it didn't use that much extra gas. To get my CX-9 to match the acceleration that I am used to in a 3300 lb. vehicle, it must use almost twice as much fuel to accelerate the 4600 pound CX-9. I simply need to learn to be much lighter on the throttle. Some of you claim you are no feather-foot, and you still get somewhere inside the EPA ratings, but you may also have a driving pattern that takes you on some long stretches where you get to use overdrive. The kind of driving I do in the CX-9 is 75% light to light, therefore I rarely get into 5th and 6th gear.

camrycev6

03-27-2008, 10:50 AM

I can see that if you are doing a lot of city driving. That just sucks though. Especially with gas prices going up... I don't get much better even in my approx. 3100 lbs car. I average around 22 MPG.

bill42

03-27-2008, 12:00 PM

averaging 22 is almost twice as good in your 3100lb car. That can be the difference between 2 grand and 4 grand of fuel per year!

camrycev6

03-27-2008, 12:06 PM

True... I just wanted a little bit better...

mixmasterlove

03-28-2008, 12:22 PM

I average 13.85.... a MIX 70/30 (street/highway) in NY (AWD GT)

larryc

03-28-2008, 08:57 PM

jabba

03-30-2008, 02:08 PM

This week my wife got 16.4 mpg (the last fillup it was 15.4 mpg). This is a mix of about probably about 60/40 to 70/30 city/hwy, AWD GT, with her and our 2 young kids in the back. She doesn't accelerate hard to floor the thing, so that's probably as good as it'll get (unless mpg improves after a couple thousand miles or so-she's at about 1000 miles on the odo).

caspeed

03-31-2008, 02:05 PM

I can see that if you are doing a lot of city driving. That just sucks though. Especially with gas prices going up... I don't get much better even in my approx. 3100 lbs car. I average around 22 MPG.

I have a Speed3 and a CX-9 and I'm quite happy with the gas mileage on both. Do you use premium fuel? The Speed3 gets 27-28 mpg on my daily work run. The previous car was a hatchback Ford Focus that did 30+ on the same run but this car is mucho funo. Now that mileage is mainly driving with fuel economy in mind. When I have fun it is 24 mpg.

The 9 with 4 people and luggage did 22 MPG on a highway trip. Finally fuel is a cheap part of the total cost of owning a car. Depreciation and upkeep are far more expensive. 15,000 miles per year @ 12mpg and $4.00 fuel is $5,000 per year. Wouldn't we all be happy with $5,000 per year depreciation? BTW @ 22mpg fuel cost is only $2727 per year.

Mike

camrycev6

03-31-2008, 02:59 PM

Of course I use premium fuel --- the MS3 requires it. I have never seen better than 28 MPG even when driving hundreds of miles (about 300 to be exact) of nothing but freeways. Normally I do about 40% city style driving and 60% highway. I get between 21-23 MPG based on actual fill-ups and miles travelled. This is exactly the same as the other MS3 I owned. I can therefore conclude there is nothing wrong with my car.

Edited: How are you measuring your MPG? I hope you are not using your trip computer... It has always been over the actual value I have noticed...

caspeed

03-31-2008, 04:26 PM

I use the fill-up method. I reset the trip odometer and I always fill-up. It is not completely accurate on a tank-to-tank basis but the average overtime is pretty good. I'm quitting my current job so I won't have that consistency any longer.

I am somewhat of a mileage geek in that I work the mileage on known routes. Currently, I don't launch all that well and maybe that is helping with the mileage. I'm very slow out the gate. Minivans smoke me.

Mike

camrycev6

03-31-2008, 04:35 PM

That could be it... I normally don't jump out of the hole, but I love acceleration. (Not so big on speed though)

noah522

04-01-2008, 11:44 AM

I have a 08' CX-9 and get terrible mileage as well. What is a flash? I only have 2500 miles on since 11/2007. Thanks!

camrycev6

04-01-2008, 11:49 AM

A flash is a reprogramming of your car's computer that controls the engine. They are typically done only in rare cases. Usually if there something serious change that requires it, an upgrade of some sort (again...very rare), or in some cases it is reprogrammed with the same image (software version) it had before in the event it is erased or corrupted for some reason.

caspeed

04-01-2008, 12:42 PM

That could be it... I normally don't jump out of the hole, but I love acceleration. (Not so big on speed though)

Oh, I like acceleration and speed. It is fun to take jaunts to NV and AZ. Those states have been less finicky about speed. Soon the travel season starts.

Earlier, I asked about premium because I know a number of people who use regular in their premium recommended cars. Erroneously thinking they are saving money when regular lowers mileage as the engine and transmission have to dumb down to operate.

Mike

mainerunr

04-01-2008, 01:17 PM

Are these thigns really that bad on gas? I mean, it doesnt look like it to me. 4500#, AWD, decent sized V-6, nice amount of power, you shouldnt be expecting miracles here, changing how YOU drive (yeah yeah, I know, it cant be you) can make a huge difference in mpg's. most 3500lb cars only get 25-28mpg mixed these days.

FWIW, my 4500 lb '05 Frontier 4wd (front end always spinning but disengaged at the xfer case) gets me 16.5-17mpg winter, 19 mpg summer...and that's running 285/75/16's that weigh 53lb for just the tire (btw, how much difference is there in wheel/tire weight between models, that can make a big difference in mpg's as well, more rotational inertia).

it is what it is. if we decide to add one of these to our garage, we will do so expecting the 'poor' mileage of 15 city and 20 highway.

larryc

04-06-2008, 09:03 PM

I just filled up on my first tank. (My CX-9 AWD Touring is a week old!) I got 12.5 mpg; this was 100% suburb driving (car pools, etc.) Please tell me the mileage will improve after the engine breaks in (boom06)
Filled up my 2nd tank today. Got 13.4 mpg; also 100% suburb driving. Love the car otherwise, but not very happy with the mpg. For comparison, the 2002 MDX that this CX9 replaced got 17mpg when new and about 15mpg at the time I traded it in.

jabba

04-06-2008, 10:44 PM

The 2002 MDX weighed 5690 (gross weight), while the CX-9 weighs 6049 lbs. So the 360 lb difference will account for some of the increase in mpg. Unfortunately, all these new CUVs are porkers, and I didn't find much difference in mpg--for example, the Acadia, which likes to boast "better" mpg, seems to be getting 12-15 in mostly city driving if you read the forums.

So when I picked the CX-9, I knew I'd be sacrificing more of my paycheck on gas, but unless I got the Highlander Hybrid, there's nothing else that's really much better.

CX9 SportOwner

04-07-2008, 09:22 PM

Latest Trip 22MPG

Winding Mtn roads from 5200' down to 3000', up to 9000', and back to 5200'. Hard, fun driving, with a 13.5' Kayak on the roof.

Photo is very typical of most of the roads.

exclusiverental

04-20-2008, 10:17 PM

You're darn right the gas mileage is horrible. I've been tracking it for 1000's of km's and it hasn't changed since I bought it in August/07. It may not be scientific, but I'm closer than those idiots that print the fuel econ. sticker on my window. I've tried everything just short of pushing the damn thing at a stop light, but the econ. is still garbage. I'm from Canada but will do some conversions for anyone from the U.S.

I have filled up many times from empty to full with an average of 65-70 litres (14.5 gallons) and proceeded to drive between 345-370km before filling up again. I'm therefore averaging 17.7-19.2 L/100km OR 12.3-13.3 MPG with over 95% city driving. I have over 13,000 km's (8,000 miles) on my CX-9 and it's still the same as the 1st day. And to top if off I DON'T even have AWD!! The fuel econ sticker stated 13.1 L/100km or 17.95 MPG city driving, they must have been testing it all downhill. I do have to say that the highway driving is pretty good, but I'm hardly on it..

This is an amazing automobile, BUT I will be returning it at the end of the lease for this very reason. With gas prices as they are now ($1.20/litre equivalent of $5.45/gallon, I wish we had $4/gallon) it feels like I'm hemorrhaging money everytime I go to the station....

bill42

04-21-2008, 09:40 AM

so now that so many of you posted that you too get around 13mpg overall, it seems that I am not alone. I tried babying the throttle and I can get the mpg up to the mid 14s, but at that point everyone's grandmother passes me at each stoplight. The people in more rural areas get to use their overdrive more, which is the only thing that makes our heavy car more economical than a heavy SUV from 5 years ago. Still, I am a little angry that the newly adjusted EPA ratings are still so far off from reality on these heavy cars, while the EPA ratings for smaller cars seem to be dead on if you drive carefully. All the similar vehicles in the CX-9 class seem to be getting the same bad milage. It is only a shock for those of us who never owned such a large heavy vehicle. I still get the old EPA rating of my BMW M3, and I matched the EPA ratings of my former Volvo v40 wagon when I owned it. The EPA ratings seem to fall off their accuracy only for these heavy cars.

jabba

04-21-2008, 08:07 PM

Another week for us, and 15.9 mpg, with maybe 50/50 city/hwy. We've been in the 16's once.

Summer's almost here, mpg will likely go up a bit. We'll see.

Been checking the boards, looks like Acadia owners still have low mpg like we do in city driving.

CX9 SportOwner

04-21-2008, 11:29 PM

I'm baffled how you guys are getting such poor mileage. Ours is great for this size vehicle and the way I aggressively drive it, and seems to keep getting better. Weird.

jabba

04-21-2008, 11:38 PM

I'd love to say that the low mpg is due to veryaggressive driving, but I'm not even the one driving the CX-9, my wife drives it, and she actually has never floored it yet, in 2000 miles of driving. It's where she does her driving, lots of small hills in the city area where she drives, so that's not good for mpg.

We have yet to take a long road trip in the CX-9, so I can't say what the hwy mileage might be, but it's bound to be way better than what we're getting now.

l-miwa

04-23-2008, 11:03 AM

I've logged every tank of gas that I've put into our 2007 CX-9 GT AWD since it was new with www.truedelta.com.

Over 25,000 miles, I've averaged 18.2mpg for 15% stop and go, 20% city, 10% suburbs, 55% highway at 70mph. The worst I've gotten for a tank is 16.0mph with 20% stop and go and 60% city. The best I've gotten is 21.0mph at a steady 70mph.

With the rise in gas prices, I've dropped my interstate speed to 65mph and my current tank is over 20mpg for mixed driving (30% city / 70% highway).

fraochdha

04-23-2008, 11:59 AM

08 GT AWD option here and I fluxuate between 19-21mpg on a regular basis. And I often drive fast and accelerate hard- I've only ever used regular fuel, not SuperUnleaded.... though when I first got the CX-9 the mileage was about 14-15 until I broke it in.

just my $.02

live2ski

04-28-2008, 01:20 AM

Just returned from driving my 08 Touring AWD from Denver to Aspen and back. It's was a bit over 450 miles with lots of elevation changes ranging from 5000' to 11000'. I got 21 mpg each way (90% highway) which seems in-line with other AWD models and EPA estimates.

PS - The CX-9 held it's own in Aspen among the sea of Q7s, Range Rovers, and MB GLs ;)

Thppbt

05-07-2008, 12:13 PM

I got 17.5 MPG on my 2nd tank of gas in my '08 AWD GT. The miles consisted of a mixture of highway and country road driving. I hope that the MPG will only improve. I just passed 1000 miles.

bill42

05-23-2008, 11:56 AM

UPDATE:

ok, I was one of the earlier ones posting in this thread.... I still get terrible city mileage because I drive in a crowded suburb... but I have some good news. I just got back from a trip from NYC to Ottawa Canada. I was driving from 75 to 80 most of the trip, and I averaged 20.4 mpg. (AWD) That is close enough to EPA highway for me. I am once again a satisfied customer. So it IS possible to get 20 or more on the highway with a 4600 pound vehicle. (I was prob at around 5000 pounds with family and gear) I even hit 100 for a second on a long strait-away just to feel what this heavy car feels like at jail-sentencing speeds. The CX-9 was plenty stable at that speed, although I was prob sucking up a gallon a minute.
I am sure I would have been above 21 if I kept closer to the 65mph speed limit.

ceric

05-23-2008, 06:11 PM

CX-9 has tall 6th gear and low drag coefficient (0.36), it does well in highway driving.
For local driving, however, the MPG is not impressive compared with competitors.

hss_Rao

05-24-2008, 08:57 AM

Update: Now reaching 4000 mile mark in 3 months, my CX9 is averaging around 18.5 mpg with 95% city driving and I took her on a 300 miles trip to Connecticut where I go 22.4 MPG with 70mph. Next week I will be taking it for the first service. Any tips for first service?

clarko

05-24-2008, 05:14 PM

CX-9 has tall 6th gear and low drag coefficient (0.36), it does well in highway driving.
For local driving, however, the MPG is not impressive compared with competitors.

I agree 100%, in fact I'm amazed at how tall 6th gear is for such a heavy vehicle, it does well to pull like it does, and although thirsty around town it does always put a smile on my face when I accelerate from the traffic lights.

These engines are going into our Ford Falcons in 2010, and considering they only weigh about 1650kg (compared to CX9 2100kg), they should perform quite well.

CX9 SportOwner

05-24-2008, 06:19 PM

what service?

stl_ls1gto

06-09-2008, 10:03 PM

I don't think that's unusual. My 400HP C6 Corvette gets about 21MPG city, 28MPG highway. That's better than my CX-9 or Cadillac STS.

well yeah, when at 80mph and the double overdrive you are only turning 2000rpms with the Vette (M6 trans). My cammed/stalled Ls1 Gto gets 24mph highway still and i have the A4 trans. The long tubes and full exhaust with the custom dyno tune really help the mpg figures though.

Also, my wifes vehicle is a 2007 Audi Q7 suv. Very similar in size to the CX-9 - if not a little larger/heavier. It gets 22mpg highway easy at 80mph cruise on trips - we have the 3.6L V6 with 280hp. I am amazed at the mileage that this vehicle gets for as large as it is. Around town, we get 19-20mpg. It does require premium gas though. The CX-9 was the only other vehicle we considered when shopping for her car.

My daily driver is a 2008 G35X, and I struggle to get 22mpg with this car on the highway. I have a 28mile commute each way to work, and probably 25 miles is interstate. I set the cruise at 75 usually, and with the 5 speed auto - I am turning 3100 rpms - really drives the gas mileage down. I cant wait for the 7 speed that is in the new FX50/FX35 to migrate down to all the Infiniti's - a taller OD will really help highway fuel economy. Otherwise, this car is a blast - it is what replaced my Mazdaspeed 6 that I had for 2 years. It is just as fast as the MS6 stock, with none of the problems or quirks that the MS6 had. I do miss the MS6 though - it was a little more tossible as it was lighter than the G35x.

wannabe

06-10-2008, 09:01 AM

http://hypermiling.com/

just for the sake of argument, i drive an 06 ms6. before i went to that site the best i ever got was 26mpg on all highway(told by scangauge). on friday i looked at that site at work, on the way home i pulled into the garage at 29.9 mpg on a 18 mile 70/30 highway/city drive home.

its got some good tips on there.

camrycev6

06-10-2008, 09:22 AM

I saw the same thing. That guy is nuts. He starts the car and immediately slams in into drive... He doesn't use the brakes when he makes crazy turns. He tailgates... Sorry, it just isn't worth it.

larryc

06-14-2008, 08:26 PM

Filled up my 2nd tank today. Got 13.4 mpg; also 100% suburb driving. Love the car otherwise, but not very happy with the mpg. For comparison, the 2002 MDX that this CX9 replaced got 17mpg when new and about 15mpg at the time I traded it in.
Well, here's my report two months later:
I am consistently getting around 13 mpg or less, 100% suburb driving. Not so happy about this; wondering if I should take it to the dealer to see if anything can be done.

Not optimistic anything can be done as I took a road trip last week NY to Boston and got 22 mpg going there, 19 mpg back (but coming back had a little local driving mixed in + a/c going)

bill42

06-14-2008, 11:07 PM

Sounds normal. Others are getting higher city mileage but they likely live in more rural suburbs. NY Suburbs are very different than your average suburb.
I get 13 too around Long Island. I just filled my tank today and it cost $81. Not fun. What are our options? Get a raise I guess! I think you'll be seeing a lot less large SUVs on the roads soon. I still love the CX-9, but my next car will prob be an A4 wagon. The new one looks like it may get 31 mpg on the highway.

fraochdha

07-12-2008, 01:39 AM

I purchased my 08 GT AWD cx9 in Nov and love it, with the exception of the gas mileage. I've learned to watch my lead foot though. Keeping my shift points at or below 2K on Tach has really made a difference around town.

not_too_shabby

10-23-2008, 12:43 PM

Has anybody downgraded from 20" to 18" wheels on their Cx-9 and seen a noticeable mileage difference? Between the price of replacing 20" tires and the higher rotating mass of the 20" wheels it may be a big money saver to downgrade the wheels.

bill42

10-23-2008, 01:25 PM

I just got my new 18 inch wheels in the mail a few days ago, with performance winter tires on them. (Pirelli Scorpion Ice&Snows) The tread may alter mileage slightly as well as the possibly lighter wheels.
I will let you know if my mileage changes, but I seriously doubt the small difference in rotating mass is going to effect mileage. Driving style for example is way more of a factor than a few pounds of rotating mass or unsprung weight.

not_too_shabby

10-23-2008, 01:35 PM

I have those snow tires on my MB R350. They are great. How much did the winter setup cost you? Did you buy TPMS?

trthom

12-04-2008, 11:19 AM

Run in manual mode on long trips. I did this and got 24-26 on my AWD CX9

bill42

12-04-2008, 11:36 AM

I have those snow tires on my MB R350. They are great. How much did the winter setup cost you? Did you buy TPMS?

Yes I got the TPMS which are pretty pricey for our cars. The total with shipping came to 1487. The wheels were one of the cheapest ones but they still look pretty cool. The car lost all of its tight steering due too the tall mushy tread, but the ride is nice and even smoother over large bumps. It still corners fine but I automatically adjusted my driving due to the decrease in road feel. I am very glad I didn't get the Blizzacks now as they are rated far worse on dry pavement. (And since it is 50 degrees out today it looks like I have a lot of dry pavement ahead of me)

I can post pictures of the wheels and tires if anyone is interested...

bill42

12-04-2008, 11:40 AM

Run in manual mode on long trips. I did this and got 24-26 on my AWD CX9

how did that get you better mileage? In my experience the auto trans shifts way sooner than I do when running in manual mode. Plus, on long trips, your car is in 6th gear the entire time on the highway. Please elaborate if you could...

I still have never gotten better than 20mpg but that is probably because I drive fast on long trips.

not_too_shabby

12-04-2008, 12:25 PM

I have been getting 14 MPG on my first couple tanks. Did you guys see an improvement in your mileage after the engine broke in? I'm up to about 800 miles on the car now.

bill42

12-04-2008, 12:34 PM

no. I get worse mileage, because when it was new I tried to drive it easy to get better mileage. Now I am back to my old ways, and I am always late to something. I get 250 miles from full to empty now (right at the "E")
That works out to around 13 mpg or so, which is constant with all the other vehicles of this class according to MotorTrend's actual mileage tests.

not_too_shabby

12-04-2008, 02:03 PM

I'm going to try synthetic oil after a couple thousand miles and hope that helps. Car and Driver got 17 or 18 on their 700 mile trip when they did their SUV comparison a couple months ago.

Neuritis

12-08-2008, 07:37 AM

I just got my 08 GT AWD a couple of weeks ago and noticed that I was getting much better mileage on the first and second tank of gas (over 500 km per fill with about 1/4 tank). Now I have over 1,500 kms on it, I'm finding that I'm only getting around just over 400 km with when I get to 1/4 tank. Does premium gas make a difference?

wannabe

12-08-2008, 10:14 AM

the main difference now is the colder temps and the winter mix fuel. there are more additives in the winter, and the car has to run harder longer to warm up. for the last 8 months i have consistently gotten 18-20 mpg, last two tanks were at 16(in the cx-7). winter crap.

not_too_shabby

12-08-2008, 11:39 AM

That's true. Colder whether equals more dense air, which equals more fuel needed for combustion.

Padre Dave

12-10-2008, 12:03 AM

In my first week of ownership of my GT, I have measured 21 mpg with mostly highway driving. In my first week I have driven ~1,100 miles, which is my normal.

For the level of comfort and performance, not bad. My '05 Dodge Magnum RT (with the Hemi) that I have driven for the past 3 years averaged 19 mpg with the same driving pattern, so I am pleased.

not_too_shabby

12-11-2008, 12:16 PM

Just got 17MPG on my last tank with a 100 mile highway trip along with my usual commute stop and go traffic. I guess there is some hope....

broomco

12-11-2008, 12:58 PM

Just got 17MPG on my last tank with a 100 mile highway trip along with my usual commute stop and go traffic. I guess there is some hope....

I don't know, I think I've given up hope. Ours is probably 70/30 city/highway, best ever is 16.7. One tank all 55-65 highway returned a whopping 16.2. The gas gauge on this thing drops quickly...

For comparison, our 04 Pilot was always at least 19, usually 20-21 mostly stop and go.

TTubrag

12-16-2008, 09:22 AM

5,500km travelled.
Using 98 or 95RON fuel.
Best mileage = 12.06l/100km (19.5mpg)
Worst mileage = 15.6l/100km (16.04mpg)
Average mileage = 13.35l/100km (17.68mpg) I think I got those conversions right.

Not too bad I don't think.... for a 2 tonne AWD SUV!

Cheers,
TTubrag.

CX9 SportOwner

12-22-2008, 06:03 PM

still getting great mileage for this size car

never got worse that 19

o.c.cx9

12-22-2008, 07:34 PM

still getting great mileage for this size car

never got worse that 19

With all due respect.

Hope you don't mind me calling B.S.

squidly

12-23-2008, 08:42 AM

I've been down to 17 MPG two times, otherwise I'm at 19 or 20
all the time in my AWD sport.

TTubrag

12-24-2008, 03:43 AM

With all due respect.

Hope you don't mind me calling B.S.

My thoughts initially too. That kind of mileage is clearly the exception, rather than the rule. But... to be fair... it's very achievable if you do the kind of driving that puts the ECU into a closed loop more often than not. ie: 80kph to 110kph on open roads, constant driving. Certainly not stop-start city/ suburban driving in my experience. Mind you... that goes for ANY car really.

DSherwood

12-28-2008, 01:11 AM

Squidly,

still getting 19, now that it is winter? I am down to 15, I live in the western burbs in mpls, across the river from you.

I have 8500 miles on mine, hope it gets better.

regards,

bill42

12-28-2008, 08:36 AM

Now that I am used to the car after 1 year I drive it the way the transmission is geared to be driven. Meaning I don't try to keep it shifting at 2000 RPM anymore. Gas is half the price that it was for a while, and since we are all using it up quick I might as well enjoy the car for a bit before gas jumps back up for good. We all know these large heavy cars are likely the last of their breed. The CX-9 is something we will turn into a legend for our grandkids. Anyway, I never totally floor it except maybe once or twice a tank, while entering a short on-ramp onto a highway. I drive 75% in suburbia out on Long Island NY and I now get 12mpg just about every tank.
I have accepted that I can only go about 230 miles on a tank, and the car is a lot more fun now to drive when you let it shift near its torque peaks. Only now do I appreciate what ZOOM ZOOM means! Yes, I proved once that O could get 18 to 19 mpg, but it was no fun watching priuses blow me away at each stoplight.

squidly

12-28-2008, 09:57 AM

I didn't check it during the last cold-spell, but I imagine it dropped
under 19. I really try to drive like an old man to my MPG up.

Padre Dave

12-28-2008, 08:14 PM

I don't know, folks, I have been driving pretty normally and have never gotten below 19.5 and have gotten as much as 23 mpg in mixed urban freeway/rural freeway driving

CX9 SportOwner

12-31-2008, 09:26 PM

No BS and I drive this car the way it was intended. Fun

One more time, as I described in another post:

We took a trip from Prescott (AZ) to the White Mountains. From 5200' over a 6000' mountain range, down through Jerome to the Verde Valley. ALL winding mountain road. Then through Sedona, and over to Payson. Again, almost all winding roads, other that a short 80mph stretch on I-17. Then Payson to Show Low at 6400'. And while there. we drove around town for 2 days seeing the sights. Then up to Sunrise Ski resort at 9000' and back. Then back to Show Low, and home the next day taking the same route home.
All the time, we had our 13.5 foot kayak on the roof as you see in the photos.

For the entire trip we averaged 22mpg. Home, to home.

bill42

01-02-2009, 12:21 PM

Is yours 2 wheel drive maybe? Or maybe some of you guys have some sort of super gas jet fuel at your gas stations. Or is it because you have God on your side? ;-)

I just completed a 350+ mile highway trip to Canada. I do have a new Thule Cargo box on the roof that surely cuts down on gas mileage at highway speeds. I filled up the tank at the start of the highway driving. I never went over 80 and 90% of the time I was driving my fully loaded CX-9 AWD at 70mph. At the end of the tank I calculated 13.5 mpg, 100% highway driving.
It must be that the cargo box costs me a lot of extra fuel, but could it be causing me to lose 7 miles per gallon? In the past I average 18.5 for all highway driving.

jabba

01-03-2009, 05:41 PM

Back from a road trip over Xmas, ended up with 19 mpg with mostly highway driving. Same trip over the summer ended up with 22 mpg.

So winter driving hurts the beast, but I was expecting that. Half and half driving ends up somewhere near 14 mpg, usually about 16 in the summer.

I wouldn't say that this is great mileage, but again, I bought this thing knowing what I was getting myself into. The weight just kills you. I do have to admit that it's a bit worse than I was expecting, we've really been babying the beast...ah well.

CX9 SportOwner

01-04-2009, 11:26 PM

as in my signature, 2 wheel drive, but that's only 1 or 2 mpg difference at best. Also, keep in mind the boat we carried. not as aero as your thule box, and probably heavier, too

bill42

01-05-2009, 08:20 AM

My post drive conclusion:
I had about 200 pounds of gear in the roof box, plus another 200 in the back, plus 500 pounds of humans. With the extra ~1000 pounds of weight, my CX-9 was about the weight of a Suburban-sized vehicle, and I would guess with not much better an aerodynamic profile. Therefore, it makes sense—nothing in this universe comes for free. If you are the weight of a large Suburban, you are going to get roughly the same mileage as a Suburban.
On my return trip with no snowstorm, I got closer to 15 or 16 mpg, just like a large sized SUV gets on the highway.

tomiller97

01-06-2009, 12:33 PM

Seems that our fuel economy is common across the country. I live in Ohio and drive an 08 FWD Sport CX-9 and have averaged 16mpg over the first 4500miles. My wife normally drives it and does a majority of city driving.
I've kept track of every tank so far and the best we've done was 19 (that was with me driving it to work from Toledo to Detroit for a few days 60 miles one way at about 75mph). I haven't seen much fluctuation in economy over the first 3 months we've had the vehicle due to "breaking in" either.

I also haven't made it a point to use 'better' gas, say only going to Sunoco or a Mobil station vs going to the cheapest gas in the area. I normally use gas from Kroger as we get a 20 cent discount per gallon. I've always only used regular 87 Octane to this point as well...

Asia

01-13-2009, 10:25 PM

Want a good laugh? We have only had our CX-9 a couple weeks and when we went to pick it up, our salesman wasn't there yet. Another saleman came over and talked to us until he arrived. He said he owned a CX-9 and that after the "break-in" period of about 8k miles, he gets 29 mpg on the highway. I figured he was embellishing a little!

bill42

01-13-2009, 10:38 PM

sounds like some people on this board actually...
just kidding. Mostly.

SeCX-9

01-14-2009, 06:46 AM

I'll bet he has his family of 6 who usually sit in the back, get out and push the car about 7 more miles per gallon....

Asia

01-14-2009, 01:58 PM

First tank with 300 miles on the car we got 18 mpg in mostly suburban driving, some back country roads. FWD Sport with no roof racks.

Padre Dave

01-15-2009, 12:54 AM

Got my best tank yesterday with 23.6 mpg....way cool. She likes Chevron Regular the best....hates "no-name" gas like at Costco.

not_too_shabby

01-15-2009, 11:12 AM

23.6. wow. you must have a light foot. The warm weather probably helps as well. Cold air is denser = more fuel.... I'm still bouncing around 15 MPG in mixed driving.

cccx9

01-15-2009, 03:43 PM

I get about 18 with mixed driving on cheap costco gas :) with my AWD.

o.c.cx9

01-30-2009, 07:36 PM

Filled up today at Costco 14 + Gal on all city driving and not hard driving.

Whoopee 11.7 MPG.

Hope I can find a sucker this year to buy it.

Tom

PS. All of you who claim 18MPG in the city.
Well(butt)

bill42

01-31-2009, 07:56 AM

you are not alone. I drive mostly all city driving in NY and I get 230 miles on a full tank and no more- in the high 11's. The people who get 18 would get 11 instead if they drove in my city for a week. I have no hole in my gas tank. CX-9s don't roll off the assembly line with every other engine dropping 6 mpg.

I am sure if I had a big Chevy Tahoe or an Escalade I would be getting 9s.
I don't complain anymore- I just accept it. I need the 3rd row seat and I can't think of another SUV other than a hybrid that would be any better. With the hybrids you simply pay the fuel savings difference upfront.
The CX-9 still wins.

jpr210

02-03-2009, 08:29 AM

bill42

02-03-2009, 08:56 AM

I think that once someone goes to the dyno with one of these CX-9 we will discover that the thing runs very rich and a good tuner will be able to lean it out and get much better millage and more power to boot. is there anyone out there working on this?

Jpr

I am curious as to why you might think this? With 273 hp and 270 lb-ft of torque rated at the engine, the 3.7L engine in the CX-9 has more power/liter than my 1999 BMW M3 had, and that engine required 91 octane.
How much power do you think someone can get out of a 3.7 liter with no forced compression and standard 87 octane? Our engine beats most of the competition in its class as well. I think Mazda hired better engineers and spent more R&D on this engine than any tuner could ever afford. Yes, a tuner can build a new engine map and sell you a new chip to get more horsepower but that would require switching to high octane fuel and also raising the redline, giving the CX-9 even worse mileage.
Also, if the engine was running rich it would produce more carbon and fail emissions. In modern engines with all the precise sensors, fuel mixture is precisely controlled to a level unheard of 10 years ago, and engines are both more powerful and more efficient than ever before as a result.

CX9 SportOwner

02-03-2009, 03:07 PM

Got my best tank yesterday with 23.6 mpg....way cool. She likes Chevron Regular the best....hates "no-name" gas like at Costco.

Gas is gas. It's literally all the same, because every refinery puts a specific volume of gas in the pipeline, and is allowed to take that much out of the other end, never knowing who actually manufactured it. So they all make the exact same product. It has to be the same chemical composition in order to BE gasoline.
The only difference at the pump is that companies like Shell and Chevron then put additives in their gas prior to trucking it the their stations claiming it helps keep your engine cleaner. The truth is, it's just cheap filler to give you less actual gasoline per gallon for your money. What keeps an engine clean is efficient combustion, and you get that with undiluted gas. Every vehicle I've owned ran worse on Chevron because of the junk they add.

bill42

02-03-2009, 03:34 PM

Not just shell and Cevron, but I think all the companies add extra additives and levels of Ethanol. When tested, many gas stations have been proven to not meet their advertised octane rating. In the old days before electronic timing, I used to buy bad gas sometimes from cheep places and my old Chevelle would ping like crazy. In modern cars we don't notice the bad gas because our cars simply retard the timing.

treeguy4u

02-04-2009, 06:19 PM

We have checked ours twice in the last month and got around 14mpg with 1600 mi. on the car. Little discouraged but not giving up yet. My wife drives the car most of the time. I think that's where at least 5 mpg are going. Traded in Toyota Avalon that was getting 20-22 city/highway. But I love doing in the snow what that FWD Avalon cannot do. Lots of good ideas on this forum for getting better mileage.

jpr210

02-04-2009, 11:00 PM

I am curious as to why you might think this? With 273 hp and 270 lb-ft of torque rated at the engine, the 3.7L engine in the CX-9 has more power/liter than my 1999 BMW M3 had, and that engine required 91 octane.
How much power do you think someone can get out of a 3.7 liter with no forced compression and standard 87 octane? Our engine beats most of the competition in its class as well. I think Mazda hired better engineers and spent more R&D on this engine than any tuner could ever afford. Yes, a tuner can build a new engine map and sell you a new chip to get more horsepower but that would require switching to high octane fuel and also raising the redline, giving the CX-9 even worse mileage.
Also, if the engine was running rich it would produce more carbon and fail emissions. In modern engines with all the precise sensors, fuel mixture is precisely controlled to a level unheard of 10 years ago, and engines are both more powerful and more efficient than ever before as a result.

Mazda, like other manufacturers make the engines run slightly rich as this cools down the conbustion chambers, keep the engines cool under extreme circumstances. A slightly rich combustion keeps the engine more tolerant of different types of gas quality and able to perform well in both the 90 plus degree heat as well as below zero. When a good tuner tunes an engine on the dyno as well as live on the road, they are able to adjust the engines operation of the particular area and gas quality you can get. My Chev LS1 with a tune got 20 more HP and 3 more MPG from a on site tunning (not a mail order chip).

That is just my experience.

Jpr

not_too_shabby

02-05-2009, 09:38 AM

The down side to running leaner is you are more likely to have detonation issues. I "chipped" my passat 1.8turbo, and I did get better MPG on premium. The downside is the car wasn't tolerant of anything less than 91 octane. You could probably do something similar on the cx-9, but you would have to run premium, which is usually 20 cents more a gallon so the MPG increase would need to be enough to justify the added expense. Now if we got more power too, that would be nice.

Asia

02-14-2009, 12:46 PM

I got 19.2 miles per gallon on the last fill-up in mostly suburban driving. I drove it very gently and coasted to red lights. I got 18 with the first two fill ups. It hasn't been as cold the last week which probably helped some too.

NWCX9

02-23-2009, 05:42 PM

I got 17mpg on my first tank full driving 60% city / 40% hwy with hard starts off the line.

On my second tank driving mostly hwy miles (20%city / 80% hwy) I got almost 21mpg driving mellow with very little jack rabbit starts (no fun).

I'm about 1/2 through my third tank with once again mostly hwy miles and more jack rabbit starts than tank #2 and it looks somewhere around 19~20mpg.

Big change from my 99 Corolla that got an easy 32~35mpg and WAY more fun to drive!!! (drive2)

Bumpin Mazda

02-26-2009, 11:57 AM

i can garrentee that ur engine is not broke in if u only have 4k miles on it
my previous car. toyota sequioa. i baught with 35k and the engine still wasnt broken in cause the lady before me drove like a grandmaw. it didnt get broken in and in a consistant 18-20 mpg untill i got to 45k. within the first 6k miles on a new car u have to drive it like a bat out of hell. all the sensors have to be maxxed out to be able to measure fuel efficiency and fuel distribution evenly to get a consistant and oem sugested gas milage.

cccx9

02-26-2009, 12:16 PM

bill42

02-26-2009, 12:29 PM

Some interesting theories there, Bumpin Mazda! I hope you realize some of what you said is controversial and not necessarily proven fact. Personally I did break in my sports car engine using a similar philosophy- there is a race proven method of reving a new engine throughout the RPM range under load, which is also controversial as manufacturers recommend babying the engine. However the purpose was to make all the engine seals break in properly, not for fuel economy. It seemed to work well for my high performance M3 engine so far, as she runs like a top and never burns a drop of oil 5 years later. But I didn't break in the family-oriented CX-9 using that method.

As for driving the CX-9 like a bat out of hell, well I don't even drive mine that hard at all and I get an average of 13mpg here in the suburbs. If I drove it hard, I bet I could get down to 9mpg or less, but why would I want to do that?

Lastly, let me remind everyone that the EPA has changed it's ratings after 2007, to reflect more accurate and lower mileage more consistent with real life driving. I just looked it up and a new Sequoia is rated at 13 city, 16 highway. That means it is virtually impossible to get 18-20 mpg. Real life driving will certainly be equal or lower to the EPA rating just like it is for the CX-9.

(except for the few of you with magic fairy feet ;-)

CX9 SportOwner

02-26-2009, 02:28 PM

I drove ours moderate to occasionally hard with no problems for 'break in'.
Still get 19 to 22 mpg with ME driving. Ours can't be broken in favor of better mileage.

And yes, driving super hard on a new engine isn't a good idea. The "grandmaw" car didnt get better mileage at first because it was babied, sure. That is more due to carbon buildup from dogging the engine.

Asia

03-09-2009, 10:36 PM

I just notice your car is an 07 which has a slightly smaller engine. I wonder if the 07's get better mileage that the 08 & 09's?

CX9 SportOwner

03-10-2009, 01:17 AM

We've had this debate since 07. For some reason some people are getting horrible mileage, and calling me a liar when I state my figures.

ceric

03-10-2009, 01:44 AM

Short drives (stop and go) kills MPG of heavy vehicles. A few more factors contribute to the so-so MPG of CX9
- weight (200lb heavier) of AWD (compared to FWD)
- tall 1st gear (high rpm on 1st gear when accelerating)
- wide tires (245) and big alloy wheel (18" 20").
Compared with Highlander, which is
- 200lb lighter
- 225 tires
- shorter 1st gear
Highlander can easier get 1-2mpg better than CX9.

Also, check your tire pressure. Every 5psi drop can cost you 2mpg.

CX9 SportOwner

03-10-2009, 01:48 AM

I'm totally happy with our mileage for this vehicle.
I'd prefer it to be a H2 fuel cell car, but we're all supposed to pretend those don't exist.

And the Highlander is still a 4 adult turd.

bill42

03-10-2009, 08:39 AM

you seem to enjoy the word "turd."
I think the new highlander is a pretty nice crossover and to me it looks better than the Pilot and the MDX.
Anyway, I for one am not calling you a liar. If you are getting 22 mpg on the highway on your 07 Front wheel drive CX-9, then you are matching the EPA rating which is certainly possible. I do believe that others who have stated much higher mileage than you are mistaken, and probably didn't calculate accurately.
Then again I am not lying that I get 13 mpg overall, since I drive my heavier AWD nearly all short distances in suburbia, and my wife likes to launch the CX-9 at lights since she doesn't ever fill up the tank. And I did once get my EPA rating of 20mpg last summer when I babied the throttle on a long trip, so I know all of us can get the EPA ratings of our cars under the right conditions.

nuhuskyfan

03-10-2009, 09:22 AM

Bill, I'm in the same boat as you. Granted I have 1000 miles on the car but I have never had a vehicle where gas mileage improved significantly as the engine broke in. I'm getting 15-16 MPG driving in suburbia. I don't see how this thing will get over 20MPG unless there is an endless downhill freeway that I'm not aware of :)

vikefan7

03-10-2009, 11:59 AM

I'm with you guys. I got 13 MPG on my first tank, mostly suburban driving. I think it's actually worse than my Montero Sport. However, that's probably because I drove the Mitsu like an old lady because it was a frickin' tank and the CX is soooo much more fun to drive that I end up flogging it everywhere.... Should've bought a Prius... not really:)

Asia

03-10-2009, 01:39 PM

I have an 08 with 1500 miles on it. I am averaging 18 miles per gallon on mainly short distance suburban driving. I drive 1 mile to work and back (walk when the weather is nice, but it has been cold in Ohio) and have carpool a couple days a week which involves some idling. On weekends it gets some highway mileage in, but not a lot. I'm guessing when the weather warms up I will get 1-2 miles per gallon better, so I am happy with the mileage. It will be interesting to see what it gets on a long trip.

nuhuskyfan

03-10-2009, 02:05 PM

CX9 SportOwner

03-10-2009, 02:17 PM

I've never accused anyone else of lying, certainly. My question is simply why some people are getting far worse mileage. This car in any form should get at least the sticker specs for mpg.

The AWD doesn't change the mileage significantly. Only 1mpg less than the FWD. Yes, the other options do add more weight, but still no more than an extra passenger. I've had a full compliment of adult passengers and still got decent mileage.

The other issue here is that the low mpg people all claim to be driving conservatively. I drive anything but conservatively, and still get good mileage for this size vehicle. I have as much fun in our CX9 as anyone can. And if you read my trip accounts, they are rarely flat smooth interstate driving. 99% of our interstate driving is I17 in Arizona from Prescott to Phoenix. It's hills and curves, and a 4000ft elevation change. Yes, that helps a bit going down, but is more than offset going back up, especially at 80mph.
Read my account earlier in this thread of a trip we took with a 14 foot boat on the roof. I got 22 on that trip. That wasn't flat straight 55mph driving, for sure.

During the week, my wife drives the car to work and back. It's about 1.5 miles and all 35mph or less. If we don't travel anywhere for an entire tank, her short slow trips still yield at least 17 mpg. I know if I drove on a long flat highway with the cruise set to a conservative speed I could get 25 with this car.

Therefore, I can't help but wonder if something isn't wrong with the low mileage CX9s, like a bad computer control parameter or something. I would definitely have it checked if I was getting anything less than the claimed mileage.

And yes, I like the word turd. Hehe he said turd...

not_too_shabby

03-10-2009, 04:10 PM

Another tank for me, another 14.9 MPG average for the tank. I have about a 8 mile freeway commute with 2 miles stop and go in traffic on each end. I'm pretty disappointed. The best I have done was 17 with about 140 miles of highway driving. I have an AWD GT 2008. I am tempted to try higher octane. This may help improve mileage if the timing is being retarded to prevent pinging.

The 2008 MY also had the 3.7L verses 3.5L engines. Maybe that is a source of some of the discrepancy in mileage.

bill42

03-10-2009, 04:46 PM

I am an avid MotorTrend Reader, and I am always noticing that the motorTrend staff never gets close to the EPA ratings when they do their long term testing. For the CX-9 and all the other cars in our weight class, MotorTrend reports around 13 or 14 mpg overall. And yet they never seem alarmed. So I am not thinking that there is anything wrong with our cars.
I think there is something wrong with your car, if you are able to actually get that 25 mpg that you think you might get! I accept your challenge- drive your next highway trip conservatively and calculate your tank to tank mileage and report back on this thread what you really got.
To quote Scotty, "You can't change the laws of physics, Captain!"

CX9 SportOwner

03-10-2009, 05:01 PM

The challenge is driving our CX 9 conservatively, but ON THE next flat interstate trip I will see what we get.
The problem is finding a flat stretch. We live a mile up, and have 4 routes out of town. All 4 have a minimum 1000 foot elevation change, 2 up, and 2 down, within 30 miles. And the two interstates then drop another 3000 feet over 90 miles.

I still can't believe that our car could be broken in favor of better mileage. If there is, then I'm not going to fix it, since the car runs perfect. Most owners actually don't seem to get bad mileage, so I'd still take it to a dealer and have the codes run.

Asia

03-10-2009, 05:40 PM

Someone on the Edmunds forum posted that they got 25 mpg on a highway trip to NC, so it probably is possible.

CX9 SportOwner

03-10-2009, 05:42 PM

I believe it.

Even at 9000 feet our car runs great. At sea level it was on fire!

cccx9

03-11-2009, 10:21 AM

I just drove from the DC area to Disney World in my AWD. I got varying mileage but nothing lower than 21. My highest was just over 23 mpg and that was with the AC on for most of the trip home. Speeds were between 60-80 mph depending on speed limit and traffic.

I usually get around 18 w/ normal mixed driving.

not_too_shabby

03-11-2009, 10:59 AM

Force-1

03-11-2009, 11:14 PM

CX9 SportOwner

03-12-2009, 01:50 AM

I just took a R/T Albuquerque to Denver last weekend. I averaged 80 MPH, and got about 19.8 MPG. I'm quite happy with this, as I swapped an Escalade for my CX-9. The Escalade would have been about 15 MPG on the same trip.

That's decent mileage for that trip. 2400 foot climb over Raton. Bet it was beautiful this time of year.

microlost

03-12-2009, 02:07 AM

on my 2007 awd, i drive 2 miles trip to work, if i don't go out, just keep the same tank to drive to work, i get 13 mpg, when i first got it in the winter, i got only 11mpg, and back then the gas was $3 a gallon. i drove it to canada one time, freeway only, it got 21.3 mpg; on my mix driving, i usually get 13--15 mpg, if more freeway driving i get 14--15.6 mpg, never get 18 mpg maybe i need to bring it back to dealer have then look at it.

Force-1

03-12-2009, 08:08 AM

That's decent mileage for that trip. 2400 foot climb over Raton. Bet it was beautiful this time of year.

It was a nice drive--I make it 3-4 times a year. Did have nasty winter weather on way back between Denver and Pueblo though.

Force-1

03-12-2009, 08:12 AM

I would also add I typically put about 45 miles a day on my vehicles during the work week. This includes a 38 mile R/T, the rest running around the Air Force base I work at. Average MPG for my vehicles (I rotate them) for work week day:

CX-9: 18 MPG
Cadillac STS: 20 MPG
C6 Corvette: 21 MPG

About 80% of my R/T to work is average 60 MPH, not many lights.

cccx9

03-12-2009, 10:18 AM

Do you have a 2007(3.5L) or 2008(3.7L)?

Sorry forgot that, 2008 3.7L

ceric

03-12-2009, 01:39 PM

The difference between FWD and AWD in city driving is much more than 1mpg (as EPA rating indicated). EPA may says so, but the way they test vehicles is not how most people drive. On highway, the difference could be close to 1mpg. I would believe that.

CX9 SportOwner

03-12-2009, 02:15 PM

Definitely in snow and ice, but I wouldn't expect much difference in normal driving when the AWD isn't engaged.

todd92

03-12-2009, 02:51 PM

It does not matter if it is engaged or not. There is additional weight (city MPG penalty) and driveline friction (city and hwy MPG penalty) which is present at all times with AWD. There is yet another increment of driveline friction when it is engaged, but this is small compared to the 1st two effects.

CX9 SportOwner

03-12-2009, 03:32 PM

But only the PTO and longitudinal shaft turn . Not the rear differential unless AWD is engaged. Thus, the rated 1mpg less.
This is just like our 99 CR-V was, except the engagement was different, and we still got similar mileage with that car vs. the 2wd version.

It's minimal unless your AWD is activating under normal driving.

todd92

03-12-2009, 06:03 PM

So you think the rear differential is still while the vehicle is driving when the center differential is not engaged? Think again, the rear wheels are turning the differential and sloshing the oil around. Again, the center differential being engaged matters not.

CX9 SportOwner

03-12-2009, 06:22 PM

You're right. Mazda developed an AWD system so inefficient that it drags the mileage down 5 MPG just by existing. I guess when you take your foot off the gas an AWD CX9 comes to a quick stop without breaking, too

cccx9

03-16-2009, 10:58 AM

I have a 2008 AWD. I get 18 MPG mixed driving. I got an avg of 22 MPG hwy on a long trip to Disney just a few weeks ago. The EPA rates the AWD 15 City and 21 Hwy. I'd say they got it right.

There are always going to be those who get less mpg due to the way they drive, the terrain they drive on, the gas they use, the altitude they drive in, etc etc etc. It is impossible to rate a car's mpg for all driving situtations etc. The new EPA ratings are pretty accurate in my opinion. Much better than the old system. YMMV

jpr210

03-17-2009, 02:34 PM

08 CX-9GT w 28K. drove from Miami to Orlando this weekend and did 23.5mpg on the way up to Orlando (at 72 mph 2Krpm) and did 22.5 on the way down at the same speed. that is the best Ive ever done with the Cruise Control on.

Jpr

bill42

03-17-2009, 02:59 PM

So far at least one of you have confirmed that you got 1 mpg more than the EPA highway rating. I didn't think it was possible and I was wrong. But most of you at best are just reaching your EPA rating of 22 for front wheel drive.
The best I ever did was 20 and my AWD is rated at 21. There really is no magic here, nor does it sound like some of the CX-9s have a design defect or engine problem.

CX9 SportOwner

03-17-2009, 03:00 PM

True, an AWD GT will not get my FWD Sports mpg, but no one should be getting 13mpg driving conservatively. I'd have the codes run, or do it myself.

not_too_shabby

03-31-2009, 01:28 PM

Just took about a 500 mile trip which contained of about 300 miles of interstate going between 60-80MPH plus 200 miles of windy highway probably averaging 30-60MPH. With about 400 pounds of passengers plus luggage I got 19MPG for the whole trip. This is by far the best mileage I have seen. Hopefully the trip help break the engine in more. I have about 3500 miles on the odometer now. In my normal commute I have been getting 14.5 which has about 2 miles of stop and go on each end of a 8 mile highway commute.

nuhuskyfan

03-31-2009, 01:38 PM

Mine is creeping in on 16.5 MPG with 2,000 +/- miles on the odometer. I suppose that is what I should expect.

CX9 SportOwner

03-31-2009, 02:05 PM

nuhuskyfan

03-31-2009, 02:43 PM

Prescott to East side of Phoenix (120 miles interstate/freeway)
Phoenix to Lake Havasu with cargo (260 miles, half interstate/freeway, half winding highway)

22mpg

Havasu to Prescott. (200 miles, 5k steady 80mph climb)

Waiting to fill up again.

I think you have one of the leanest CX9s around. I'm jealous!

CX9 SportOwner

03-31-2009, 03:01 PM

seems that way

vikefan7

03-31-2009, 03:50 PM

seems that way

Do you have the '07?

CX9 SportOwner

03-31-2009, 04:03 PM

Yes

(drive)

Padre Dave

04-01-2009, 01:06 AM

My '08 is still getting a steady 20-22mpg, calculated with a calculator after each fill-up. Maybe it's Arizona....or good gas?

CX9 SportOwner

04-01-2009, 01:18 AM

todd92

04-01-2009, 06:53 AM

I avoid the expensive gas like Shell and Chevron. Since those have more filler and less actually combustible material, maybe that makes a difference.

They can claim cleaning power all they want, but it's really just a legal way to water down the gas to increase profit. The best way to keep an engine clean is efficient combustion from pure gasoline and normal maintenance (plugs, filters, etc)

Not true. Gas is gas. All gas has detergents. The amount of detergents put in any gas is so small to be unmeasurable with regards to specific heat content. I just use whatever is cheapest and convenient.

Force-1

04-01-2009, 08:17 AM

http://www.toptiergas.com/

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/2007-06-13-bad-gas-usat_N.htm?imw=Y&loc=interstitialskip

vikefan7

04-01-2009, 11:56 AM

Yes

(drive)

So is your '07 rated the same mpg as the '08 and '09? Doesn't it have the smaller engine in it, or at least less horsepower. Maybe that's the difference why you seem to be getting much better mileage than most....

ceric

04-01-2009, 12:46 PM

By proportion, a 3.5L engine will consume 0.55% less gas than a 3.7L. That translates to about 0.99mpg ~ 1mpg. Therefore, a 2007 has an advantage of 1mpg over 2008/9 models, even if EPA rated them the same. (note: Highlander and Pilot both have 3.5L engines)

As the links indicated, all brand of gas comes from the same refineries. The gas tankers get the gas from refineries and add additives to the bulk gas and send to the gas stations. The condition of storage tanks of gas stations probably matters even more than the brand of gas. Some stations are old and outdated. There may be lots of sludge at the bottom of the tanks.

Anyway, my friend who is a auto-mechanic recommends me to add a bottom of STP gas treatment on even two/three fill-ups. ($1 each) The effect is probably better than buying Shell over no-name brand gas. If Shell charges you 0.05c more per gallon, that is $1 per fill-up (asuming 20 gallons) more than the no-name brand.

I personally believe in the theory of carbon deposits build-up on the valves because I saw it myself on my old student car, a 1985 Honda Accord.

vikefan7

04-01-2009, 03:16 PM

I seem to have problems with carbon deposits myself. Both of my vehicles needed the injectors cleaned at about 60000 miles as per the dealer mechanic. How often are the injectors supposed to be cleaned?

CX9 SportOwner

04-01-2009, 03:27 PM

I did simplify my statement. Yes, all gas has some detergent in it. My point was that Shell and Chevron add MORE. More than is needed. It's like adding mildecide to paint. It's rarely needed except in specific cases, but some paint manufacturers add it to all their paint to justify a higher price.

Dirty gas is certainly possible, but stations are inspected for that and many other standards regularly.

Generally, carbon builds up from low RPM, and reduced combustion, caused by worn plugs, dirty air filter, ring wear...

Doing the basic maintenance and not babying the car is the best way to avoid carbon. Ceric is right. Add a good injector and top end cleaner at about 50k and you will probably get better results for less money than buying gas with it already in there.

An occasional bottle of Marvel Mystery Oil on an older engine doesn't hurt, either.

Asia

04-01-2009, 06:38 PM

I got 20 mpg with my last fill up in mainly suburban driving and 1,650 miles on the car. I think the warmer weather is helping as I do a lot of short distance driving.

CX9 SportOwner

04-05-2009, 05:56 PM

Prescott to East side of Phoenix (120 miles interstate/freeway)
Phoenix to Lake Havasu with cargo (260 miles, half interstate/freeway, half winding highway)

22mpg

Havasu to Prescott. (200 miles, 5k altitude increase, steady 80mph climb)

Waiting to fill up again.

Here's the tally. The return trip, plus my wife driving to and from work all week (3 mile round trip @ 25mph stop and go) drrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr (drumroll)

17mpg.

o.c.cx9

04-05-2009, 08:54 PM

CX9 SportOwner

04-05-2009, 10:14 PM

Its a tank, just admit it and pay the price. It rides and handles great.

The CX9 is deceptively large, but one thing I would never characterize it as is a tank. More like a 7 passenger sport hatchback.

cccx9

04-06-2009, 01:51 PM

I just returned from a 800 mile trip to Arizona from California. Whoopee, an average of 19.5 mpg all highway with cruse control.

I even looked for some of that special holly water that the Arizona people claim gets 22 mpg, but couldn't fine it.

Regards.

Tom

PS. Its a tank, just admit it and pay the price. It rides and handles great.

Cruise control set to what? 90?

I got 22-23 mpg (AWD) on my trip to Disney from DC. I even had the A/C on most of the way home because it was 80 degrees outside. I was I95 most of the way so speed varied from 60-80.

ceric

04-06-2009, 05:00 PM

TrackHo

04-07-2009, 08:33 PM

It is very easy to get 20-22mpg with CX9 on highway as long as you have steady feet on the gas pedals. On city stop-n-go, however, 2007 model might have some advantage (being 3.5L vs 3.7L). Plus, FWD will save some gas on hauling the extra 200lb AWD hardware and spinning them for nothing. 18" wheel/tires help a bit also (over 20"). For me, 3mile round trip stop-n-go with my AWD 2008 CX9, I will probably get 15mpg.

Stop and go means nothing, except you have a heavy car. My wifes 2005 Acura TL gets 29mpg on the freeway doing 75mph and gets 13mpg when she is driving my girls locally. The CX-9 does about the same around town and prolly gets 20-22 on the freeway(havent checked it yet w/o a trailer). The CX-9 weighs 4400 lbs, in stop and go its simple physics. My buddys 2007 MDX is slighly worse

Asia

04-16-2009, 12:16 PM

On our first short road trip with the CX-9 we got 22.6 miles per gallon. Went 366 miles, 40 of which were city and the rest were flat interstate miles going 70 mph. I had hoped to get 24, but maybe the city miles brought it down.

CX9 SportOwner

04-16-2009, 02:16 PM

Asia

04-16-2009, 09:07 PM

08 Sport FWD with 2,200 miles

CX9 SportOwner

04-16-2009, 09:53 PM

Thank God! Another Sport owner

Asia

04-17-2009, 01:22 PM

Yes, mine is Galaxy Grey too. I'm glad I got the Sport, but I got the black interior which shows all the dirt. That was my only mistake!

CX9 SportOwner

04-17-2009, 03:04 PM

Imagine the sand cloth though. i'll take easy to vac lint over ground in black. Now, if I got leather, it'd be sand just to stay cooler.

Asia

04-17-2009, 08:41 PM

Yes, I like the black seats but the black carpet shows all the dirt. Oh well, I guess it make you vacuum more often and keep it clean. We were offered a tourning with a sunroof for $2k more, but my daughter hates leather for some reason and I think the cloth is more comfortable too.

CX9 SportOwner

04-18-2009, 01:14 AM

I didn't want the leather either, but I think my bias against it was partly based on the really bad leather I saw in American cars (The sloppy Barcalounger type seating)

I looked closer at the GT after we bought ours and I think the leather seats are pretty nice, actually. The multi-tone sand is quite attractive, I think. And the heat issue in summer can be partially countered with the Sand interior. The cold is handled by the heated seats.

The thing that will always keep me from getting a GT is the completely out of place blue accent lighting competing with the blazing orange. Weird idea

Asia

04-19-2009, 12:40 PM

I thought the multi tone sand leather was very nice too. We tend to keep our cars for a long time. We have a 10 year old Lexus with beige leather and after 10 years the drivers seat which gets all the use looks worse than a cloth seat would. I think if you take care of the seats, cloth looks better longer. We had a 1988 Honda LXi with a burgandyish/brown interior and when we finally sold it at 15 years old, the interior still looked great.

CX9 SportOwner

04-19-2009, 12:43 PM

Anyone with leather needs to invest in a good set of cleaner and conditioner and use it regularly.

Al's Chop Shop

05-03-2009, 02:22 AM

i've been averaging 20mpg in my 08 sport FWD, and that is about 75% highway 25% city.

Al

Pounder

06-07-2009, 01:39 PM

Well this is my 2 cent worth!

We took the 08 AWD CX9 on a 2 week 2000 mile east coast trip.
Since we stopped often, for the kids, we refueled every 300 miles and I topped the car off to make all MPG calculations accurate.
Our best MPG on 300 miles was 25MPG (95% Highway) at a constant 70 MPH on flat terrain in Ohio. The next 300 Miles had some hills (50% Highway, 20% rural and 30% City traffic). MPG dropped down to 21.
Mountain driving was impressive. This car really bites in the steep hills! MPG 22 with 70% Highway, 20% rural and 10% city.
The worst was Washington. Although 50% was Highway and 50% of the 300 Miles were in the city the MPG dropped to 18. This was of course due to the stop and go traffic. The last 300 were a combination of Mountains/ Hills/ and flat terrain, 99% Highway and a 23 MPG fuel consumption.

So what did I think of the car.
When my wife bought it and I started reading the forum, I was not sure we had made the right decision. I didn't like the MPG consumption (70% city gave us 15-18MPG).
Now that I spent 2 weeks with it, I am starting to like the car more and more.
It is a very comfortable and roomy car. After an 8 hour day in the car I wasn't tired at all. The GT version we have has all the goodies. The one I like the most is BLISS. An awesome feature that works great. I even start to like the NAV system. It is not the best but when you know how to use it, it is not really that bad and has neat features.

We had a great 2 weeks and part of it was thanks to our CX-9. An average of 21,8 MPG on a 2000 mile trip is not too bad (It isn't great but for such a heavy car not bad at all). I can't wait to go on our next road trip :)

hamproof

06-08-2009, 12:54 PM

The GT version we have has all the goodies. The one I like the most is BLISS. An awesome feature that works great. I even start to like the NAV system. It is not the best but when you know how to use it, it is not really that bad and has neat features.

What is BLISS?? The NAV would have been much more useful if you can lookup while driving. But I did find it very useful as it shows me the next upcoming gas stations, restaurants etc. My old TT GO 700 doesn't have that feature, though I suspect most newer GPS do.

Also, in addition to the little box that shows time of arrival and number of miles left, a bit more info would be very useful.

I'm too lazy to read the manual again, but what is suppose to happen if you press the SPEAK/NAV button and say "restaurant" for example. The NAV just repeats it back to me and nothing happens after that. Does it just lookup restaurant POI and display them on the screen?

Pounder

06-09-2009, 05:26 PM

What is BLISS?? The NAV would have been much more useful if you can lookup while driving. But I did find it very useful as it shows me the next upcoming gas stations, restaurants etc. My old TT GO 700 doesn't have that feature, though I suspect most newer GPS do.

Also, in addition to the little box that shows time of arrival and number of miles left, a bit more info would be very useful.

I'm too lazy to read the manual again, but what is suppose to happen if you press the SPEAK/NAV button and say "restaurant" for example. The NAV just repeats it back to me and nothing happens after that. Does it just lookup restaurant POI and display them on the screen?

Bliss = Blind Spot Information System. It lights up, in your mirrors, when someone is in your blind spot. An audio warning sounds if you turn on your turn signal.

About your Nav question.... You will have to look it up cause i don't know (drinks)

ceric

06-09-2009, 07:02 PM

Bliss = Blind Spot Information System.

I think Mazda uses "BSM" instead of "BLISS", which is a term used by Volvo.
The BSM technology was originally from Volvo, which is part of Ford, which "used to" own Mazda.

P.S. Ford owns 20% of Mazda stocks now - legally it does not own Mazda (needs 30% or more).

hamproof

06-09-2009, 08:46 PM

It's called BSMS - Blind Spot Monitoring System. Official name.

ceric

06-09-2009, 09:07 PM

It's called BSMS - Blind Spot Monitoring System. Official name.

Direct copy from Mazda news release....
"Safety
- Front air bags††, side-impact air bags and 3-row side air curtains with roll-over protection.
- The CX-9 received the Highest Frontal Offset and Side-Impact Crash Test Rating from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS).
- Standard Dynamic Stability Control (DSC)‡‡, Traction Control System (TSC) and Roll Stability Control (RSC).
- Standard Blind Spot Monitoring (BSM) System***, Tire-Pressure Monitoring System (TPMS) and antitheft perimeter alarm.
"

The abbreviation is still BSM, not BSMS, though the full name is "Blind Spot Monitoring System"

gavilan_pr

06-10-2009, 08:43 PM

sp535:

I have the same issue. I bought mine about three weeks ago do mostly city driving. I’m located in South FL. I’m on my second gas tank hope it does better I had this same question.

gavilan_pr

06-10-2009, 08:44 PM

I have the same issue. I bought mine about three weeks ago do mostly city driving. I’m located in South FL. I’m on my second gas tank hope it does better I had this same question.

o.c.cx9

06-10-2009, 09:14 PM

I have the same issue. I bought mine about three weeks ago do mostly city driving. I’m located in South FL. I’m on my second gas tank hope it does better I had this same question.

Don't plan on anything better than 13 to 14 city driving, unless you live in Arizona.

My last city tank came in at 12.98.

Best of luck.

jbdiver

06-10-2009, 09:58 PM

I'm getting 16 to 17 in Minneapolis when I consciously try for better mileage. If I'm just driving normally in the city I get around 15.

Asia

06-22-2009, 07:29 PM

Back from our first long trip with the CX-9. Drove 700 miles from Ohio to SC and got 27 mpg on the first 350 miles with 500 lbs of passengers and fully loaded with air on all except the first hour. Second leg thru the mountains got 24 mpg. Very pleased--seats were really comfortable and it drove like a dream!

CX9 SportOwner

06-22-2009, 09:00 PM

Another reminder to put your vehicle details in your signature.

Sounds like the mileage I would get if I didn't have so much fun behind the wheel.

Asia

06-23-2009, 08:51 PM

Testing to see if signature shows.

vikefan7

06-24-2009, 12:06 PM

Testing to see if signature shows.

Nope.

CX9 SportOwner

06-24-2009, 02:09 PM

Yep

vikefan7

06-24-2009, 02:20 PM

Nope.

CX9 SportOwner

06-24-2009, 03:17 PM

Yep 2008 FWD Sport

I see it

Asia

06-24-2009, 03:21 PM

I just figured out that the signature only shows if you are signed in.

nuhuskyfan

06-24-2009, 05:35 PM

I just figured out that the signature only shows if you are signed in.

Sigs are visible only in your first post on a page. To change your thread display preferences, click http://www.msprotege.com/forum/profile.php?do=editoptions and enable 'Always Show Signature'.

CX9 SportOwner

06-24-2009, 06:28 PM

Close, but it's your most recent post.

joffficer

08-14-2009, 09:18 AM

First tank of gas, and I did a fill up. The numbers work out to be 18.6 mpg, at 305 miles. That was 50/50 city/hwy driving so I'm very happy with that! With any luck those numbers might get better as everything loosens up a little.

'09 AWD GT

bumparker

08-14-2009, 10:15 AM

First fill up for our new 2009 GT (2wd) was 20.5 mpg. Probably about 80% hwy and 20%city mix. I was quite pleased, was getting a little worried after reading what some people were getting.

jcpharm

08-14-2009, 12:15 PM

for my first 1000 miles i am averaging 16.8 mpg (50/50 highway/city) with a AWD GT...not great. i'm trying not to be a leadfoot too! oh well...good thing i live in NJ with lower than national avg gas prices. =)

ceric

08-14-2009, 01:26 PM

The MPG of AWD model is significantly worse than the EPA's 1mpg difference.
Remember than the transfer case, the drive shaft are spinning non-stop as long as your vehicle is moving (that is why the AWD can react very quickly), in addition to the extra 200lbs.
That costs you fuel.
With AWD, 15-17mpg is expected for city driving (2-3mpg off FWD). On highways, however, the penalty of AWD reduces down to around 1mpg.