Mazda 5 wish list discussion
- Thread starter twintrbo
- Start date
I think the diesel 1.6 is too weak for our market, if you think its slow now........woo boy! I would love to see the CX-7 Diesel. 2.2l 175 HP and 295 ft. lbs of torque and 31 MPG in the CX-7. Now that would be awesome! Couple it with AWD and you really have something special! I think the skyactiv D is even better. I dont think I need the power sliding doors, maybe on the passenger side only, but I would love a power tailgate with a foot controlled opener a la Ford C-max. Sadly none of this will ever come here due to the low volume. People just dont get it, they really feel they need a city bus to drive 3 people around.
dieseldriver
Member
Plus not to mention lack of diesel knowledgeable techs out there too. When I had the 3 TDI's in my lifetime, the Golf, Jette, and Beetle, was always a pain to find someone that I can trust to work on my TDI engine. I do like diesel engines though, and if it's a turbo diesel, 1.6 should be adequate but yeah, it's a bit weak I agree.
But then again, with the current prices of diesel, the offset would not be that great comparing to engine technology such as Skyactiv. A Skyactiv engine is what Mazda should push on all it's cars, maybe a more powerful Skyactiv for M5 in the future. And I really wished that they bring the power sliding door option for the U.S.
But then again, with the current prices of diesel, the offset would not be that great comparing to engine technology such as Skyactiv. A Skyactiv engine is what Mazda should push on all it's cars, maybe a more powerful Skyactiv for M5 in the future. And I really wished that they bring the power sliding door option for the U.S.
DKaz, I applaud your green-ness but the 5 does not appeal here in the US because of size alone. The MPG doesn't matter to anyone down here. Regular has dipped into the $2.9x range and no one remembers the $4+ it was last year. At least from what I've seen, everyone wants a fire breathing monster truck because......well I dont know why really. A friend of mine, who lives in Manhattan, just bought a 4 door Ford F-150 Raptor!!! There is nowhere to park it, its extra for an SUV in a garage and he plans to use it for fishing on the beach. At least it will actually see off-road.....
I'm not green, just Canadian. 
Gas is 3.90 a gallon of 87 octane in the cheaper parts of Canada like in Alberta with all its oil sands to 4.75 a gallon where I live in Vancouver, BC. This is probably why Canada buys 40% of the Mazda 5s sold in North America despite having less than 10% of the population.
Not many Mazda 5s in Alberta btw, their vehicle buying habits are very American-like due to their cheap gas. In Vancouver, I see at least a dozen Mazda 5s a day.
Gas is 3.90 a gallon of 87 octane in the cheaper parts of Canada like in Alberta with all its oil sands to 4.75 a gallon where I live in Vancouver, BC. This is probably why Canada buys 40% of the Mazda 5s sold in North America despite having less than 10% of the population. Not many Mazda 5s in Alberta btw, their vehicle buying habits are very American-like due to their cheap gas. In Vancouver, I see at least a dozen Mazda 5s a day.
dieseldriver
Member
On my 2006 New Beetle GLS TDI with 1.9L Turbo Diesel, typical MPG would be around 42 to 45MPG. It had so much torque once it was warmed up that it was just amazing. For a measly 90H.P. it would pump out close to 200 ft./lb. of torque all day long. It handled very well too, and my factory Michelin MXV4 Plus lasted me to 100K+. But wasn't the most reliable car in terms of electrical. It was so hard to work on, compared to Mazda, it was just no comparison. I'll take Mazda's with 40MPG any day, and we all know that EPA figure is just that, an estimate. I'm sure it would realistically be around 43-46 MPG spread on highway no problem.
The EPA rating is such a joke anyway. How can anyone really believe that the Honda Odyssey returns almost the same MPG as the 5? 50% bigger engine, more frontal area and an extra 1000 lbs........riiiight.......I would like the diesel for sure, this vehicle is not about speed and the torque of the diesel is ideal for people moving. I think a sky-g 2.0 would be a step back, its just not a big enough engine for the 5. I often wonder if the city MPG would pick up if it wasn't working so hard to move it around.
dieseldriver
Member
My 2007 Honday Odyssey Touring was rated at 21 City, 24 Highway, on the sticker when I bought it. I said, well, 24 isn't bad, considering the Eurovan I had previously, I got around 22. Well, lo and behold, I was lucky to get around 17 MPG combined. In terms of realiability, it surely did not live up to the "Honda... we make it simple..." garbage. Some people live and die by the Honda brand, but that's because they've never owned an Odyssey. They always think that because Honda Civic was a decent car back in the 90's.. they think it's the same for all their cars. Also, the Honda V6 engine came with the engine management that supposedly shuts off some cylinders when there's not a lot of load on it when cruising. Did it work for sure? I don't know but that ECO light on the instrument cluster was so annoying and I never felt like it made any difference to the fuel economy.
Anyway, in terms of the Skyactiv, I saw some demonstration. My first thought was that, it almost seemed as if they took a Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde approach (or is it more like the "Dr. Moreau's Island?) to making a fuel efficient engine. First, they took some concept from building turbo/diesel by making it a high compression engine. Also tweaked some emission components because of now more power on every power cycle. I think this is a good thing. Hope they keep it up..
Anyway, in terms of the Skyactiv, I saw some demonstration. My first thought was that, it almost seemed as if they took a Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde approach (or is it more like the "Dr. Moreau's Island?) to making a fuel efficient engine. First, they took some concept from building turbo/diesel by making it a high compression engine. Also tweaked some emission components because of now more power on every power cycle. I think this is a good thing. Hope they keep it up..
Last edited:
Figured I'd put my two cents in
MPGs and savings at the pump are very tricky. Realistically it comes down to the price of the vehicle. Bellow I've provided an example of what i'm talking about.
I assumed $4 a gallon, which is an over estimate for today's market, at least here in NJ, but you'll get the picture. The chart estimates the gas costs of a vehicle based on MPGs for 12k 24k (yearly) and 100k total miles driven.
To kind of illustrate what i'm talking about, let's take a 25MPG combined vehicle (close to Mazda 5), and let's say we are comparing to the diesel version that gets 35MPGs combined, the fuel cost difference between the two models is $549 a year assuming you drive 12k a year, or $4571 over the 100k period. Sounds good, but if the price point of the vehicle that gets 35mpgs is 5k more from the dealer. If you are not going to keep the car for 100k+ you will actually loose money i.e. it will cost you more to own a car with better MPGs, additionally one has to keep in mind that if you finance the car, you pay even more because now the interest is involved, if you buy with cash, you still loose, because that $5000 difference can be earning interest at the bank or mutual fund etc.
I've over estimated with $4, just to "future proof" but if we take the price of $3.5 difference is even less (it's only $4000 over the course of 100k).
Please keep in mind I'm keeping the "being green" factor out of equation, this is strictly "money out of pocket".
Interesting example is 2011 elantra vs 2011 prius. Due to the price point difference, you will pretty much never make your money back. Same goes with RX370 vs RX450h, I can't justify a difference of 10000+ for a 5MPG difference. The interesting things happen when you start looking at used cars though, because the upfront premium is somewhat diminished, but you can account for that as well and some situations will actually change, and it might be well worth it to go for a "better" model.
Anyhow, just my two cents, if one is interested in specific models etc, and what's better finance vs purchase I have many equations set-up to analyze the cost to own for many scenarios (can you tell i'm a math major lol), so I can potentially help with a car decision choice if anyone is interested, because some things might look and sound good, but once the numbers are on paper, it's totally different.
MPGs Pice per Gallon Cost of fuel per year at 12000miles Cost of fuel per year at 24000miles Cost of fuel for 100000 miles Difference from the chepest (45MPG)
15 $4 $3,200 $6,400 $26,667 $17,778
20 $4 $2,400 $4,800 $20,000 $11,111
25 $4 $1,920 $3,840 $16,000 $7,111
30 $4 $1,600 $3,200 $13,333 $4,444
35 $4 $1,371 $2,743 $11,429 $2,540
40 $4 $1,200 $2,400 $10,000 $1,111
45 $4 $1,067 $2,133 $8,889 $0
MPGs and savings at the pump are very tricky. Realistically it comes down to the price of the vehicle. Bellow I've provided an example of what i'm talking about.
I assumed $4 a gallon, which is an over estimate for today's market, at least here in NJ, but you'll get the picture. The chart estimates the gas costs of a vehicle based on MPGs for 12k 24k (yearly) and 100k total miles driven.
To kind of illustrate what i'm talking about, let's take a 25MPG combined vehicle (close to Mazda 5), and let's say we are comparing to the diesel version that gets 35MPGs combined, the fuel cost difference between the two models is $549 a year assuming you drive 12k a year, or $4571 over the 100k period. Sounds good, but if the price point of the vehicle that gets 35mpgs is 5k more from the dealer. If you are not going to keep the car for 100k+ you will actually loose money i.e. it will cost you more to own a car with better MPGs, additionally one has to keep in mind that if you finance the car, you pay even more because now the interest is involved, if you buy with cash, you still loose, because that $5000 difference can be earning interest at the bank or mutual fund etc.
I've over estimated with $4, just to "future proof" but if we take the price of $3.5 difference is even less (it's only $4000 over the course of 100k).
Please keep in mind I'm keeping the "being green" factor out of equation, this is strictly "money out of pocket".
Interesting example is 2011 elantra vs 2011 prius. Due to the price point difference, you will pretty much never make your money back. Same goes with RX370 vs RX450h, I can't justify a difference of 10000+ for a 5MPG difference. The interesting things happen when you start looking at used cars though, because the upfront premium is somewhat diminished, but you can account for that as well and some situations will actually change, and it might be well worth it to go for a "better" model.
Anyhow, just my two cents, if one is interested in specific models etc, and what's better finance vs purchase I have many equations set-up to analyze the cost to own for many scenarios (can you tell i'm a math major lol), so I can potentially help with a car decision choice if anyone is interested, because some things might look and sound good, but once the numbers are on paper, it's totally different.
MPGs Pice per Gallon Cost of fuel per year at 12000miles Cost of fuel per year at 24000miles Cost of fuel for 100000 miles Difference from the chepest (45MPG)
15 $4 $3,200 $6,400 $26,667 $17,778
20 $4 $2,400 $4,800 $20,000 $11,111
25 $4 $1,920 $3,840 $16,000 $7,111
30 $4 $1,600 $3,200 $13,333 $4,444
35 $4 $1,371 $2,743 $11,429 $2,540
40 $4 $1,200 $2,400 $10,000 $1,111
45 $4 $1,067 $2,133 $8,889 $0
- :
- 2008 Mazda5 GT
Are you sure you don't own a Prius? And if you get 50MPG, you’d be making money? I kid.
Using $4/gal is not an overestimate and using any fix $/gal is not accurate. I still remember when gas was about $1/gal in NJ only about 10 years ago. It is about $3.40-$3.50 for regular in PA today. Once (not if) gas prices go up again, Hybrids and diesels will quickly make up the difference. If you can get historical avg gas prices per month for NJ and do this again from historical data, then you’ll see how you would have spent but still no way of foretelling the future.
A typical car’s purchase price is easily overcome when you consider:
-Operating cost -maintenance through life of car but depends on how long you keep it
-Gas -hybrid/Diesel pay less gas but pay more in initial purchase price, like pre paying. I am dumbfounded by low mileage Priuii -I guess owner wants to contribute to Toyota.
-Insurance -especially if you have a new car or kids
-And for some -dumping too much money in aftermarket stuff
Using $4/gal is not an overestimate and using any fix $/gal is not accurate. I still remember when gas was about $1/gal in NJ only about 10 years ago. It is about $3.40-$3.50 for regular in PA today. Once (not if) gas prices go up again, Hybrids and diesels will quickly make up the difference. If you can get historical avg gas prices per month for NJ and do this again from historical data, then you’ll see how you would have spent but still no way of foretelling the future.
A typical car’s purchase price is easily overcome when you consider:
-Operating cost -maintenance through life of car but depends on how long you keep it
-Gas -hybrid/Diesel pay less gas but pay more in initial purchase price, like pre paying. I am dumbfounded by low mileage Priuii -I guess owner wants to contribute to Toyota.
-Insurance -especially if you have a new car or kids
-And for some -dumping too much money in aftermarket stuff
Last edited:
He bought it because walking around with your fly down is a crime. Unless you live in a state like Nevada, where undeveloped public land is 3' from everyone's front door, buying a Raptor, H2 or Jeep is more for public display of virility than anything else. A Ford Escape will get him on/off the beach just as well as a Raptor, but it has less than 1/2 the engine and you can't ride your bike underneath it, so its less manly.
More b/c of their ranching/ag heritage, I would say. Try towing a horse trailer with less than a 1/2 ton truck. My big beef isn't with Americans (Canadians incl, since it is one big continent w/lots and lots of room) wanting to own a big truck or SUV. Many times they come in really handy. I got one myself, even if its used very little. But it really grates me when a typical suburban family with few outdoor interests and even less time to pursue such interests owns nothing but SUVs and trucks. They push gas consumption up, raising pump prices, create more smog and endanger other people on the roadway moreso than if they were in a car more appropriate for their needs. I'm into efficiency. Each vehicle I have seats my whole famly, but I prefer to use the one that is most appropriate for the circumstances I am driving. Runs to the store alone or w/the kid that won't go to sleep: Mz5. Long road trips: V70. Packing lots of gear: Ram. at 11 mpg if I pretend there is no gas pedal, its plain stupid to take the Ram down to the grocery store for a few bags of food. Its also a stupid choice, since I'd have to park it in a lot made for midsize cars. But I can't live w/o the truck, either. Its saved me tons of times. Renting one just isn't an option for me.
Gearing. The Odyssey has the V6 and I bet out-torques the 2.5L more than 2-to-1. That allows them to set the final drive so that its cruising at highway speeds below 2500 rpms, I bet. Honda also "builds to the test" per se. Meaning that they do all their driveline tweaking to maximize the numbers that show up on the EPA reports. In the real world, if you drive exactly like an EPA tester, you would do really well in the mpg dept. Drive like a normal person, watch your mpgs fall 20% easy. I'm happy to claim that my Mz5 OUTPERFORMS the EPA city ratings. And I drive like an idiot. My wife has it more often, but even she gases it from stop signs. The car basically makes an 8 mi round trip 1st thing in the morning, the same trip every other afternoon, and many nights 3-4 mi round trip to the stores for supplies. We put about 300 mi on it bi-weekly, but when the AC compressor is not engaged, we see 23-24 mpg in that scenario. BTW - stoplights every 1/2 mi, and we almost always hit them red. If we could make the same trip @ 45 mph on rural routes w/o stopping, I'd expect 28-30 mpg min.
True with Alberta's ranching, farming, and especially the oil sands, lots of pickup trucks out there. In the two major cities, the typical makeup of compacts, midsizes, SUVs, minivans, pickups, but for some reason Mazda 5s just don't exist.
Canada still uses the old EPA method so the 06-07 is rated 22/29 MPG, 08-10 rated 24/33, 12+ 24/34 (all manual). I've been able to do 35 MPG very recently in my 07 but I find overall I'm typically on the dot, I rarely accelerate quickly and take it slow on the highway if I'm not in a rush. How do you guys compare?
Canada still uses the old EPA method so the 06-07 is rated 22/29 MPG, 08-10 rated 24/33, 12+ 24/34 (all manual). I've been able to do 35 MPG very recently in my 07 but I find overall I'm typically on the dot, I rarely accelerate quickly and take it slow on the highway if I'm not in a rush. How do you guys compare?
thaxman, You have the manual transmission, right? I never thought there would be that much difference in the gearing between the manual and the automatic, but I guess there is. 25 mpg is the lowest number I've seen since I started keeping numbers for this car. I get consistent 29's and 30's.
What are your freeway speeds tho? Remember 75 is posted here, and 5 over is overlooked. Also, no trees. When the wind blows (and it always seems to be a headwind, no matter whether travelling east or west) you get the full assult. The 5 is taller than the Accord wagon that preceeded it. With the 4AT, we could eek out 25-26 mpg with similar conditions, but the rpms max out at about 3600 @ 80, not 4000. Since it was an auto, city mileage sucked out the tailpipe since the torque converter basically never locked up until it was time to slow down for a stoplight. Best ever was 20 mpg w/no AC, but summers were 17-18 mpg.
