First drive of the Diesel - Review and Photos/Videos

Hi All,

About six weeks ago, I put a deposit down on a Diesel CX-5 having never seen a single CX-5 in Australia.

I was looking forward to my order: a Black Mica Diesel GT. An additional wait was required because the diesels were going to be released a month after the petrol models.

Order became....

Model: CX-5 Black Mica AWD GT
Build date: 15th February 2012
Ship name: Michigan Highway
VIN: JM0-KE1021-00102915

Having this information made it official. It existed. It had just been built *barely*.... just for me.

I watched the position of the ship Michigan Highway online (using http://www.marinetraffic.com), and imagined it was being loaded (carefully). I watched as it the ship departed Hiroshima on 20th February. I watched the ship visited other Japanese ports picking up other brands, and hoped that ship workers were careful not to overpack the ship and scratch my new paintwork.

Something particularly boyish about dreaming about a journey of a new car purchase along the route that takes it from port to port, before the keys get handed over. Waiting in anticipation, knowing that it exists... and knowing where it exists only adds further to the excitement.

It was only when "my" car had finally arrived in Australian waters that the earlier ship carrying petrol CX-5's had been, gone, and they were available for test drives.

As you may remember, I posted a review of the Petrol (a GT with Tech Pack) a few weeks back:
http://www.mazdas247.com/forum/show...-a-CX-5-GT!!&p=5898961&highlight=#post5898961

I did a drive with my best mate, then my wife and lastly a third test drive with my Mum. They were to be the critics, because I had driven only 20 metres by the time I knew this was the perfect replacement to my Mazda 3.

The dealership must have been annoyed with my persistence to test something (multiple times) that I'd already ordered. But as you know with my posts, I've been reading everything I can, researching as much as I can and annoying this forum with posts to the wazoo - even before I get my own set of keys.

I think with the knowledge and research I'd gained deciding the product was right, I'd managed to teach the friendly salesmen a thing or two, and probably even helped a sale by rabbiting on to someone looking over the vehicle while at the car yard.

The test drive confirmed it was the right vehicle, but the model I drove had the Tech Pack (which in Australia equates to blind spot monitoring, high beam control and lane depart warning). One thing became clear - the blind spot monitor was a must-have feature, particularly in Sydney traffic.
But unfortunately my order... my preciously tracked order.... didn't have the factory fitted option.

My romanticised tracking of the ship that contained "my" car was left futile as I cancelled my order on 6th March - just as (ironically), it was docking at my home port.

So close, and so far - the order clock was reset and the car containing my needed blindspot monitoring was sitting on the dock in Hiroshima, ready to board the ship Azalea Ace.

The start of a whole new tracking adventure, and waiting game started for....

Model: CX-5 Black Mica AWD GT + Tech Pack
Build date: 28th February 2012
Ship name: Azalea Ace
VIN: JM0-KE1021-00104494

Well today I was at the dealership within 30 seconds of their first diesel arriving....
The sales team hadn't yet had a drive before I arrived.

I looked over at a Black Mica CX-5 GT.
...and fate had it, that it was the very Black Mica I'd tracked then cancelled weeks prior.

Today I took the beast for a drive, and I am the process of uploading photos and videos as I type.

Review, coming every so shortly......

Well, you have my attention. Looking forward to it, even though diesel isn't an option in the states. Next vehicle will likely be diesel, hopefully by 2020 or so they'll have a lot more diesel options here.

Still in the process of uploading photos and videos. So far uploading three very short videos (curse YouTube and upload speeds).

Firstly, the photos can be seen at:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/glennstewart/sets/72157629532767321/

Excuse the quality. All rush jobs from my iPhone. You can only do so much when you're doing a test drive.
The diesel shots are clearly marked with filename of 2012-03-23 onwards (photo of key, onwards).

Videos are as follows:
1. Diesel startup - the diesel is reasonably quiet for a diesel
2. i-Stop usage in traffic - this also gives you an idea of the acceleration of the diesel from 0 to 60km/h.
3. Moving through traffic and i-Stop deciding when to kick in

The good, the better and the brilliant....

From the outset I'll say that both petrol and diesel CX-5 models are great to drive. The chassis is confidence inspiring. The steering is direct with a suitable amount of feedback. The suspension soaks up minor road defects, but provides enough communication back through the wheel enabling it to be just tactile enough to know what the car is gripping to.

We've all read excellent reviews. Most of them have been written without having the diesel to compare against. Very few have been critical of the petrol engine.

I review the first really critical review today, and it was out of the only car magazine I subscribe to: Australia's number one car magazine - Wheels.
They typically tell it like it is, and they were critical of the petrol version saying that per tonne, it was now Mazda's lowest torque vehicle - even more so than the Mazda 2.

To sum up, they said - "there's ample 'zoom-zoom' in the chassis, just not enough under the bonnet". They claimed that their tests of 0-100km/h (0-62mph) took 11 seconds instead of the manufacturer figure. And that even worse, is that in Australia a lot of country highways are two lanes where you often have to overtake into oncoming traffic. The 80-120km/h time required for this was said to be a poor 9.3 seconds.

The petrol CX-5 I drove didn't feel like it would post such a ridiculous (and non zoom-zoom) time.
Driven as an every day vehicle, the petrol CX-5 is completely acceptable. It's very comfortable and has all the creature comforts one would want from an SUV (CUV).

But jumping into the diesel after having driven the petrol, it's like night and day.

The first thing I noticed was that the diesel is quite tame in start up (for a diesel). The low rumble present in every diesel due to low revving and high compression, was far less noticeable. The engine note was quite masculine, throaty and not too annoying at all. It would take someone who knew cars to know it was a diesel from the engine note.

Kick off the line is immediate. The diesel responds very quickly when given instruction. The auto transmission (there isn't a manual option for this engine in Australia), is very quick to ensure power gets delivered from the engine to the wheels with only the slightest of delays. It's probably about halfway between the lethargic reactions of a torque convertor and the neck snapping response of a DSG. It's a good compromise between speed and comfort.

In isolation, the petrol performs take off in a similarly smooth manner and is able to get up to normal driving speeds with little hesitation. But in comparison, the petrol seems has a distinct fall off of torque as the gears quickly notch up through 2nd, 3rd and then far too quickly into 4th. The car feels like its given you a decent bulk of what it has to offer to get you moving, leaving little spare for later use. You know there might be more, but its tucked away and requires a mashing of the pedal to withdraw it, and is accompanied by the symphony of high pitch revs that comes with its delivery.

The diesel on the other hand gets off the line calmly with a tiny rumble and deepness in note. It goes into 2nd and 3rd but at this point you can feel that it has required very little input to get the momentum up to this point. There is a sensation that under the pedal, there is a lot more potential ready to be relinquished upon pressing the foot slightly deeper. Driving even up to speeds of 80km/h, it still felt as if it were being driven gently and wanted to be flogged. Pushing the foot to the floor the diesel felt as if it were on an audition for Mazdaspeed. Not quite... but the efforts, valiant.

The fuel economy achieved by the petrol engine is remarkable. But the evidence is clear. A lot of this economy may come from the design of the engine, the advanced direct fuel injection and optimised fuel spray patterns. A lot of it though comes purely from the transmission and it's desire to race its eco butt to 5th as soon as the chance is given. To coax it back down is like yanking the walking lead on a Rottweiler in an effort to make it heal. I'd dare say both would yelp.

It was far harder to gauge whether the auto in the diesel had the same desperation to be eco happy. It always seemed to have enough grunt above the current gear, and with immediacy no matter which gear it was in. Furthermore, at any given speed is exhibited the petrol's very smooth and calm nature. One engine was always showing you it was well behaved and needed a kick to get angry, the other was restrained in an effort to be well behaved but was ready to respond, no kick required.

Steering was more or less identical on both. My mate reckons the steering was a tad light on the petrol test drive, but I am certain he was mistaken.
The steering is on the lighter side of feedback and the greater side of electrical assistance. It's very hard to provide this forum an accurate illustration to compare with given that Mazda Australia chose the European specified steering calibration, Furthermore it mixed this steering with the auto transmission calibrated for the American market.
The European transmission is designed for calm inputs of the typical calm and well taught European driver, whereas the Australian/American transmissions are meant to take inputs as if they were throw in at random. The calibration of steering is still unknown to me and I am uncertain which between Europe and the US market would want the heavier steering. But I am happy to report that regardless of that, the steering is sharp as an arrow in its ability to go exactly where pointed. The steering also feels very quick,particularly when going round corners. It's as if more assistance is throwing in, to get you around - which as I type, doesn't sound logical - but in practice it appears to work quite well.

The last part of the test drive was dedicated to i-Stop. By default it's turned off. Apparently in the background a computer calculates whether or not the engine should be stopped at a given pause. But turning it on fresh (as in just off the boat) also seems to result in the i-Stop system not being available for a decent 20 minutes or so.

Once it is available though, it doesn't really get in the way of driving. The system shuts the engine off completely when the brake is applied completely and will only kick the engine back into life once it detects the brake lifting. The system is quick enough that it doesn't interrupt the driving experience. In traffic particularly, I could see this eliminating a bulk of the fuel that would otherwise be lost to idling. Very impressive!
The system is said to contribute a 10% saving in city driving and is certainly included in the fuel consumption figures below.

Moving onto fuel economy:
The following figures were provided by Australian government testing and given as:
a) combined - mixed city/highway
b) urban - city driving
c) extra urban -highway/country driving

Mazda CX-5 2.2L AT AWD Twin-turbo Diesel:
combined: 5.7L/100km (41.3mpg)
urban: 6.7L/100km (35.1mpg)
extra urban: 5.1L/100km (46.1mpg)

Mazda CX-5 2.0L AT AWD Petrol:
combined: 6.9L/100km (34.1mpg)
urban: 8.2L/100km (28.7mpg)
extra urban: 6.2L/100km (37.9mpg)

Mazda CX-5 2.0L AT 2WD Petrol:
combined: 6.4L/100km (36.8mpg)
urban: 8.0L/100km (29.4mpg)
extra urban: 5.5L/100km (42.8mpg)

For comparison...

Toyota Camry Hybrid (Australia manufactured version)
combined: 5.2L/100km (45.2mpg)
urban: 5.7L/100km (41.3mpg)
extra urban: 4.9L/100km (48.0mpg)

very nice write up, ask your Mazda team when the US is getting the diesel. Cheers!

ourlee said:

very nice write up, ask your Mazda team when the US is getting the diesel. Cheers!

Click to expand...

Hope damn soon. But I'll ask the question of mates back in Japan. They might know something we don't.

Great report inodes.. Thanks for putting in the time.

great review inodes. Makes me want the diesel cx-5 even more now. Until we get it in the states, I'll be keeping my Mazda 3.

Very nice to hear the diesel is good, as I ordered one today before your review - phew. Thanks for the comprehensive appraisal. The 80 to 120km/h, when it is tested, will be an interesting comparison to the petrol car. Also, it will be interesting as to how the figures change as the engines get 'run in' and loosen up.
A silly question to our American friends or anybody. Why in America haven't diesel cars (in general) been popular, especially with all the extra torque they give? Is it because of tradition where gas/petrol is cheap(ish) and cars had large capacity?

prhac said:

Why in America haven't diesel cars (in general) been popular, especially with all the extra torque they give?

Click to expand...

And actually, further to that... what is the cost of diesel fuel?

Fuel cost... Is Diesel worth it?

In Australia at the moment, we are at double the price of fuel compared with 7 years ago. Not good!
Also note these prices might look expensive, because at the moment the Euro, UK Pound and US dollar are at their historic lows against the Australian dollar (lowest in 30+ years for GBP and USD).

We typically have 4 choices at the bowser: 91, 95 and 98
Inclusive of tax prices are roughly (as at now) per Litre.

91 = AUD $1.30 (€1.02, 112, CAD $1.36)
95 = AUD $1.37 (€1.08, 118, CAD $1.43)
98 = AUD $1.45 (€1.14, 125, CAD $1.51)
Diesel fluctuates between 91 and 98 prices. Sometimes the cheapest, sometimes the most expensive - but certainly not too different.

I'll have to convert - the US uses non standard fuel octane namings and non standard fuel measurement.

US uses AKI instead of international RON
So 91/95/98 in US terms is 87/91/94
US also uses US gallon instead of international L

Per USD $ per US Gallon that's
87 = $5.35
91 = $5.39
94 = $5.70

UK uses non standard fuel measurement - per gallon (not US gallon)
91 = 4.01
95 = 4.04
98 = 4.28

Is it worth it?

The average Australian driver, drives 15,000km/year. Taking the L/100km combined for the CX-5 AWD Petrol and Diesel and assuming the Diesel is going to cost the most at the pump...
CX-5 Petrol = 5.7L/100km = (5.7 x 150) = 855L per year =$1407.60
CX-5 Diesel = 6.9L/100km = (6.9 x 150) = 1035L per year = $1239.75

Over 5 years that's only a $839 saving of petrol vs diesel - which is much less than the $3000 premium we pay for the engine.

Answer: Diesel is not worth the cost variance - only desirable for increased resale value and performance

prhac said:

A silly question to our American friends or anybody. Why in America haven't diesel cars (in general) been popular, especially with all the extra torque they give? Is it because of tradition where gas/petrol is cheap(ish) and cars had large capacity?

Click to expand...

There are lots of reasons that people bring up. The answer varies from person to person and usually includes one or more of the following:

Diesel engines are perceived to be noisy and stinky in the US.
Diesel engines are perceived to be bad for the environment, so a lot of people who are willing to pay more for a car that uses less fuel seem to prefer hybrids.
Diesel is up to 15% more expensive than 87 octane gas (which most cars use), so the payback is very long since most diesels cost more at initial purchase.
Due to some bad engineering during the late 70s and early 80s, a lot of older people think diesel engines are unreliable.
Diesel car emissions have to be as clean as gasoline, which killed the plans of some car companies, like Honda and Subaru to bring diesels here.
The emissions requirements have lowered the mileage advantage that diesels used to have over gasoline.

Another reason is that they aren't offered in many cars that are affordable. The TDi cars from VW are the only affordable diesel cars that I can think of and VW doesn't have a reputation for reliability here either. Other than that, BMW, Mercedes and Audi seem to be the majority of passenger vehicles (besides pickups) that you can get a diesel in.

So, in my opinion, consumer ignorance is the main reason.

Edit: According to some people, we also don't like wagons!

DougNuts said:

Diesel engines are perceived to be noisy and stinky in the US.

Click to expand...

The Japanese documentaries about the CX-5 say exactly the same thing. The purchase rate of diesels in Japan is 1%.
The explained that one negative of the low take up is to do with oil refining.

All fuel sold in Japan is sourced from imported oil. They refine it, and as part of the refining process petroleum and diesel are produced as part of the process. They have far more diesel than they can consume domestically. The diesel is then exported, often for a marginal price. Ideally the more they sold domestically, the less loss that would occur.
The exhaust from the Mazda comes with a 0.01% black soot, mainly because of the re-design of the engine. No urea or expensive NOx treatments either. Maybe not quite as clean as petrol, but not far off. Furthermore, lower CO2 emissions.

The results speak for themselves in Japan:
http://www.mazda.com/publicity/release/2012/201203/120315a.html

Twenty seven percent of total CX-5 orders are gasoline engine models, surpassing initial expectations. The gasoline engine CX-5 models boast a linear, refined and powerful driving sensation that results in the driver feeling at one with the car. The clean diesel engine model consists of 73 percent of total orders, also exceeding initial expectations, and delivers powerful dynamic performance equivalent to a 4.0L, V8 gasoline engine.

Somehow I don't think Corvette needs to be worried. The last sentence regarding being equivalent to a 4.0L V8 is barely true for the power side of the Skyactiv-D.

DougNuts is spot on. I bought my 1st diesel in 1994 and never looked back (now I have 3, Jetta, Touareg, Dodge). Most Americans won't even test drive them. Everyone of my friends that I have badgered into test driving one, are now converts and would never go back. Back before 2004, the cost of diesel was less than our lowest grade gasoline (referred to as regular). I was enjoying great mileage/savings. Around 2004 for some reason the cost of diesel jumped and has remained close to or (at some points in time) higher than our premium grade of gas. Really puts a damper on the savings (pretty much levels the 40mpg+ diesels with the 30mpg gassers), but it is hard to get away from that torque fix once you have tried it. )

I will definitely be in line to try out a diesel CX-5 when and if they come to the US (trade in my Jetta).

Notice one thing that's interesting on http://greenvehicleguide.gov.au/GVGPublicUI/home.aspx
The website might look crap, but info is handy. Shows pollution, noise and rpm consider to be standard running.

Typically diesel are low rpm, high compression and petrol and high rpm, low compression.
The Skyactiv-D is the lowest compression diesel on the market. Significantly lower than most other diesels, and as a result the light components the rpm of the diesel is closer to normal petrol engines in rpm - hence the lesser rumble and warbling of traditional diesels.

See the following comparison:
Car Make - L/100km combined, urban, extra-urban - C02 - Noise (dBa) - test rpm

Petrol:
Mazda 3 SP20 - 6.2, 8.1, 5.1 - 145g - 84 - 4500
Mazda CX-5 FWD Petrol - 6.4, 8.0, 5.5 - 149g - 77 - 3750
Volkswagen Tiguan 118TSI - 6.9, 8.7, 5.9 - 162g - 75 - 3750

* Mazda 3 - highest rpm, noisy, most fuel efficient
* VW and CX-5 have same rpm

Diesel:
Mazda 3 Diesel - 5.7, 7.0, 5.0 - 150g - 76 - 2625
Mazda CX-5 AWD Diesel - 5.7, 6.7, 5.1 - 149g - 77 - 3345
Volkswagen Tiguan 103TDI - 6.2, 7.1, 5.7 - 164g - 74 - 2375

* CX-5 most fuel efficient, VW least
* CX-5 has almost petrol like rpm and least emissions

You can do your own comparisons, but it's very clear:
* Noise in CX-5 is closer to VW Tiguan than Mazda 3 SP23 (much quieter)
* Old Diesel in Mazda 3 is fairly standard diesel and runs same rpm as VW, CX-5 spins much faster
* CX-5 is more fuel efficient than Tiguan counterpart but only slightly louder in cabin

prhac said:

Very nice to hear the diesel is good, as I ordered one today before your review - phew. Thanks for the comprehensive appraisal. The 80 to 120km/h, when it is tested, will be an interesting comparison to the petrol car. Also, it will be interesting as to how the figures change as the engines get 'run in' and loosen up.
A silly question to our American friends or anybody. Why in America haven't diesel cars (in general) been popular, especially with all the extra torque they give? Is it because of tradition where gas/petrol is cheap(ish) and cars had large capacity?

Click to expand...

It's also because of Corporate America. The hybrid heads have lobbied the government into giving incentives to hybrid buyers and not to diesel owners, therefore further isolating the diesel engine. However, it seems times are changing and more people are starting to come on board, especially in California where the price of premium gasoline is now more expensive than diesel.

inodes said:

The average Australian driver, drives 15,000km/year. Taking the L/100km combined for the CX-5 AWD Petrol and Diesel and assuming the Diesel is going to cost the most at the pump...
CX-5 Petrol = 5.7L/100km = (5.7 x 150) = 855L per year =$1407.60
CX-5 Diesel = 6.9L/100km = (6.9 x 150) = 1035L per year = $1239.75

Click to expand...

Are the fuel consumption numbers backwards?

jaman_ca said:

Are the fuel consumption numbers backwards?

Click to expand...

Bugger. That's what I get for copy and paste. The words are around wrong way.
Diesel is the better figure, but honestly the petrol does very
well in this calculation because it's a class leader in its own right.
I compared to CX-7 figures, and it makes the diesel look saintly.

Thanks for all the discussion regarding my post - very interseting. Here it only works out cheaper for diesel running if the annual mileage is quite high as the cars and fuel are pricier. My misconception as to Australia. I have always thought Australians did many more miles/km per year than you stated, inodes. And the same goes for the US - both vast countries. (note to inodes - we actually pay /litre at the pumps, but we think in /gallon).

prhac said:

Thanks for all the discussion regarding my post - very interseting. Here it only works out cheaper for diesel running if the annual mileage is quite high as the cars and fuel are pricier. My misconception as to Australia. I have always thought Australians did many more miles/km per year than you stated, inodes. And the same goes for the US - both vast countries. (note to inodes - we actually pay /litre at the pumps, but we think in /gallon).

Click to expand...

We have vast distances, but we're have a very high urbanisation rate (similar to UK), and about 10% higher than the US. The majority of people live in the cities, have fairly good public transportation. There is no reason to do large distances. But those that do like to drive, often do far more than 15,000km.

When stretching the figures over 5 years compared to a CX-7, the Diesel CX-5 pays for itself. The petrol CX-5 is just so damn good it begs a test drive of both.
Once you drive both though....

See this new review:
http://www.carshowroom.com.au/SectionResearch/ResearchNews.aspx?Article_ID=2877

Mazda CX-5 Diesel Verdict

Across both petrol and diesel models, the Mazda CX-5 is now the medium SUV ‘Crossover’ by which others will be graded – it’s that good.
We felt the excellent chassis could handle more grunt than the 2.0-litre petrol powerplant provides and we were right – the 2.2-litre turbo-diesel is a well-balanced and tasty proposition.Moreover it’s the all-round combination of style, space and performance which scores top points for Mazda’s CX-5.
We’ll take the diesel thanks.

Regarding /litre - I should have remembered that. It has been a few years since I've driven in UK though. London is certainly one of the easiest big cities to navigate and drive though. Such a pleasure.

Seems Japanese Diesel test gets 0-100 fairly quickly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NlPEpC4STI