On the other hand, I've got plenty of Audi and VW buddies with 200K + miles on original turbos. I'm sure the Ecoboost will be fine having seen the 165K torture test they put the F-150 through.. Low pressure turbo systems are pretty reliable these days... Not to say they can't be occasionally problematic....
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
CX-5 vs. CR-V and Escape
- Thread starter ManMachine
- Start date
On the other hand, I've got plenty of Audi and VW buddies with 200K + miles on original turbos. I'm sure the Ecoboost will be fine having seen the 165K torture test they put the F-150 through.. Low pressure turbo systems are pretty reliable these days... Not to say they can't be occasionally problematic....
smithsm1984
Member
So I priced out a a FWD 2013 Escape 1.6 SE FWD and tried to build it the same as our Touring FWD. The major differnce between the two is that the CX-5 comes with Bi-Xenon headlamps. The CX-5 comes in 27,205 MSRP and the Escape 29,2XX! $2000 is alot of coin. Not to mention the escape has 3inches less legroom in the back. Plus you have to realize that sure a turbo engine can get great gas mileage, but once you get into boost the mileage will tank. You'll have to baby the Escape to get the EPA numbers.
The Escape's pricing is a bit nutty, but then again, the Focus also looks expensive. Then you realize Ford dealers are laying $2000-$3000 on the hood of the car before you even start negotiations.
Not that Mazda won't do that either...dealers seem to be taking big chunks off the MSRP of the Mazda 3 as well.
^ I have the same concerns about bloated MSRP pricing of the new Escapes.
With a loaded CX-5 GT AWD stickering just under $31K and it seems like a similar Escape AWD 1.6L turbo would be about $34-$35K, that is a significant difference. But as you pointed out Ford customers are used to discounts of several thousand dollars off MSRP on a regular basis.
With a loaded CX-5 GT AWD stickering just under $31K and it seems like a similar Escape AWD 1.6L turbo would be about $34-$35K, that is a significant difference. But as you pointed out Ford customers are used to discounts of several thousand dollars off MSRP on a regular basis.
One thing to remember for the Ford Escape sold in the US is unfortunately based on the now extremely old Ford Kuga.
We've just released the Ford Kuga in Australia, many years too late (it's a 2008 model). And car magazines here are being critical of it.
The big question is... why release it now?
The model will be replaced in Europe (and also Australia) in a very short period of time.
The Escape is based on the old C1 platform (also found on the Mazda 3). The CX-5 is arguably a far more advanced platform (otherwise the CX-5 would have been based on the C1 as well).
We've just released the Ford Kuga in Australia, many years too late (it's a 2008 model). And car magazines here are being critical of it.
The big question is... why release it now?
The model will be replaced in Europe (and also Australia) in a very short period of time.
The Escape is based on the old C1 platform (also found on the Mazda 3). The CX-5 is arguably a far more advanced platform (otherwise the CX-5 would have been based on the C1 as well).
Last edited:
Note: The 2013 Escape is not same as old 2008 Kuga (yes, the 2008 Kuga came to Australia late or just over a year ago), even though C1-derived. Fortunately it's based on the redesigned Kuga which is far superior to the 12 year old non fuel-efficient EOL Escape it replaces here. In the US domestic market I expect the new 2013 Escape to outsell the CX-5 by a ratio of at least 3 to 1.
Test mules caught by spies were new 2013 hardware in old Kuga bodies over a year ago but that was not the redesigned body and platform. That's a typical test mule scenario for automakers.
In the US, automakers realize the importance and growth potential of the compact SUV market. I'm certainly glad about increasing levels of competition. I think Mazda and Ford will stand out as drivers choices over Honda in this class.
The redesigned 2013 Kuga just made its debut in Geneva in March 2012 as a 2013 model and will go on sale in Europe and ROW later in 2012 as a global platform (new Kuga= new Escape). Critical magazine reviews of the 2008 Kuga (first generation) are not applicable to 2013 Ford Escape or the 2013 Ford Kuga (2nd generation).
Test mules caught by spies were new 2013 hardware in old Kuga bodies over a year ago but that was not the redesigned body and platform. That's a typical test mule scenario for automakers.
In the US, automakers realize the importance and growth potential of the compact SUV market. I'm certainly glad about increasing levels of competition. I think Mazda and Ford will stand out as drivers choices over Honda in this class.
The redesigned 2013 Kuga just made its debut in Geneva in March 2012 as a 2013 model and will go on sale in Europe and ROW later in 2012 as a global platform (new Kuga= new Escape). Critical magazine reviews of the 2008 Kuga (first generation) are not applicable to 2013 Ford Escape or the 2013 Ford Kuga (2nd generation).
Last edited:
VK Sefirosu
Member
- :
- 2016 CX-5 GT AWD
^ I have the same concerns about bloated MSRP pricing of the new Escapes.
With a loaded CX-5 GT AWD stickering just under $31K and it seems like a similar Escape AWD 1.6L turbo would be about $34-$35K, that is a significant difference. But as you pointed out Ford customers are used to discounts of several thousand dollars off MSRP on a regular basis.
I honestly haven't checked the specs of the 1.6L Ecoboost engine but am I the only one here seeing where Mazda could position their diesel CX-5 in regards to that ? A little pricier, but better performing engine and, probably, better MPG ?
I'm still hoping.
I have checked out the Forester, Sportage and Outback, as well as the CX-5. Of those, the CX-5 gets my vote. The dealer in Bend, OR, had a manual Tiguan, but it had not been prepped yet, so I couldn't drive it, but I have since ruled it out due to reliability issues reported by owners.
One vehicle that no one has mentioned yet in this discussion is the new Acura RDX. Yeah, I know it's in a higher price bracket, but I still wanted to check one out. I drove the first generation, and found it to be a bit too high strung with terrible gas mileage, although people on the RDX forum seem to love it. When I read that the new one was ditching the turbo in favor of a V6, and was going to be about the same size as the CRV, I thought it warranted a look.
So, I checked out the new one yesterday, and was impressed with the overall package. The dealer had one in stock for test driving purposes, and it was the top of the line with AWD and tech package and every other option that they could jack up the price with. It is very nice on the inside with a great, but very expensive, tech package. It's got a 273 hp engine hooked to a 6 spd auto with paddle shifters. It's about 500 lbs heavier than the Cx-5. Unfortunately, I didn't have time to drive it, and at $40,000, it's going to have to be really exceptional for me to want to spend that much, but we have owned 2 Acuras and they have been absolutely bulletproof as far as reliability, and low maintenance costs. I am going to try to test drive one next week and I will post my impressions.
One vehicle that no one has mentioned yet in this discussion is the new Acura RDX. Yeah, I know it's in a higher price bracket, but I still wanted to check one out. I drove the first generation, and found it to be a bit too high strung with terrible gas mileage, although people on the RDX forum seem to love it. When I read that the new one was ditching the turbo in favor of a V6, and was going to be about the same size as the CRV, I thought it warranted a look.
So, I checked out the new one yesterday, and was impressed with the overall package. The dealer had one in stock for test driving purposes, and it was the top of the line with AWD and tech package and every other option that they could jack up the price with. It is very nice on the inside with a great, but very expensive, tech package. It's got a 273 hp engine hooked to a 6 spd auto with paddle shifters. It's about 500 lbs heavier than the Cx-5. Unfortunately, I didn't have time to drive it, and at $40,000, it's going to have to be really exceptional for me to want to spend that much, but we have owned 2 Acuras and they have been absolutely bulletproof as far as reliability, and low maintenance costs. I am going to try to test drive one next week and I will post my impressions.
Canadian-ES-GT
Member
- :
- Protege
I honestly haven't checked the specs of the 1.6L Ecoboost engine but am I the only one here seeing where Mazda could position their diesel CX-5 in regards to that ? A little pricier, but better performing engine and, probably, better MPG ?
I'm still hoping.
Mazda must be waiting for the new Rav4 and Escape to come out. They will probably (well, hopefully) introduce the new 6 with the diesel, and put it in the CX-5 shortly after. It would be a great competitor for any hybrid or small turbo CUV.
smithsm1984
Member
Guys, no one is going to buy a diesel in the states, because its a diesel and doesn't have a Volkswagen badge.
Okay thats not the real reason...the real reason is that it will be a lot more expensive than the gas version and diesel is a bit more expensive than gas to buy. So it really only ends up making sense if you drive a lot of highway miles.
Okay thats not the real reason...the real reason is that it will be a lot more expensive than the gas version and diesel is a bit more expensive than gas to buy. So it really only ends up making sense if you drive a lot of highway miles.
VK Sefirosu
Member
- :
- 2016 CX-5 GT AWD
In the US (California) diesel fuel is about 5% more expensive than premium high octane gasoline. What is diesel pricing versus gasoline in Canada?
Here 87 octane gasoline (standard) is 1.44$/L and diesel is 1.36$/L right now.
Okay thats not the real reason...the real reason is that it will be a lot more expensive than the gas version and diesel is a bit more expensive than gas to buy. So it really only ends up making sense if you drive a lot of highway miles.
If VW can sell diesel cars I can't see why Mazda wouldn't be able to as well. I know most buyers probably won't think that way but even if it would be a little pricier to buy and marginally pricier to fuel up per gallon or litre than, let's say a more powerful gas car like the turbo CX-7 or the new 1.6 or 2.0L ecoboost Escape for example, won't possible better fuel economy on the diesel CX-5 make a better deal in the end ?
Just a thought.
Last edited:
In the US (California) diesel fuel is about 5% more expensive than premium high octane gasoline. What is diesel pricing versus gasoline in Canada?
Thursday night in Ottawa diesel was point 2 cents per litre (ie less than a penny) cheaper than regular. I have seen it up to 8 cents per litre more costly. Generally in this market gas can fluctuate over a day while diesel prices are set by the week. I will get the diesel when available as the dollar-over savings on consumption remain greater than the per litre savings on gas - in this market.
Even if there were no consumption savings making it impossible to recover the increased investment in diesel technology I would still get the diesel for the actual reduction in the physical volume of fuel consumed over distance. Call me crazy but it has to be better for the environment to just burn less of it.
Disclosure - I don't own a CX-5. I will be replacing my thirteen year old Volvo S70 as soon as the new Escape is available at local dealers. The Mazda is current first choice but the Ford is too close to not consider it. I like Mazda. I am currently on my second MX-5 (2010 GT PRHT). The best car I ever owned (not the nicest) was a 1990 Mazda 626 bought new and sold in 1999.
Brian
Canadian-ES-GT
Member
- :
- Protege
If the diesel is marketed as a "high performance" engine... well, as the sportier choice, it will be easier to sell. People buying a more performant version of a car tend to know more about cars, and should be more open to the diesel.
But CX-5 diesel is not significantly better from a measured/instrumented testing performance standpoint, despite torquey feel in regular driving. It does get much better MPG, that's a big difference in measured data. That's why economy aspect is played up.
Isn't it a better drive though? Just test drove a new 328i with 4 cyl turbo. Supposedly the mpg is just as good as my 335d diesel, but my diesel is definitely a much more relaxing drive as I don't have to rev the engine at all to get awesome power. I noticed I had to work the cx5 petrol engine quite a bit to get it moving on the freeway with 4 adults. Wife and I are thinking about waiting for either diesel option or possible rumored turbo petrol variant.But CX-5 diesel is not significantly better from a measured/instrumented testing performance standpoint, despite torquey feel in regular driving. It does get much better MPG, that's a big difference in measured data. That's why economy aspect is played up.
Yes more relaxed drive. Now we see why the Marketing group plays up fuel economy. Sporty drivers of sport sedans bouncing off rev limiters is not something BMW plans to advertise. The 335tt gasser is faster and more fun.
In California with diesel at 5% more expensive than premium gas it's a tougher sale than Canada.
In California with diesel at 5% more expensive than premium gas it's a tougher sale than Canada.
Last edited:
Canadian-ES-GT
Member
- :
- Protege
ohh, I guess I thought the extra 20hp and 100-some torque would have made a bigger difference. Would still be nice to bring the diesel as the diesel market is growing and they are being more and more accepted.
I'm worried because I really want to pull the trigger on a CX 5 NOW. But, I also would really love the diesel if I could get it (in Canada).
Things Im worried about:
1) Is the diesel THAT much more powerful? I am kind of worried the petrol would be underpowered for me and I would kick myself for not waiting.
2) How long would I actually have to wait? If it would be not until fall 2013 for a 2014 CX5 then I would probably just buy now
3) How much more would it cost? I want the GS version with Navigation installed, in Canada that comes to about 32K. I wouldn't want to pay much more than that for diesel... Maybe 2k more max.
Things Im worried about:
1) Is the diesel THAT much more powerful? I am kind of worried the petrol would be underpowered for me and I would kick myself for not waiting.
2) How long would I actually have to wait? If it would be not until fall 2013 for a 2014 CX5 then I would probably just buy now
3) How much more would it cost? I want the GS version with Navigation installed, in Canada that comes to about 32K. I wouldn't want to pay much more than that for diesel... Maybe 2k more max.
smithsm1984
Member
Just go ahead and buy now if you like the CX-5. Maybe they'll bring the diesel and maybe they won't, it will be more expensive, it won't be that much more powerful in terms of raw speed.
You can spend a couple years waiting or you can enjoy the CX-5 now. Talk about the gas engine sucking is just the usual enthusiast circle-jerk. The gas engine is fine.
You can spend a couple years waiting or you can enjoy the CX-5 now. Talk about the gas engine sucking is just the usual enthusiast circle-jerk. The gas engine is fine.
