Diesel CX5 has landed in the USA

Chris_Top_Her

Banned
Moderator
Contributor
:
San Antonio, Texas
:
'15 CX-5 Miata AWD
Couple members of the cx5 club have sen them in dealerships. $42k msrp.
 

yrwei52

2016 Mazda CX-5 GT AWD w/Tech Pkg
Contributor
:
Plano, Texas, USA
Another bad decision made by Mazda or Mazda North American Operations!
 

ColoradoDriver

Gen-1 Kodo Design
Contributor
:
Denver, CO
:
2014 CX-5 Touring
Couple members of the cx5 club have sen them in dealerships. $42k msrp.
$42k huh?



Doubt they will sell much of anything diesel at that price. People who don't know modern Mazda are just going to laugh at that price. Another fail by Mazda. :(
 
:
2019 Mazda CX-5 GTR
I an't imagine the logic of it either BUT, how about one of you guys that has one on the lot, taking a test drive and reporting back to us?!?!?!?
 
:
2019 CX-5 Reserve
Don*t get the appeal of diesel anymore. Times were that diesel was cheaper than gas, but those times are long gone in the US. Also, for Mazda, less power than even the NA engine. Why?
 

DieselTorque

Contributor
:
2016 CX-5 Touring AWD W/Tech & 2019 CX-5 Signature
Signature Diesel $42,345 168 hp, 290 torque, 27/30 mpg. Grand Touring FWD $31,350 187 hp, 186 torque, 25/31 mpg. That's a bunch of $$ for some torque (and a bunch of features a diesel driver may not want). Good luck Mazda.
 
:
2019 Mazda CX-5 GTR
It's not about the spec sheet is aBoUt ThE fEEL XD
RIGHT! Someone who lives near a dealership with Diesel inventory needs to test drive one and report back, with an objective review. On the surface, 168hp and 290ft/lbs seems anemic, compared to the 2.5T models, given the included price premium. Even the fuel efficiency doesn't excite me. My GTR now has 12,000mi and is nicely broken in. Currently I'm seeing just over 28mpg on my daily commute. I can't envision how the diesel will do anything for us, given no performance advantage, 1mpg fuel efficiency advantage and a $4,000 msrp premium over the Signature ($6k over the GTR).

However...... The real proof is in getting behind the wheel.
 
:
CX5 GT-R
RIGHT! Someone who lives near a dealership with Diesel inventory needs to test drive one and report back, with an objective review. On the surface, 168hp and 290ft/lbs seems anemic, compared to the 2.5T models, given the included price premium. Even the fuel efficiency doesn't excite me. My GTR now has 12,000mi and is nicely broken in. Currently I'm seeing just over 28mpg on my daily commute. I can't envision how the diesel will do anything for us, given no performance advantage, 1mpg fuel efficiency advantage and a $4,000 msrp premium over the Signature ($6k over the GTR).

However...... The real proof is in getting behind the wheel.
The only thing that could save it is if it's grossly under-rated either by the EPA, or in the power department, and a very solid publication reviews it as such with some really strong evidence, and people "get it".
 
:
13' CX-5 and 16' Mazda6 both Touring w/Tech/Bose
Are the latest Skyactiv Diesels in Europe and in Japan considered bullet proof status yet? I recall the oil issue or something like that in the 1 gens.
 
:
2019 CX-5 Reserve
How likely is a test drive going to be able to tell you more than you can surmise from the numbers alone? Given that the torque is almost the same as the gas turbo, people should have an idea how that feels. The power is obviously going to be down compared to the turbo, and you*re unlikely to get an idea of the day-to-day real world gas mileage from test drive. Hard to figure how it could come across as anything other than an underpowered car that costs $4K more than the top-of-the-line gas turbo.
 
:
2014 Mazda3 S GT auto, 2008 MX5 6-speed
Under most circumstances, it's not the power, it's the torque that is the key to driving enjoyment. One of my coworkers has a diesel Colorado and he tells me that the difference in fuel mileage compared to the gas version is significant. As far as cost, isn't the turbo CX5 about the same cost? (assuming the trim level/features are similar)
Believe it or not, there are still many diesel heads out there, despite the German diesel disasters.
 

Avoidin Deer

Zoom Zoom, baby
Contributor
:
Central Virginia
:
2019 CX-5 Reserve
Don*t get the appeal of diesel anymore. Times were that diesel was cheaper than gas, but those times are long gone in the US. Also, for Mazda, less power than even the NA engine. Why?
Yeh, back then diesel was a bargain...if you could find a station that sold it.

Almost as scarce as charging stations are today.
 
:
'14.5 CX-5 Touring AWD, Soul Red | '14 CX-5 Touring AWD White
LOL. I have Tesla model Y on order. Can't wait to get rid of 1 of my CX-5s.

42K and still drive poison car.
 
:
2013 Mazda CX-5 Sport FWD Auto
LOL. I have Tesla model Y on order. Can't wait to get rid of 1 of my CX-5s.

42K and still drive poison car.
I do appreciate Mazda's attempts at lowering greenhouse emissions overall though. Their focus claims to be on the net carbon footprint of the vehicle: production of the car as well as the vehicles lifetime emissions. The net carbon footprint of an electric vehicle can be the same as a gas or diesel powered vehicle if production of said electric vehicle was accomplished in an environmentally unfriendly manner. I'm not saying that's true for Tesla as I honestly don't know, but I understand Mazda's mission statement moving forward.

To stay on topic though, Mazda's diesel release in the US seems to be dead in the water for all of the reasons mentioned previously. Skyactiv-X followed by their third iteration of Skyactiv after X seems to be the best bet for fuel efficiency's sake, not the diesel powerplant. My guess is that the diesel is well established and sold overseas, so a sale is a sale if we can get one in the US. Mazda is designing compelling ICE vehicles that will be an outstanding option for those unwilling to be a guinea pig for vehicles like Tesla (which are admittedly in a constant state of beta readiness, being fixed with OTA updates, etc).
 

Kaps

Contributor
:
CX-5 Touring 2016.5
I do appreciate Mazda's attempts at lowering greenhouse emissions overall though. Their focus claims to be on the net carbon footprint of the vehicle: production of the car as well as the vehicles lifetime emissions. The net carbon footprint of an electric vehicle can be the same as a gas or diesel powered vehicle if production of said electric vehicle was accomplished in an environmentally unfriendly manner. I'm not saying that's true for Tesla as I honestly don't know, but I understand Mazda's mission statement moving forward.
This has been debunked many times with supporting arguments. An EV has higher carbon footprint upfront but within 2-5 years depending on whichever state you live in - the EV comes out ahead. It doesn't matter if you charge it with coal generated electricity or solar. The avg. age of a car is around 7-8 years so an EV will always be more green unless you buy ones made in countries with no regulations / no environmental protections - I cant think of a country that makes EVs that falls in this category.
Mazda's verbiage is based on a single fact - they have zero EV tech and zero hybrid tech. Few 3 Hybrids were sold in Japan and Australia but beyond that not much. Mazda has no money for EV tech and more importantly no supply chain for batteries. If CX5 had a hybrid version which had 220/250 power numbers and it became popular in US - I doubt they would be able to build and sell 40K of those assuming a small (< 2KWh battery).

There is zero chance the SPCCI can compete with a proper PHEV or an EV - the more you think about it - factors like brake dust and carbon footprint to extract and refine and transport oil (sometimes store is for long periods) - the EV keeps getting ahead.
 
Top