Just Took My First Trip With My New CX-5......

[ocinsomniac]

1,200 mile round trip from northern GA to southern FL. Purchased this 2016 GT model in July with the intent of it being my highway cruiser, so I was excited to see how comfortably it handled a long trip. Must say I was very pleased as I was a bit apprehensive about what I read while researching it........concerning an overly stiff ride, excessive road noise and high speed passing acceleration, and I must say, it passed my litmus test on all three counts. Seems like Mazda really hit the mark with the drive train and suspension, was very pleased the way it handled in & out frequent lane changes, and for a naturally aspirated 4 banger, it gets up to passing speed quite adequately.

Only one minor disappointment - only averaged 27.8 mpg's for the whole trip, but that's my fault. It's mostly a 70 mph speed limit down I75 from GA to Fl, but most of the time I set the cruise control to 75 in those 70 zones (just to keep up with the traffic flow) and even did some passing at 80-85 mph. Noticed right away that 70+ mph really kills the mpg's but that is so with just about any vehicle on the road.

So this long trip made me even more of a SKYACTIV believer, and now I have no regrets whatsoever about canceling a factory order on a 2016 Subaru Outback in order to purchase my CX-5. At least I know it's a lot more fun to drive than the OB and still serves its purpose for my individual needs very well. (2thumbs)

 

[Unobtanium]

1,200 mile round trip from northern GA to southern FL. Purchased this 2016 GT model in July with the intent of it being my highway cruiser, so I was excited to see how comfortably it handled a long trip. Must say I was very pleased as I was a bit apprehensive about what I read while researching it........concerning an overly stiff ride, excessive road noise and high speed passing acceleration, and I must say, it passed my litmus test on all three counts. Seems like Mazda really hit the mark with the drive train and suspension, was very pleased the way it handled in & out frequent lane changes, and for a naturally aspirated 4 banger, it gets up to passing speed quite adequately.

Only one minor disappointment - only averaged 27.8 mpg's for the whole trip, but that's my fault. It's mostly a 70 mph speed limit down I75 from GA to Fl, but most of the time I set the cruise control to 75 in those 70 zones (just to keep up with the traffic flow) and even did some passing at 80-85 mph. Noticed right away that 70+ mph really kills the mpg's but that is so with just about any vehicle on the road.

So this long trip made me even more of a SKYACTIV believer, and now I have no regrets whatsoever about canceling a factory order on a 2016 Subaru Outback in order to purchase my CX-5. At least I know it's a lot more fun to drive than the OB and still serves its purpose for my individual needs very well. (2thumbs)

I averaged exactly 27.8 mpg on a 300 mile trip I took for thanksgiving. I don't think anyone is getting the sticker 30mpg doing a normal 75mph in these things. Your mileage sounds spot on to me! (2.5L AWD)

 

[MikeM.]

I averaged exactly 27.8 mpg on a 300 mile trip I took for thanksgiving. I don't think anyone is getting the sticker 30mpg doing a normal 75mph in these things. Your mileage sounds spot on to me! (2.5L AWD)

I get better than EPA HWY going a bit faster than the average EPA HWY speed (which last I checked was only 48 MPH average speed). But I don't know anyone who expects to get "EPA sticker" going a good 25 mph faster than the average EPA HWY test speed. The physics of aerodynamics is the physics of aerodynamics.

My highway/city mix is roughly 70/30 mix and my average MPG since new is still 32.5 mpg in mixed driving.

 

[craigo]

You'll see 30+ if you use cruise control, stay below 70, and after the first oil change. The wind resistance is a big one.

 

[craigo]

I get better than EPA HWY going a bit faster than the average EPA HWY speed (which last I checked was only 48 MPH average speed). But I don't know anyone who expects to get "EPA sticker" going a good 25 mph faster than the average EPA HWY test speed. The physics of aerodynamics is the physics of aerodynamics.

My highway/city mix is roughly 70/30 mix and my average MPG since new is still 32.5 mpg in mixed driving.

Here's the actual tests: https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml

I think a lot of confusion comes from terminology. 'Highway' to the EPA is driving for 10 miles on a city freeway with moderate speed limits and assumes the driver follows them. The 'high speed' test is the closest approximation to long distance driving at 70+ mph, but to a lot of people that's what they think of 'highway' - going on a trip.

It would be interesting to see the individual test results broken out. That doesn't seem to be easily found...

EDIT: High speed test isn't a great approximation either because it includes many stops and aggressive accelerations.

 

[Unobtanium]

I get better than EPA HWY going a bit faster than the average EPA HWY speed (which last I checked was only 48 MPH average speed). But I don't know anyone who expects to get "EPA sticker" going a good 25 mph faster than the average EPA HWY test speed. The physics of aerodynamics is the physics of aerodynamics.

My highway/city mix is roughly 70/30 mix and my average MPG since new is still 32.5 mpg in mixed driving.

We've been over this. All of my other vehicles, from my 500+hp corvette to my brick of a Jeep Grand Cherokee with a HEMI more than delivered EPA ratings doing well over 70 on road trips. You don't believe me. Blah blah blah.

Some manufacturers just DELIVER. For example, my WS.6 put to the ground almost as much as it was rated to produce at the flywheel. My Jeep would do 0-60 about half a second quicker than Chrysler claimed by my stopwatch (I exactly replicated my CX-5's advertised 0-60, for reference). My Z06 actually got 2mpg OVER "highway" sticker doing 75mph. My 370Z would hang with E92 M3's on the freeway after just a catback (multiple runs, I can't explain that one! It was a real E92, though, and the guy could drive. Did auto X events, etc. Pulled over and chatted for a half hour.)

My CX-5 looks like an exercise in "it does EXACTLY what we say it does, if you use it EXACTLY as we did in testing. But don't go expecting any extras, now!" Well and good, that's fine, I've been spoiled by others, though!

 

[fdew]

1,200 mile round trip from northern GA to southern FL. Purchased this 2016 GT model in July with the intent of it being my highway cruiser, so I was excited to see how comfortably it handled a long trip. Must say I was very pleased as I was a bit apprehensive about what I read while researching it........concerning an overly stiff ride, excessive road noise and high speed passing acceleration, and I must say, it passed my litmus test on all three counts. Seems like Mazda really hit the mark with the drive train and suspension, was very pleased the way it handled in & out frequent lane changes, and for a naturally aspirated 4 banger, it gets up to passing speed quite adequately.

Only one minor disappointment - only averaged 27.8 mpg's for the whole trip, but that's my fault. It's mostly a 70 mph speed limit down I75 from GA to Fl, but most of the time I set the cruise control to 75 in those 70 zones (just to keep up with the traffic flow) and even did some passing at 80-85 mph. Noticed right away that 70+ mph really kills the mpg's but that is so with just about any vehicle on the road.

So this long trip made me even more of a SKYACTIV believer, and now I have no regrets whatsoever about canceling a factory order on a 2016 Subaru Outback in order to purchase my CX-5. At least I know it's a lot more fun to drive than the OB and still serves its purpose for my individual needs very well. (2thumbs)

Your experience is identical to mine except I wasn't surprised. I have always equated a stiff ride with good handling. After test driving the CX-5 on some twisty turn roads I knew it would be good there and on the highway. I have found myself getting off the interstates and taking secondary roads, extending the trip time but making it more fun. For me it is a very enjoyable long trip car.

 

[Unobtanium]

Your experience is identical to mine except I wasn't surprised. I have always equated a stiff ride with good handling. After test driving the CX-5 on some twisty turn roads I knew it would be good there and on the highway. I have found myself getting off the interstates and taking secondary roads, extending the trip time but making it more fun. For me it is a very enjoyable long trip car.

My only nagging complaint is that I wish it were more insulated from noise. The ride is fine. But I would have preferred another 30-75# of fluff in there to damp the sound.

 

[TheGanzman]

My only nagging complaint is that I wish it were more insulated from noise. The ride is fine. But I would have preferred another 30-75# of fluff in there to damp the sound.

I see SO many "complaints" about these things being noisy! I don't know what YOU guys came from (and maybe it helps being 59 and partially deaf, LOL), but *I* think the 2016 CX-5 is PLENTY quiet! It's AS quiet as my Isuzu VX was, quieter than my wife's Mercedes SL63, and quieter than my '69 Ford Bronco. You guys just came from too luxurious vehicles is the problem!(wink)

 

[ocinsomniac]

It's nowhere as noisy as I anticipated (except under very heavy throttle).......not like my second ride, a '13 Subie Impreza Sport wagon. Now that li'l CVT driven boxer really churns up some wind and tire noise while driving at highway speeds, that's why I use it for my around town ride. The CX-5 is quiet enough for my needs. I guess it's all relative as TheGanzman implies.

 

[mazdadude]

I see SO many "complaints" about these things being noisy! I don't know what YOU guys came from (and maybe it helps being 59 and partially deaf, LOL), but *I* think the 2016 CX-5 is PLENTY quiet! It's AS quiet as my Isuzu VX was, quieter than my wife's Mercedes SL63, and quieter than my '69 Ford Bronco. You guys just came from too luxurious vehicles is the problem!(wink)

For 2016, the CX-5 was quieted down a bit, so it is most likely the 2013, 2014, and 2015 model owners that are complaining about noise. I was getting some road noise on mine and was able to reduce it by doing a cross rotation on the tires that had become feathered.

 

[JbCalg]

turn up the sound system - or the spouse

 

[BMuzzy]

when my wife is in the car the noise level goes up...
when she's not in the car the noise level goes down...
I'm not sure Mazda owns that issue..

 

[CC58]

27-28mpg is right on the money at interstate speeds. Bizarrely, the best mpg you will see are on twisty mountain roads of north Georgia. You would think the twisties and elevation changes would reduce mileage, but expect 32mpg!!! That's what I get. The engine and programming are highly efficient in less than optimal conditions, but only when speed is reduced. The laws of physics can't be overcome when you drive an SUV with large wind resistance at high speed.

 

[Unobtanium]

I see SO many "complaints" about these things being noisy! I don't know what YOU guys came from (and maybe it helps being 59 and partially deaf, LOL), but *I* think the 2016 CX-5 is PLENTY quiet! It's AS quiet as my Isuzu VX was, quieter than my wife's Mercedes SL63, and quieter than my '69 Ford Bronco. You guys just came from too luxurious vehicles is the problem!(wink)

That's nice. I once upon a time came from a 5.0 mustang with heads, cam, headers, carburetor conversion, dumped pre-axle. It reeked of raw fuel and was loud enough to wake the dead. I really think the other poster nailed it when he said the 2016 was quieter. Thing is, the CX-5 isn't a mustang, Bronco, or SL63. It has none of the attributes those bring to the table. It's joy is in being the ultimate toaster on wheels. An appliance. Appliances should be somewhat "numb", in my opinion, and although I enjoy Mazda's suspension on this one, I do wish the '15 were quieter.

 

[fdew]

That's nice. I once upon a time came from a 5.0 mustang with heads, cam, headers, carburetor conversion, dumped pre-axle. It reeked of raw fuel and was loud enough to wake the dead. I really think the other poster nailed it when he said the 2016 was quieter. Thing is, the CX-5 isn't a mustang, Bronco, or SL63. It has none of the attributes those bring to the table. It's joy is in being the ultimate toaster on wheels. An appliance. Appliances should be somewhat "numb", in my opinion, and although I enjoy Mazda's suspension on this one, I do wish the '15 were quieter.

Some of us have figured out how to get a bunch of fun out of driving the CX-5 Its not raw power, it is handling.

Mazda CX-5

Toster

 

[ALafya]

Mine is plenty quiet, more than few cars we owned or still own.
As is, I prefer its 50 lb weight advantage over the 2016s.

 

[MikeM.]

Mine is plenty quiet, more than few cars we owned or still own.
As is, I prefer its 50 lb weight advantage over the 2016s.

(iagree)

 

[MikeM.]

Bizarrely, the best mpg you will see are on twisty mountain roads of north Georgia. You would think the twisties and elevation changes would reduce mileage, but expect 32mpg!!! That's what I get. The engine and programming are highly efficient in less than optimal conditions, but only when speed is reduced. The laws of physics can't be overcome when you drive an SUV with large wind resistance at high speed.

I'm glad others have noticed this. There were some disbelievers earlier in the year when I noted hilly terrain can actually improve your MPG. How can hills return better MPG? I suspect it has to do with the way the variable valve timing is adjusted to get more efficient coasting. This also explains the uncanny city MPG when driven in a non-frenetic manner.

 

[123373]

Did they make the seats more comfortable in the 2016 models? The reason I asked is I drive 300 highway miles each way to my other office twice a month and my behind is numb after driving just 2.5 of the almost 5 hour trip. No issues making the trip non stop in my other car.