CX-5 vs. CR-V and Escape

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.

Having both available to drive in Australia. You're actually incorrect.
The difference in terms of driving between the diesel CX-5 and the petrol CX-5 is significant. It almost feels like going from a standard Mazda 3 to a Mazdaspeed 3. (And I can state this on the basis of 7 years Mazda 3 ownership and racing Mazdaspeed 3's at a race track).

The power doesn't seem like a lot of paper. But it's the torque.
Both engines hit 1000rpm quite quickly and often.... But at 1000rpm the diesel already has 50% of it's total available torque, and the max at 2000rpm. The max torque the petrol has at 4000rpm (which you don't get to unless pressed), is a figure the diesel has with zero effort at 800rpm.

This translates into extremely quick take offs if you need them. To get the same torque, the petrol has to wait until 4000rpm - which make it only useful for overtakes.

The petrol seems to be begging for more. The diesel has everything you need, then more.
The torque difference is noticeable in two situations:

1. From a standing start (e.g. set of traffic lights).
2. On highway for overtaking

The 0-100 is roughly a second faster for the diesel due to the fact that it's only available in auto (slower), AWD (heavier) and it's 80kg heavier to begin with.

Basically the car dealerships are starting to strip back their petrol orders here. Consumers who are in market for either mid or top end who test drive both, are refusing to purchase the petrol.

The fact that emissions are better. Performance is better. Resale is better.
There isn't a need to play up the economy.

In regards to the apparent negatives of diesel being noisy and sooty - the CX-5 lacks both.
The only comment I get from passengers is how silent the vehicle is. And it's mainly because in normal driving rpms are MUCH lower than the petrol, and there is practically no effort (or rpm) to travel at normal speeds.
 
Last edited:
It is a CUV and not a sports car so I am not really worried about how fast it is, as long as its decent enough for every day driving.

The petrol is superb for everyday driving. The fuel economy is superb as well. You don't need to worry.
But the comparison is there for when the diesel is finally released into the North American market.
 
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.

My comments are already on this thread. But if you want a second opinion, search for any reviews in non North American countries - because we all have diesels and there is no comparison.

If you can't wait - then don't. But if you have six months to think about it, then it would be well worth the wait.

The car magazines in Australia are being blunt about the situation. Actually, they're writing off the petrol CX-5 as complete rubbish. But they're only saying that because the diesel exists.
In isolation, the Petrol CX-5 is excellent.... but only the US and Canada have the luxury of rating it in isolation.

The British are more polite about the situation:
http://www.topgear.com/uk/car-news/mazda-cx5-first-drive-2012-04-17

And remember, the British are comparing a high spec petrol (14:1 compression, high octane fuel), with two diesels (including a low end diesel - which we don't even bother selling in Australia). Also keep in mind that British mpg differ in calculation to US mpg.

The new 165bhp 2.0-litre petrol isn't worth bothering with. Yes, the bewilderingly high compression ratio (14:1) has helped ensure it's impressively economical (a claimed 47.1mpg), but it's actually noisier than the new 2.2-litre diesel and lacks the torque of turbocharged rivals.

The oil-burner, predicted to account for 85 per cent of sales, is a force to be reckoned with, though. It's remarkably smooth-revving, and even the lower powered 150bhp version is plenty quick and torquey enough.


In Australia, the diesel is so much better that it's accounting for 85% of sales.
In Japan, a country that has 1% Diesel sales - it's accounting for 85% of sales.
 
Last edited:
Inodes - As I pointed out correctly the difference in measured fuel economy is greater than difference in measured performance (typical measured and instrumented testing data is what I'm taking about, not subjective drivability). That is why manufacturers emphasize that. My comment only explains why auto makers emphasize the economy aspect, because in terms of measured data, the increase in economy (%) is more significant than the increase (%) in typically measured performance data. (This has nothing to do with racing Mazda 3's or the the difference in driving the diesel version is significant for the CX-5.)

I already mentioned the diesel's better torque and better drivability and I do appreciate the driving review you gave above. Like you, I think the CX-5 diesel is the better ride for most SUV typical users in most markets. None of the CX-5's are high performance SUVs (not the gas or diesel engine). The list of SUVs with better performance is too long to list here.

btw - More on topic, did you see clarification on new Ford Escape=new Ford Kuga, both not yet for sale in Australia or ROW, but coming soon. Sounds like an example of high performance compact SUV will be the 2.0L turbo Escape, it should have significantly better measured performance than CRV or CX-5 with engines currently available.
 
Last edited:
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.

1) A skyactiv-D will have DOUBLE the torque of the gas engine. It will definitely be faster.
2) There are rumors that'll it'll be launched in March of next year. If they don't have news about the diesel or it's not launched by then, the diesel will never come and you can take the plunge for the petrol version. It doesn't hurt to wait 11 months. I'm actually in the same boat as you are.
 
Yeah, I suppose I could wait. I'm driving a little Saturn Astra XR right now, its a 2008 and in fine shape so its not like I NEED another vehicle, I just want something a bit bigger and AWD.
Maybe I'll just save a larger down payment in the mean time, to offset the higher cost of the diesel.

I saw on the Mazda Australia site that the diesel was about 4000 more expensive, but their prices in general seem a lot higher than what we pay here in N.A.
 
Yeah, I suppose I could wait. I'm driving a little Saturn Astra XR right now, its a 2008 and in fine shape so its not like I NEED another vehicle, I just want something a bit bigger and AWD.
Maybe I'll just save a larger down payment in the mean time, to offset the higher cost of the diesel.

I saw on the Mazda Australia site that the diesel was about 4000 more expensive, but their prices in general seem a lot higher than what we pay here in N.A.

I'd say a $1500-$2000 premium for the diesel is about right.
 
1)
2) There are rumors that'll it'll be launched in March of next year. If they don't have news about the diesel or it's not launched by then, the diesel will never come and you can take the plunge for the petrol version. It doesn't hurt to wait 11 months. I'm actually in the same boat as you are.

My opinion only, but waiting for the diesel from ANY maker is a mugs game which will eventually grow very old. My '99 Volvo was to be replaced in '09 so I started the replacement search in '08 to discover that the preferred model (Forester) was being released in Europe in '99 with a diesel. With the rumour that this engine would be coming to Canada in '10, I opted to wait until then so as to get the diesel. I have continued to drive my '99 Volvo in the face of continued rumour that the diesel Forester would be coming 'next year'. Since '10 the Tiguan diesel has been coming 'next year'. Now the diesel CX-5 may be here in the fall of '13.

Life is too short. If the '13 Escape can't best the CX-5 on its own spring release I will be ordering the CX-5 with the only available gas engine. In the event that a diesel eventually arrives I will consider an upgrade to it. It has been an error to put off for so long replacing the sedan with a CUV, as the latter will so much better meet my needs.

Brian
 
Last edited:
I saw on the Mazda Australia site that the diesel was about 4000 more expensive, but their prices in general seem a lot higher than what we pay here in N.A.

Prices are higher for the typical reasons. Supply, demand and ability to pay.
Our salaries are closer to Western European level and significantly more than the US or Canada (then again, our costs of living are significantly more as well).
Prices also seem more expensive because it's against Australian law to provide prices unless every single tax and cost is included. Providing pre- prices is considered to be misleading to customers and leads to dealers cheating some customers.
What you see is what you get - you can only argue the price down.
It's against the law for the dealer to increase the price to their benefit.

Our exchange rates should have fixed the cost though. The Aussie dollar is among the strongest currencies which should have made the CX-5 cheaper. European cars has plummeted in price in Australia - the CX-5 is a tad high.

The $3000 price difference for diesel is fairly standard though. Only on Chinese manufacturers will you see it dip down to $2000.
But Australians will blindly pay the money without a thought. It's not considered to be very much money at all.
 
Last edited:
My opinion only, but waiting for the diesel from ANY maker is a mugs game which will eventually grow very old.


Anything could happen. Wind back the clock 4 years, and Australia was identical to the US. Auto makers wanted to sell diesels. We wouldn't buy them.
For us diesel is more expensive fuel, it was considered too dirty and there was no apparent advantage. We even had to pay more.

Decent marketing, a few world records set by Peugeot diesels driving between major cities in Australia and we were convinced.

Australia has a similar size and urban rate to the US. But our cities are further apart with very few petrol stations in between. To be shown that with a diesel we could go from city to city on one tank, was the marketing pitch we required.

Within 4 years Australia went from practically zero diesels, to being a market in which an auto manufacture has to offer diesel if they're serious.

The Japanese have a low rate of diesels than the US. They're less convinced. No Euro car maker has dared enter the diesel market seriously in Japan. They'd fail.

I watched Mazda's marketing though (was in Japanese, but wife helped translate). It was a convincing case.
They highlighted two points:
1. CX-5 had extremely low emissions, PM and NOx - thrashing every government's diesel standard
2. Japan was producing diesel, but the usage was low and it was exporting diesel - a waste.

Both points are valid for the US as well.
The US is lucky in that it produces a very high quality diesel that complies with all standards (albeit production at a ratio that favours gasoline). But domestic diesel consumption in the US is so low, that in the past the US has been exporting excess to Europe for their consumption.
It is diesel that *could* be consumed domestically instead.

It might not be this year, or the next.... but when the US finally gets why the rest of the developed world is in love with diesels, there will be a rapid conversion.

With the CX-5 the argument is even more convincing...

Diesel CX-5 is the better performer, better fuel economy and much better CO2 emissions with very low pollution for a diesel (NOx and PM are far less of a concern with petrol engines)
 
Last edited:
but when the US finally gets why the rest of the developed world is in love with diesels, there will be a rapid conversion.

I signed up to reply to this. I believe that the US has long been ready for diesel but the auto manufacturers refuse to give them to us. I had a 2002 Ford F-150 and the rumor was that Ford was working on a baby diesel for it. Everyone on the F-150 forum was ready to trade their gas trucks for it. But the word was they couldn't meet the upcoming EPA laws and ditched it. The only real choice for diesel in the US is VW which has quality issues or high end/expensive cars like BMW and Mercedes. I am sure that when Mazda or any other mainstream mfg gives us a viable diesel, it will sell very well. I and a friend of mine are waiting on the CX-5 diesel to hit the states.
 
Now that this is the thread is focused on diesel, we've had a lot of posters report on diesel pricing from around the world. It sounds like the US in the only major market with diesel pricing that's about 10% over the price of regular/low octane gasoline.

Certainly Mazda should consider offering diesel option in all markets for a competitive advantage with better selection of engine choices, especially in markets where Escape and CRV (the topic here) have been so dominant.
 
I signed up to reply to this. I believe that the US has long been ready for diesel but the auto manufacturers refuse to give them to us. I had a 2002 Ford F-150 and the rumor was that Ford was working on a baby diesel for it. Everyone on the F-150 forum was ready to trade their gas trucks for it. But the word was they couldn't meet the upcoming EPA laws and ditched it. The only real choice for diesel in the US is VW which has quality issues or high end/expensive cars like BMW and Mercedes. I am sure that when Mazda or any other mainstream mfg gives us a viable diesel, it will sell very well. I and a friend of mine are waiting on the CX-5 diesel to hit the states.

The real issue is that diesel is more expensive in the United States than gas, and because we have stricter emissions standards, there are additional costs associated with bringing a diesel engine here.

Our fuel prices are also low in-general, so whatever cost savings you might end up with at factoring in the price you paid for the diesel and the higher price of diesel is likely to be small, for the same reason that the money you save by going diesel is small.
 
I signed up to reply to this. I believe that the US has long been ready for diesel but the auto manufacturers refuse to give them to us. I had a 2002 Ford F-150 and the rumor was that Ford was working on a baby diesel for it. Everyone on the F-150 forum was ready to trade their gas trucks for it. But the word was they couldn't meet the upcoming EPA laws and ditched it. The only real choice for diesel in the US is VW which has quality issues or high end/expensive cars like BMW and Mercedes. I am sure that when Mazda or any other mainstream mfg gives us a viable diesel, it will sell very well. I and a friend of mine are waiting on the CX-5 diesel to hit the states.

The US is a very sophisticated market. The quality of diesel full is done. The environmental requirements are tough.
But the CX-5 exceeds all government emission requirements by such a large margin it's not funny (even California).

The CX-5 Diesel would be acceptable in the US here and now. It's CARB friendly.

But would it sell? Would Mazda bet on it?
 
If Mazda brings the diesel in the cx-5 to the US early next year, is it likely that it will only be mated to the automatic tranny and not the manual?
 
If Mazda brings the diesel in the cx-5 to the US early next year, is it likely that it will only be mated to the automatic tranny and not the manual?
It really comes down to the market. The US is an auto market, so Mazda USA would be foolish requesting a manual to be imported.

When the CX-7 was developed, Mazda in Japan was listening to two major markets - the US and the UK.
For the US, a turbo charged petrol + auto was created. For the UK (and Europe), a turbo charged diesel + manual was created.

When Mazda Australia looked at the product they hit a quandary. They wanted both engines, but they thought that the Australian market would embrace the diesel but turn their nose up at the manual (Australia is 90% auto). That's exactly what happened.

The CX-5 Diesel is selling *extremely* well. The fact it's tied to an auto (that makes all their old autos look pathetic), is only helping.

I'd a manual is unlikely unless they need the manual to meet an MPG magic number they can't hit with the automatic.

The diesel is good enough. Add the extra weight of AWD and Diesel, add the slower auto - and the fuel economy and performance still outdoes the manual FWD petrol.

Australian Government tests fuel economy, because it's illegal for Mazda to do so.

Definition:

Combined: Mix of city and highway
Urban: City
Extra: Highway

Results:

CX-5 Petrol FWD Manual
Comb: 6.4L/100km (36.8mpg)
Urban: 8L/100km (29.4mpg)
Extra: 5.5L/100km (42.8mpg)

CX-5 Diesel AWD Auto
Comb: 5.7L/100km (41.3mpg)
Urban: 6.7L/100km (35.1mpg)
Extra: 5.1L/100km (46.1mpg)

I think the greatest benefit here is that the CX-5 Petrol varies far more between city and highway than the diesel.

I'm not getting figures close to this. More work required. But very happy. Thrashes my Mazda 3.

But I digress...... need to get back on topic :)
 
Last edited:
Back to topic then:

I am curious what North Americans would buy OTHER than the CX-5 in this segment. Without the diesel available currently, what other products are there out right now that give the CX-5 Petrol the most competition? I suppose being a mazda forum everyone will probably re-iterate whats already been said.

For me, the Kia Sportage looks pretty nice, but I don't really like the looks of the new escape.
 
Last edited:
^ Yes, given the topic being CX-5, CRV, Escape, we still have a bit to learn about new redesigned Ford Escape/redesigned Ford Kuga. The high-volume Escape configuration for US market is expected to be the 1.6L turbo, but EPA gas mileage estimates are still TBD and availability at dealers is not expected until May.

I agree the Kia Sportage certainly is very stylish, but I found inventory variety to be lacking at several dealerships. CRV rates well for those seeking practicality (including roominess, ride quality, quietness, refinement, reliability, resale value, safety) over driving enjoyment, but not something I wanted to own. The CX-5 has many of these attributes and some others too.
 
Back to topic then:

I am curious what North Americans would buy OTHER than the CX-5 in this segment. Without the diesel available currently, what other products are there out right now that give the CX-5 Petrol the most competition? I suppose being a mazda forum everyone will probably re-iterate whats already been said.

For me, the Kia Sportage looks pretty nice, but I don't really like the looks of the new escape.

Well, the CR-V is a lot more practical. I love my CX-5 but let's face it - that sporty hatch-like rear end is kind of dumb if you view your car as practical transportation rather than driving enjoyment. The CR-V also has a lower load floor and more accessible seats (i've heard older folks complain that the bolstering in the CX-5 makes them harder to get in/out of). The Honda may not be exciting but they have really done their homework on the features its buyers use most.

The Escape is going to get a lot of people who are looking for something that feels a bit more modern inside. Personally I would take the CX-5's interior any day, but it looks dated. When the Ward's Best Interiors list came out the arm-chair enthusiasts were constantly whining that the CX-5 doesn't belong on the list. Why? It looks boring! Ford has a certain modern design philosophy that a lot of people enjoy.

And every competitor on the market has more power. Nevermind the fact that many of them actually aren't much quicker in instrumented testing - they have more torque and feel faster. Here in America you have people saying stupid things like accusing the CX-5's mill as being so slow that it's unsafe. What the really mean by that is that they're not comfortable taking an engine above 3K RPM.
 
Back