Home > Apps > there's diverging about historical gas usage. Haven't dig much into it, but if there's anything, it would be there.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
2016 CX-9 Real World MPG
- Thread starter TX_Driver
- Start date
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
According to Motor Trend, the real world MPG on 2016 CX-9 is not good either. The real world MPG on the 1st-gen CX-9 outperforms EPA fuel economy estimates, but the 2nd-gen CX-9 is way below:
Mazda's New People Hauler Heads to the Track and Real MPG Lab
Mazda's New People Hauler Heads to the Track and Real MPG Lab
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
There's no replacement for displacement...
To be honest, I routinely get only 12-13 mpg on short hops (e.g. 5-10 min suburban drive from home to supermarket with AC on). I can get up to 20 mpg on longer suburban drives with a few stop lights and speeds of 40 mph between lights. Hardly 'city' driving.
I have talked to several people at the EPA and have requested Mazda's raw test data. I have learned a lot about the convoluted process of determining the MPG that appears on the label. I will post again once I hear back from the EPA.
Are you going by the trip computer? Or a full tank of gas after a week or so of those short hops? I mean, 13 is pretty appalling for a 4cyl. I can get that with my V6 stuck in traffic with a 2,500 camper in tow. If your mileage is that bad you could be idling a lot or worse, dragging a stuck brake caliper or parking brake.
- :
- 2016 CX-5
wow, seriously ? 12-13 mpg for short hops on the new 2106 CX-9 , that's pretty disappointing, and no improvement over the 2007-2015 V6 CX-9's.
seems like it's across the board from real owners that the MPG don't match as advertised.
Yes, just looking at the MPG posted on the trip computer for each ignition-start. I drive modestly, no jack-rabbit starts. Getting up to 30 mph eats up the gas. The EPA 'US06 City' test is meant to reflect aggressive city driving. The 2016 CX9 dynamometer 'US06 City' test gave 16.4 mpg which would have to be downgraded for non-dynamometer factors. I'm, determined to figure out how the window-label MPG values were calculated.
Last edited:
Stryker medic
Member
- :
- 2016 Mazda CX9 Signature White Pearl/ 2013 Mazda CX9 GT
Before I got into 300 miles on mine, I had an average of 15-16.8 mpg. But recently as the engine got broken in, my average is running around 21-23 mpg. What I did noticed though is never to idle the engine even for a minute or so. It does drop the average mpg significantly.
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
That's why Mazda needs to give us the i-stop for NA market!
Stryker medic
Member
- :
- 2016 Mazda CX9 Signature White Pearl/ 2013 Mazda CX9 GT
Article from 2011 about the i stop technology.
http://www.autoblog.com/2011/09/09/mazda-says-i-stop-coming-to-u-s-vehicle-lineup-by-2016/
Stalled for the North American market.
http://www.greencarreports.com/news...da-i-stop-stalled-in-u-s-because-of-epa-tests
Last edited:
Make sure when calculating your mileage you use a full tank until the light turns on. Always carrying the weight of a full tank and expecting the best results will always be disappointing. If I fill up after half a tank all the time I get worse numbers than running down until the warning light turns on. If you don't drive long distances, keep the tank below half. It's the same concept as emptying the water tanks on your camper before traveling.
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
Penny wise and pound foolish!
Mazda refuses to bring its unique i-stop stop/start system into US market is because the cost can't be justified as the existing EPA test cycle doesn't show the benefits of stop/start systems. But had we have i-stop here, we'd experience better gas mileage, especially in city driving, in the real world environment! I thought Mazda has claimed the CX-9s real-world figures should actually surpass the ones from the EPA. Then why they would decide to cut i-stop which actually can help new CX-9 in the real world fuel economy? Besides, Honda Pilot has started to offer similar "Idle Stop" feature, and the excuse of not offering i-stop by Mazda in NA market seems just lame! And Mazda missed the opportunity to be the first SUV in the US offering a gas-saving idle stop/start system!
Some more data.. Got 21 mpg this morning in light suburban traffic, but only 10.1 mpg this afternoon on a 13 min drive through residential neighborhood (stops signs every block) followed by sitting in stand still traffic for several minutes with AC on (104F outside). I have annotated the fuel economy pict below. The MPG is shown for ever minute of the last 10 mins of the trip. I wish there was a way of exporting the fuel usage along with the driving cycle (speed vs time). That info could be then be uploaded to the EPA for some real-world grass-roots feedback.
Some more data.. Got 21 mpg this morning in light suburban traffic, but only 10.1 mpg this afternoon on a 13 min drive through residential neighborhood (stops signs every block) followed by sitting in stand still traffic for several minutes with AC on (104F outside). I have annotated the fuel economy pict below. The MPG is shown for ever minute of the last 10 mins of the trip. I wish there was a way of exporting the fuel usage along with the driving cycle (speed vs time). That info could be then be uploaded to the EPA for some real-world grass-roots feedback.
Is your overall average for the lifetime of the car 17.4 mpg? How many miles is that based upon?
Article says the system probably costs Mazda "several hundred dollars" a vehicle. That would have to be added to the sticker. That's a lot of gas where gas is $2/gal in the US. Meaning you'd have to drive for several years before getting that money back. Same type of consideration as a hybrid purchase, just smaller scale. In other countries, gas is 2-4 times the price making more sense for a system like this.
The other thing is, how good of an idea is this in a turbo engine where heat is a bigger issue? I personally wouldn't want my turbo engine cycling on and off, but I don't know enough about this to make that judgment. I just figure turbo engines run hotter and when the engine turns off, cooling is affected. Plus I read a lot of people online say they don't really like the feel of start/stop systems. They have a weird delay when you hit the gas. Perhaps Mazda's i-stop is better.
Last edited:
177.7 mile round trip. 4.5hrs of driving at 95% freeway. 3hrs there, 1.5hrs back. Fuel Economy Monitor is set to monitor Trip A. The 32.4 is the way back, 24.8 is on the way there, and 28.6 is the average for the trip.
There were 6 (!!!) accidents on the way there while the return trip was merely "busy".
You can also see the previous 5 fillups.
...and I was trying to maximize efficiency on this trip.
Great info! Thanks so much for posting. Since you have 5 fillips, I'm guessing you have over 1,000 miles on your car? I have less than 400. Interesting that Mazda-Canada says "selected test vehicles are run in for about 6 000 km before testing." (https://www.mazda.ca/en/about/5-cycle-fuel-testing/). So 6000km~3700 miles (!). Hoping that my mpg increases in the future.
The 17.4 mpg is the current average for my 2nd tank of gas. The first tank gave 16.7 mpg. I had to chuckle when I read the manual and saw their example (pg 4-79) showing 8 mpg. Guess the technical reviewers missed that one.
Stryker medic
Member
- :
- 2016 Mazda CX9 Signature White Pearl/ 2013 Mazda CX9 GT
177.7 mile round trip. 4.5hrs of driving at 95% freeway. 3hrs there, 1.5hrs back. Fuel Economy Monitor is set to monitor Trip A. The 32.4 is the way back, 24.8 is on the way there, and 28.6 is the average for the trip.
There were 6 (!!!) accidents on the way there while the return trip was merely "busy".
You can also see the previous 5 fillups.
...and I was trying to maximize efficiency on this trip.
That's a good number right there. So how many miles now do you have on your CX9?
