2016 CX-9 Real World MPG

JPL said:

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.

Click to expand...

You almost don't need any expensive hardware to implement the i-stop, so most cost would be on software, which costs almost to minimum now since Mazda has had its idle stop/start system for more than 5 years. "Several hundred dollars"? That's inflated MSRP cost! Auto makers now spend millions for development just trying to save 1 mpg in fuel economy, it won't be cost effective even if gas price is $8 per gallon. It's the conscious of human beings and government regulations which push those little fuel saving improvement with a lot of cost. Now Honda has done it on its Pilot, I didn't hear Honda is complaining the cost!

JPL said:

The other thing is, how good of an idea is this in a turbo engine where heat is a bigger issue? I personally wouladn'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.

Click to expand...

This would be a concern for me too but many turbo supporters swear you can turn off a turbo engine immediately without idling a while like the old days. In theory, they can use software to control the i-stop so that it happens only at a proper time. And electric pumps can still circulate oil and/or coolant even if the engine is stopped.

nebx9 said:

...and I was trying to maximize efficiency on this trip.

Click to expand...

I believe cooler temperature (62F) in California helps your fuel economy. I've found gas mileage on SkyActiv-G is very sensitive to the variables and environments. You drive over 70 mph, mpg drops a lot! Head wind? Mpg drops a lot! Long uphill? Mpg drops a lot too!

At least Mazda has kept coolant temperature "gauge" missing on many other vehicles that is a surprise!

TX_Driver said:

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.

Click to expand...

From my experience with our SkyActiv-G CX-5, I can almost guarantee you that, you won't see too much improvement on your gas mileage even after break-in period, unless you have drastic changes on the driving variables and environments. Even that, you should be happy if your average MPG can reach 20 from your current 17.4!

I am averaging 18.7mpg in mixed driving. The terrain is a bit hilly here in the North East. I also have a GT AWD model and have 1,700 miles on the car.

I was hoping to average at least 21-22mpg. Especially considering Mazda claimed the car was engineered for "real world driving" and the EPA test would not reflect how well the car would perform. Little disappointed so far.

Stryker medic said:

That's a good number right there. So how many miles now do you have on your CX9?

Click to expand...

Almost 5000 now. We took a few road trips

That's rough @Aviboy97. I'm getting no worse than 19 lately in my 60,000 mile 2013 Cx9. Usually 21-22 but my commute consists of a long stretch of highway from Nashua to Watham. I usually cruise at 70 the way there and 45-60 on the way home because of traffic. I gotta say though, I envy the new infotainment system. It's much nicer than mine...and I'm too cheap to buy an aftermarket replacement.

The 2016 CX-9 is said to have a 19 gallon tank, every time I fill up the tank the range it displays is 316 miles (to empty tank) that's a 16.6mpg (assuming the tank is indeed 19 gallons, which I doubt it is) here's why:
The gauge that indicates miles to emtpy tank it's pretty accurate. I just filled up my tank with 40 miles to go to empty tank and it was 13.2 gallons. I highly doubt that 6 gallons are required to drive those 40 miles I had remaining. I had about 1/4 tank or maybe less remaining. I'm in California if that means anything. What are you guys getting?

1) Range displayed with full tank
2) Gallons to fill up tank

EPA Raw MPG Data

I received the information from the EPA that I requested and thought I'd post about it. The EPA engineers were very responsive both on the phone and via email. There's probably a lot more detail here than people want, but here it goes..

The EPA requires emissions tests on vehicles and, during those tests, the fuel economy is measured. The tests involved 5 driving cycles: City(FTP75), Highway(HFET), Aggressive(US06), Air Conditioning(SC03), and Cold Temperature(FTP20) which are explained here (https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml). The CX-9 measured emissions and fuel economy can be found on the 'Certificate of Summary Information' which is available on the EPA website. https://iaspub.epa.gov/otaqpub/. The 5-cycle fuel economy values are called "unadjusted" because they are based on the dynamometer test and not real driving. As a result, the EPA downgrades the numbers to be more accurate and then weights all of the results to arrive at an expected 'city' and 'highway' fuel economy. These downgraded values are called the 'adjusted' city and highway fuel economy. The window label always shows the adjusted (downgraded) mpg values. I have plotted in blue all of the 2016 CX9 unadjusted fuel economy values based on the certificate of summary information (i.e. the raw data). The data provides insight into the relative impact of air conditioning, aggressive driving, etc. for the CX-9.


The EPA has equations to convert the unadjusted data to 'window values'. I used those equations and got lower values than the actual window label. That is what prompted my call to the EPA. After some discussion, I learned that (1) the emissions-based mpg data (blue) were not used in the calculation of the window label, (2) the emissions-based mpg data were done on a 4WD CX-9 with sport mode turned on in order to test the worst-case emissions scenario, and (3) additional tests (red) were done on a 2WD in non-sport mode and that these tests were used to compute the window-label values. Those (red) tests show an unadjusted City (FTP75) and Highway(HFET) fuel economy of 28.2715/39.8361 mpg. The EPA then downgraded them to the adjusted values of 22/28 which appears on the window label.

I am quite surpised to see the significant difference in unadjusted HW fuel economy between the 4WD sport mode (39.7 mpg) compared to the 2WD non-sport mode (30.8 mpg).

SDL said:

The 2016 CX-9 is said to have a 19 gallon tank, every time I fill up the tank the range it displays is 316 miles (to empty tank) that's a 16.6mpg (assuming the tank is indeed 19 gallons, which I doubt it is) here's why:
The gauge that indicates miles to emtpy tank it's pretty accurate. I just filled up my tank with 40 miles to go to empty tank and it was 13.2 gallons. I highly doubt that 6 gallons are required to drive those 40 miles I had remaining. I had about 1/4 tank or maybe less remaining. I'm in California if that means anything. What are you guys getting?

1) Range displayed with full tank
2) Gallons to fill up tank

Click to expand...

No vehicle made today runs out of gas when the range indicator reaches 0. Most can do another 50 or 60 miles, sometimes more, so another 2 or 3 gallons approximately. 40 miles to go, that's another 2 gallons there. That puts us to a total of 17.2-18.2 gallons. And since this is all estimation, being off by 0.8-1.8 isn't much. So yes, the tank is 19 gallons.

MrPerception said:

No vehicle made today runs out of gas when the range indicator reaches 0. Most can do another 50 or 60 miles, sometimes more, so another 2 or 3 gallons approximately. 40 miles to go, that's another 2 gallons there. That puts us to a total of 17.2-18.2 gallons. And since this is all estimation, being off by 0.8-1.8 isn't much. So yes, the tank is 19 gallons.

Click to expand...

Is that true? The reserve holds 3 gallons? I come from a 2001 car with 0.5 gallon reserve, so I have no idea what these new toys do.

A salesman told me that cars can go up to 100km (60 miles) when the range indicator reaches 0. I never tested that theory fully, but did hit 0 on a 2012 Mazda 5 I owned and drove another 25km (15 miles). That was the most I wanted to push it with the entire family in the vehicle, knowing they'd never let me hear the end of it. When I filled it, the amount put in was still short of total capacity by just over 1.5 gallons.

SDL said:

Is that true? The reserve holds 3 gallons? I come from a 2001 car with 0.5 gallon reserve, so I have no idea what these new toys do.

Click to expand...

Lol. I remember my first car which was a 1987 Mitsubishi Lancer box type. When the fuel gauge hit zero, I mean it's zero. No reserve.

My last trip via highway I made only 12mpg (7 passengers, heavy load) at 80mph.

In city I'm making 10mpg.

But today I have no hurry and I had a chance to drive miles and miles in "the periferico", an express highway, on sunday, in the second level ($$) without traffic. So I was driving with my kid and wife only and used the cruise control and no hard acceleration at all.

I get 35 MPG!!

Look:

This is "the periferic second level":



Another pic from Internet:



A picture I take (as you can see, max speed is 80kmh / 50mpg) - look the 80kmh in the traffic signal and 50mph in the GPS screen (left)



I get amazing MPG (32 - 35) at 45mph (5mph less than speed limit)

thanks for all the real world updates cubanomax, much appreciated.
what's your take on the Falken tires, do they handle well dry and wet ?
does your Mexico GT come with the 20" or 18" wheels ?

I couldn't stand the old CX-9 Dueler H/L's in the snow, absolutely worst tires ever.

also are they "mushy" when driven hard or handle like they are on rails ?
do the sidewalls get soft in hot weather ?

astriuminc said:

thanks for all the real world updates cubanomax, much appreciated.
what's your take on the Falken tires, do they handle well dry and wet ?
does your Mexico GT come with the 20" or 18" wheels ?

I couldn't stand the old CX-9 Dueler H/L's in the snow, absolutely worst tires ever.

also are they "mushy" when driven hard or handle like they are on rails ?
do the sidewalls get soft in hot weather ?

Click to expand...

I need to check my Tires because when I purchased the new GT the dealer give me 3 different brochures so I need to check the brand installed.

We have 20 inch wheels.

So far so good, very good grip (I have AWD). I would like to have some kind of indication (led, signal, graphic) to visualize when AWD is working. But the sensors I know are working because when I'm stopped in a High climb, we have some kind of electronic assistance (you can remove your foots from the pedal and the CX9 is fully stopped) - similar to Nissan Rogue. I don't know why Mazda don't advertise this feature.

This CX9 turbo engine has schizophrenia. There is way too much variation in the mpgs .... 10 mpg to 35 mpg?? WOW. The Motortrend test was right on the mark. No thank you! I will take a V6 any day.

http://www.motortrend.com/cars/mazd...051C95196B3FD126522EAB2C8C7A9B093596CE541ADD5

cubanomx said:

I need to check my Tires because when I purchased the new GT the dealer give me 3 different brochures so I need to check the brand installed.

We have 20 inch wheels.

So far so good, very good grip (I have AWD). I would like to have some kind of indication (led, signal, graphic) to visualize when AWD is working. But the sensors I know are working because when I'm stopped in a High climb, we have some kind of electronic assistance (you can remove your foots from the pedal and the CX9 is fully stopped) - similar to Nissan Rogue. I don't know why Mazda don't advertise this feature.

Click to expand...

That is called Hill Start Assist (HSA) in most brands. Mazda calls it Hill Launch Assist (HLA) https://www.mazdausa.com/vehicles/cx-9/specs. nothing to do with AWD

CrazyBiker said:

This CX9 turbo engine has schizophrenia. There is way too much variation in the mpgs .... 10 mpg to 35 mpg?? WOW. The Motortrend test was right on the mark. No thank you! I will take a V6 any day.

http://www.motortrend.com/cars/mazd...051C95196B3FD126522EAB2C8C7A9B093596CE541ADD5

Click to expand...

i think this just goes to show how different people drive. i have to admit, ever since i owned a hybrid in the past, i tend to try to hypermile a bit...not crazy hypermiling, but i do try to minimize my acceleration and braking. we just did a 300+ mile stretch on highway and ran into some stop-n-go traffic south of DC and we averaged 26 mpg on that stretch. i am pretty happy with that. i think the city mpg may be a little overstated if you are not trying to drive efficiently, but the highway EPA number (27 mpg for AWD) is pretty much spot on if you just use the adaptive cruise control (which i think tends to maximize efficiency if you keep it 65-75 mph).

We've only had our CX-9 Signature for a week now. I'd say it gets pretty much the mileage claimed. I've seen between 24.5 - 27 on the highway and between 17 - 22 putting around town. For those on the fence in regards to competitor V6's vs. this turbo 4, I will take the torque curve on this motor over any of the NA V6's. This vehicle is so relaxed in that 2-3K range that it simple 'drives' better. We didn't base our purchase decision based on the claimed EPA numbers. We thought the throttle tip and and general response of the motor felt much better than any of the NA V6's. So if you haven't driven one, don't write one off until you've done an honest back to back drive...and drive it the way you would drive normally. It's always tempting to test drive a vehicle and just floor it. All of them are going to be pretty quick, a few .5 sec or so faster in a stop light drag race, but I just don't see myself or my wife(its her rig) using our 3 row SUV for stop light drag racing. This motor is a dream in the real world. The throttle is just much more nature without that artificial over boost tip in that so many of the electronic throttle vehciles have today 4's or 6's. Count me impressed.