Manual Transmission with the diesel?

Would've liked to see this as FWD but a sinking feeling tells me they're only going to release 2.2D in AWD with all the maintenance and care that entails. Can anyone maybe tell me different? Was wanting this to do 60,000+ KM's per year, getting AWD components serviced every however many miles could be a hassle. Also the tires can't be different in tread wear otherwise it'll destroy the diff, that means if I buy this AWD version and suck up the higher maint costs, basically be prepared to throw down for 2-4 tires at the first sign of heavy wear. This is the difference to me between an AWD and FWD cost saving diesel.

Having driven both petrol and diesel cars now for 47 years (i started driving late at 19), All my cars have been manuals, this is my first auto.

Both myself and wife will not be having another manual, or another NA engine, in fact i hopeing to source a suitable turbo petrol again for my next car, suitable to tow my 1700kg caravan.

But i do have sympathy for those who want to spend less money buying a manual, and saving 3mpg on fuel. So we have the choice, so should you, but we don't get the sport button on the auto, which would i guess be useful for towing.

J.R. said:

My wife and I both drive and prefer stick, so that's not an issue in my household.

Kaps, if you have no interest in the diesel or a stick... maybe this thread isn't for you? (lol)

Click to expand...

I wouldn't, the GLC diesel in the uk comes with more power and more torque, its a popular engine for towing.

bamirault said:

I already have serious interest in the diesel and would snap up one with a manual trans. My Miata is winter stored so my left leg is under exercised for half the year. Note that although the auto is not a deal breaker (I already drive a '13 CX-5 GT) I was considering replacing the current CUV with a Mercedes GLC 300 last year until the Canadian diesel release was delayed. Presented with a choice between diesels in an auto GLC and a manual CX-5, I'd take the Mazda.

Brian

Click to expand...

I only buy AWD cars now anyway, my last five have been AWD turbo cars.
Never had any extra maintenance costs with any of them. But i prefer the part time AWD, on demand systems to the fixed permanent 4wd.

Downside for some will be extra purchase cost and i believe around 80kg more in weight, and it uses around another 3mpg in fuel, but that's offset by the useful traction.

buckbumble said:

Would've liked to see this as FWD but a sinking feeling tells me they're only going to release 2.2D in AWD with all the maintenance and care that entails. Can anyone maybe tell me different? Was wanting this to do 60,000+ KM's per year, getting AWD components serviced every however many miles could be a hassle. Also the tires can't be different in tread wear otherwise it'll destroy the diff, that means if I buy this AWD version and suck up the higher maint costs, basically be prepared to throw down for 2-4 tires at the first sign of heavy wear. This is the difference to me between an AWD and FWD cost saving diesel.

Click to expand...

All of the vehicle manufacturers have a longer term plan to phase out manual transmission. They have gone just about as far as they can with internal combustion engines in terms of emissions and the next step is to phase out the uncontrollable weak link which is the driver and particularly those that think they are on some sort of race track. Lots of drivers of manuals think they are good at it but rarely get it anywhere near right in terms of correctly balancing revs and throttle v speed.

The only way is as the choke, take it away from the unpredictable bit. Point and steer will come soon and it's thanks to those that think they can when in fact they continuously demonstrate that they can't.

Kaps said:

Diesels are going to be hit hard in Europe soon. More tighter regulations and emissions control, harsher penalties. I dont think Mazda will stay in diesels for that long.
Clean EVs or Hybrids are the way forward. VW really hurt the trust of EU nations.

Click to expand...

I am worried that the growing backlash against diesel emissions in Europe after dieselgate will lead Mazda to abandon their plan to bring the diesel to the US. At the end of last year, after the 2017 CX-5 launch, several major cities announced their intention to ban diesels. Since then, more have been jumping on the bandwagon. And just the other day I heard that the UK is considering a mix of 'toxin taxes' and bans on diesels in cities, which would screw over current diesel owners.

For several years now I've been hoping there would be a diesel hatchback (I guess what they call a small SUV these days) or small wagon available when I was ready to buy another car. I used to travel to the UK frequently for work and loved some of the diesel engines I drove over there, especially the 1.6 and 2.0 offerings from Ford and VW. Over there they have the Ford Focus ST wagon with 2.0 diesel and Golf GTD, which would have been perfect for me, but they are never coming here. Right now, the best hope I have is the CX-5 diesel.

There's hardly been a word out of Mazda about the CX-5 diesel since November, which can't be a good sign.

Anchorman said:

All of the vehicle manufacturers have a longer term plan to phase out manual transmission. They have gone just about as far as they can with internal combustion engines in terms of emissions and the next step is to phase out the uncontrollable weak link which is the driver and particularly those that think they are on some sort of race track. Lots of drivers of manuals think they are good at it but rarely get it anywhere near right in terms of correctly balancing revs and throttle v speed.

Click to expand...

I have no doubt you are correct in that manual transmissions will be phased out so that manufacturers can chase trivial mpg improvements in government testing. That's how we ended up with stop-start, which pretty much nobody likes but it provides a 1 mpg improvement in city driving.

The problem I have with most automatic transmissions today is that their behavior is binary. At part throttle they just want to upshift as soon as they can, and then they will try stay in a higher gear unless you floor it, at which point they will downshift and rev out. They resist using the middle part of the rev range. When the driver is in control of gear selection, the driver can select shift points based on what they want to get out of the car. The driver knows things that an automatic transmission can't know, like when we're driving on hilly terrain, or about to make a pass, or squirt into a gap in traffic, or just want to drive aggressively through a section of corners and then cruise to the next section or corners, etc.

buckbumble said:

Would've liked to see this as FWD but a sinking feeling tells me they're only going to release 2.2D in AWD with all the maintenance and care that entails. Can anyone maybe tell me different? Was wanting this to do 60,000+ KM's per year, getting AWD components serviced every however many miles could be a hassle. Also the tires can't be different in tread wear otherwise it'll destroy the diff, that means if I buy this AWD version and suck up the higher maint costs, basically be prepared to throw down for 2-4 tires at the first sign of heavy wear. This is the difference to me between an AWD and FWD cost saving diesel.

Click to expand...

Rear diff fluid change once in a blue moon but that's about it. The only other major difference is lower MPG due to added weight/friction losses but you also get better traction for wet/snow/high speed etc. It's really not a big issue IMO.

xtrailman said:

Having driven both petrol and diesel cars now for 47 years (i started driving late at 19), All my cars have been manuals, this is my first auto.

Both myself and wife will not be having another manual, or another NA engine, in fact i hopeing to source a suitable turbo petrol again for my next car, suitable to tow my 1700kg caravan.

But i do have sympathy for those who want to spend less money buying a manual, and saving 3mpg on fuel. So we have the choice, so should you, but we don't get the sport button on the auto, which would i guess be useful for towing.

Click to expand...

Could care less about purchase cost or a couple MPG's here or there. Heck, I'd probably pay a bit extra for a stick (don't tell Mazda)! I want one because it's more fun and I have more control.

Speaking of $$ though, noticed diesel was $0.21 less per liter here in Vancouver yesterday. Sure would have preferred filling up my diesel CX5 yesterday!

I have just as much control with the auto, it does have a very good manual option, which is a dam site easier than crunching gears and pressing clutch pedals.
I regularly use the manual mode as in every time I use the car, I prefer more engine braking with my cars, especially as I don't find the brakes that good.

In the UK diesel is more expensive than petrol. Companies such as VAG have now said they are phasing out the diesel, so its defiantly on the cards in Europe for the diesel to start declining IMO.

J.R. said:

Rear diff fluid change once in a blue moon but that's about it. The only other major difference is lower MPG due to added weight/friction losses but you also get better traction for wet/snow/high speed etc. It's really not a big issue IMO.



Could care less about purchase cost or a couple MPG's here or there. Heck, I'd probably pay a bit extra for a stick (don't tell Mazda)! I want one because it's more fun and I have more control.

Speaking of $$ though, noticed diesel was $0.21 less per liter here in Vancouver yesterday. Sure would have preferred filling up my diesel CX5 yesterday!

Click to expand...

xtrailman said:

I have just as much control with the auto, it does have a very good manual option, which is a dam site easier than crunching gears and pressing clutch pedals.
I regularly use the manual mode as in every time I use the car, I prefer more engine braking with my cars, especially as I don't find the brakes that good.

Click to expand...

You don't have as much control with an auto - you can't skip up and down the box missing gears when necessary

If you're crunching gears, you're doing it wrong.

I engine brake all the time and have never had to change pads on a car, but if you can engine brake more easily than using the brakes, you need to see a mechanic.

lol

As for the diesel thing, I won't be buying another diesel or a manual.

Crunching gears is a term, I didn't mean it literally.

As for control this has been debating many times on many forums, and I'm firmly of the opinion that I can change gear quicker with my auto in manual that you can with a manual gear box. Even though I can't skip a gear, a simple push or pull changes gears just as quick, which is why formula 1 cars use this method, I guess.

Even better apparently so I've read is the CX-3 can also have paddles, although I thought it was a bit of a gimmick at first, it appears that the paddles can change gear even when in auto.

So defiantly superior to manual gears, and even more so with 8 and 9 speed autos. As I said just my own opinion, being once very anti auto, now converted. (burnout)

Sorry I don't understand your last comment in bold?

Ziggity said:

You don't have as much control with an auto - you can't skip up and down the box missing gears when necessary

If you're crunching gears, you're doing it wrong.

I engine brake all the time and have never had to change pads on a car, but if you can engine brake more easily than using the brakes, you need to see a mechanic.

lol

As for the diesel thing, I won't be buying another diesel or a manual.

Click to expand...

xtrailman said:

Crunching gears is a term, I didn't mean it literally.

As for control this has been debating many times on many forums, and I'm firmly of the opinion that I can change gear quicker with my auto in manual that you can with a manual gear box. Even though I can't skip a gear, a simple push or pull changes gears just as quick, which is why formula 1 cars use this method, I guess.

Even better apparently so I've read is the CX-3 can also have paddles, although I thought it was a bit of a gimmick at first, it appears that the paddles can change gear even when in auto.

So defiantly superior to manual gears, and even more so with 8 and 9 speed autos. As I said just my own opinion, being once very anti auto, now converted. (burnout)

Sorry I don't understand your last comment in bold?

Click to expand...

You said, "I prefer more engine braking with my cars, especially as I don't find the brakes that good.", implying your brakes have to be really bad for engine braking to be more effective

As for the rest, I can see your point; I'm half a million miles driving a manual and 10K, if that, in various autos so I'm pretty institutionalised I guess. The last auto I drove was a mercedes and I hated it. it didn't have paddles though.

Stop start and auto box’s aren’t anything to do with saving 1mpg, they are about emissions. I’m the furthest thing you can get from a tree hugger and get as sick of it as anyone else but when you look how many cars there are all carrying and burning fuel, it can’t go on. Because of this selfish attitude about wanting complete control - and that means driving it incorrectly because of getting some sort of thrill, these types of engines and transmissions will get phased out and its thanks to those that refuse to comply. Well done.

Both the xtrails and cx-5 brakes are not the best, compared to such as the Audi quattro I had, that's a fact, so using engine braking along with the brakes is a must for me, especially so when towing.

The auto changes down, but is too slow to give sufficient engine braking, its tuned for economy IMO.
If you don't believe me with the brakes just compare the stopping distances published with group tests.

I know I'm going to get lots of opposing views, but that where I stand. (burp)

Ziggity said:

You said, "I prefer more engine braking with my cars, especially as I don't find the brakes that good.", implying your brakes have to be really bad for engine braking to be more effective

As for the rest, I can see your point; I'm half a million miles driving a manual and 10K, if that, in various autos so I'm pretty institutionalised I guess. The last auto I drove was a mercedes and I hated it. it didn't have paddles though.

Click to expand...

xtrailman said:

As for control this has been debating many times on many forums, and I'm firmly of the opinion that I can change gear quicker with my auto in manual that you can with a manual gear box. Even though I can't skip a gear, a simple push or pull changes gears just as quick, which is why formula 1 cars use this method, I guess.

Click to expand...

Formula 1 gearboxes are electronically controlled sequential manual transmissions. They operate more like motorcycle transmissions than what we have in our cars. The closest thing we have in road cars are direct shift gearboxes, but DSGs have fallen out of favor.

Anyway, my wife has owned a couple of conventional hydraulic auto trans with manual controls (Audi and Subaru) and they shift quickly enough when they decide to shift, but sometimes they don't shift when you want them to. There are some annoying delays between 1st and 2nd and at part throttle when the revs were up. I'm not sure how common that is with other makes, but it hasn't made me want to give up driving a manual trans.

Anchorman said:

Stop start and auto boxs arent anything to do with saving 1mpg, they are about emissions. Im the furthest thing you can get from a tree hugger and get as sick of it as anyone else but when you look how many cars there are all carrying and burning fuel, it cant go on. Because of this selfish attitude about wanting complete control - and that means driving it incorrectly because of getting some sort of thrill, these types of engines and transmissions will get phased out and its thanks to those that refuse to comply. Well done.

Click to expand...

Stop-start produces more total hydrocarbon emissions and more NOx emissions than idling at stops (source). Stop-start improves fuel economy (and consequently reduces CO2) in city driving if you spend enough time stopped at traffic lights.

Dsg auto's are now very popular in the UK, so not out of favour here.

Manual trans are still common there too. The UK is the only place I've traveled where I could always get a rental with a manual. (cheers2)

There was a backlash over here against DSG after VW and Ford started making them standard equipment in a lot of cars. Seems like Americans expect their trannies to smooth as butter and if they feel a hard shift they think it's defective.

The early DSG dry boxes did have issues, but the later oil filled ones cope better, they are fitted in all manner of cars in Europe, I believe even Porsche fit one.

I wouldn't mind a diesel MT, but it all depends on MPG

After searching for about a year and continually waiting for a large enough wagon to replace our Ford Focus wagon, we gave in and bought a CX5. My 2 desires were cargo and MPG. The focus wagon was great at both of these. We bought a 16 CX5 manual 2.0 because of its MPG. We haven't driven it far, and this is my first full fill up (it was used and came with .75 of a tank). So far we have gone 25 miles in 50/50 highway/city driving and it claims 34.5 mpg. I like the manual because I can change shift points when I want and I think (only time will tell), that I can get better mpg than the car deciding when to shift.
Anyway if the diesel can top my regular mpg great, I'll be in. If the manual can best the auto in MPG, great I'm in.

With the manual you have the change gear dash indicator, and it definitely indicates that you can change up much earlier than the auto does, which I believe does give more MPG.
In fact I was surprised when I bought the auto have long it seemed to hold onto gears before changing up, auto seems to use the full torque at 2000rpm, while manual will indicate a change a lot earlier.

Manual diesel is at least 3mpg more economical IME

Typical read outs read at least 2.5mpg high.
My read outs with mainly local rural driving was 41 to 43mpg with the manual. And 38.5 to 40mpg with the auto. MPG increases with mileage between oil changes due to oil dilution. a by product of the system Mazda uses to clean the DPF. A DPF will also see you average read out plummet, a lot.

You have to accept that downside with the diesel. But it will still return more MPG than the petrol.

I regulary get 43 (US) to the gallon / 52 (UK)

(manual diesel 150bhp)