US Diesel's big splash introduction

Diesels in USA are popular only for tow vehicles and that is usually high weight towing. The cost of Diesel usually runs about 25-30% higher then petrol and in some parts of the country is not sold at every gas station. I think some of the American Diesels of the 70s and 80s really turned people off to them, and they never recovered.

My friends family had a VW Rabbit (Forerunner to the Golf) and he got about 48mpg but we had to know where the diesel stations were. I remember pushing his car about 1/2 a mile one time when we didn't make it.

I wanted the diesel when i heard about it, but my few towings are light and far between, and not as many highway miles as i thought. Not sure a diesel would have made much sense for me.
 
They do say here that diesels are suited to more highway driving as you see the fuel economy benefits as the kilometres increase as well as towing
 
Diesels in USA are popular only for tow vehicles and that is usually high weight towing. The cost of Diesel usually runs about 25-30% higher then petrol and in some parts of the country is not sold at every gas station. I think some of the American Diesels of the 70s and 80s really turned people off to them, and they never recovered.

My friends family had a VW Rabbit (Forerunner to the Golf) and he got about 48mpg but we had to know where the diesel stations were. I remember pushing his car about 1/2 a mile one time when we didn't make it.

I wanted the diesel when i heard about it, but my few towings are light and far between, and not as many highway miles as i thought. Not sure a diesel would have made much sense for me.

Have driven a diesel lately? You haven’t.
I had the ‘79 diesel rabbit - quite different than the ‘14 TDI.
Here in the continental states diesel is available coast to coast without worry - fuel prices are sometimes equal to regular, sometimes equal to premium. It is rarely priced higher than premium.
It’s just a great driving experience due to torque. You wouldn’t need to tow to get excited.
 
Have driven a diesel lately? You haven’t.
I had the ‘79 diesel rabbit - quite different than the ‘14 TDI.
Here in the continental states diesel is available coast to coast without worry - fuel prices are sometimes equal to regular, sometimes equal to premium. It is rarely priced higher than premium.
It’s just a great driving experience due to torque. You wouldn’t need to tow to get excited.

I wasn't saying the experience on modern diesels are bad or undesirable. I do think others past experience turned them off. I was hoping for a CX-5 diesel, got tired of waiting.

But I can say that from Ohio to all of the east coast that Diesel fuel is 25-30% more expensive then regular. I don't put premium in passenger cars. Yes Diesel fuel is available coast to coast, but not at every station. And some parts of the country you need to know where to look.

In chicago you may be lucky, but in Ohio, we currently have regular at 2.25 and diesel at 3.08. Premium is not over $3. East coast states i visit are the same.
 
It handles worse though.



That is your personal opinion and not based on anything scientific or on a large scale survey.

Mazda tweaked the chassis to make it stiffer and then softened the ride slightly according to most written reviews. The G Vectoring while mostly indistinguishable to drivers does make the car feel like it drives on rails. That’s my observation.
 
Its a bit melodramatic. Its a car not a life.

A bit, but I agree they owe some communication. They gave in intro date, and let it pass with crickets. That is a matter of integrity for some people. The Mazda USA website has an email signup to be informed of all the latest news regarding the diesel, and hasn't once sent a single communication, in spite of the announced intro window coming and going.
 
They did this based on feedback from owners and reviewers of KE CX-5.

Yes and I actually like it. It’s a soft ride but not marshmallow like a Camry for example. Good road feel through the steering. I really think Mazda spent a lot of time getting it this way. It’s very rewarding if you go on a long trip with it.
 
My friends family had a VW Rabbit (Forerunner to the Golf) and he got about 48mpg but we had to know where the diesel stations were. I remember pushing his car about 1/2 a mile one time when we didn't make it.

.

500+ miles of range..that's just poor and there's definitely an app for that probably more like 50...
Diesel here runs about the same as premium which is in the 15-20% range..seasonally a bit high with the heating oil draw down.
 
Last edited:
That is your personal opinion and not based on anything scientific or on a large scale survey.

Mazda tweaked the chassis to make it stiffer and then softened the ride slightly according to most written reviews. The G Vectoring while mostly indistinguishable to drivers does make the car feel like it drives on rails. That’s my observation.

It's a cold hard fact backed by scientific method and data and testing.
 
Hydrogen OR gasoline. THAT is amazing.

I saw that as well. It’s quite fascinating. They have three platforms that are already being used in Japan. The hydrogen/gasoline engine already mentioned, a hybrid platform and a PHEV platform.

I’ll bet Toyota has interest in this as well.
 
Can you post this data for us so we can see it ?

Sure can: http://www.motortrend.com/cars/mazda/cx-5/2017/2017-mazda-cx-5-grand-touring-awd-first-test-review/

Across the board, the only test it could come close to the previous gen was a tie in lateral g skid pad numbers. It stopped worse, turned worse, accelerated worse , changed direction worse...

Most new models follow the “bigger and faster is better” mantra, but not the Mazda CX-5. We tested an identically equipped 2016 Mazda CX-5 Grand Touring AWD about a year ago, so we can directly compare the performance of the newcomer to its predecessor. Despite the 2017 CX-5 Grand Touring AWD’s 3-horsepower advantage, its extra 141 pounds of curb weight work against it. The 0–60-mph acceleration run takes the new CX-5 8.4 seconds to complete compared to the old CX-5’s 7.8-second run. The same story continues at the dragstrip. The 2017 CX-5 needs 16.4 seconds to run through the quarter mile, hitting 83.8 mph; its slightly older brother needs 16.0 seconds and blows through the gates at 85.0 mph.

The same trend continues through the rest of our instrumented tests. In 60–0 braking the 2017 CX-5 needed 126 feet to come to a complete stop, 10 feet longer than its predecessor. Although the new CX-5 matched the old in skidpad performance (0.81 g average), it weirdly trailed far behind in the figure eight—28.5 seconds at 0.58 g average compared to the 2016 CX-5’s 28.0 second at 0.59 g performance.


Sorry bout that.
 
Last edited:
Back