Buy a new 2017 or 2018 Grand Touring?

Buy a new 2017 or 2018?

  • 2017 CX-5 Grand Touring

    Votes: 16 61.5%
  • 2018 CX-5 Grand Touring

    Votes: 10 38.5%

  • Total voters
    26

TommyChung71

Member
:
Mazda 3
Scenario: youre buying a new CX-5. Do you buy the 2017 for slightly cheaper that they are trying to move, or do you buy the 2018 that has the cyclinder technology?
 
I just bought the 2018 GS over getting a 2017 GS. I wanted the very latest and greatest across the board.
 
I’d have the latest model every time. This CD phobia is only conjecture and you get all the latest production and specification updates.
 
We picked up a 2017 GT AWD in late December specifically because there is zero benefit on an AWD CX-5 to have CD. Plus, the one we purchased only had 5 miles on it.
 
We picked up a 2017 GT AWD in late December specifically because there is zero benefit on an AWD CX-5 to have CD. Plus, the one we purchased only had 5 miles on it.

There’s no benefit to you but there’s a big benefit to the environment.
 
1 whole MPG Anchorman? Isn't that supposedly the gain?

If getting a Sport or Touring, I'd go 18. If GT, 17.
 
1 whole MPG Anchorman? Isn't that supposedly the gain?

If getting a Sport or Touring, I'd go 18. If GT, 17.

At face value, yeah, it doesn't look like much. But extrapolate it out over 120,000 cars per year, assuming 12,000 miles per year average, and each consumer would save about 18.5 gallons, * 120,000 vehicles = 2,220,000 gallons of gas saved per year.
 
At face value, yeah, it doesn't look like much. But extrapolate it out over 120,000 cars per year, assuming 12,000 miles per year average, and each consumer would save about 18.5 gallons, * 120,000 vehicles = 2,220,000 gallons of gas saved per year.
wrxray got a 2017 CX-5 GT AWD. For AWD CX-5 he said it correctly, theres zero MPG benefit with CD on combined fuel economy according to EPA. :)

We picked up a 2017 GT AWD in late December specifically because there is zero benefit on an AWD CX-5 to have CD. Plus, the one we purchased only had 5 miles on it.
 
It all things were equal i would say 2018, but if 2017 is cheaper and has better finance offers, then 2017 all the way. Do you want the vent closure, lighted window buttons, and auto windows on all 4 - if so then 2018 is the pick. But if money is the driver, 2017.

I picked up a 2017 for a great deal but i could have done 2018. My deal was too good to pass up on existing 2017. 2017 is a year old already, so more depreciation immediately, but also instant low mileage.

There are not enough "new" features on the GT 2018 to warrant the additional expense if a like 2017 is heavily discounted. 2018 now has 0% financing in my area, so if dealer will discount the '18 just as much, go for that.
 
wrxray got a 2017 CX-5 GT AWD. For AWD CX-5 he said it correctly, there’s zero MPG benefit with CD on combined fuel economy according to EPA. :)

hmm, i thought for 2018 the average for AWD went back up to 26, which was down to 25 for 2017 AWD due to all the extra weight?

that's what i based my math on.
 
yup.. just checked. 2017 AWD is listed as 23 city, 29 highway, which i believe had 25 combined.

2018 AWD is back to 24 city, 30 highway... just like Gen 1.

(drive2)
 
yup.. just checked. 2017 AWD is listed as 23 city, 29 highway, which i believe had 25 combined.

2018 AWD is back to 24 city, 30 highway... just like Gen 1.

(drive2)

Post from other thread re comparison between 2017 & 2018 Canadian version where there fuel economy improvement

Canadian CX-5 Fuel Figures:

2017 Model with no Cylinder Deactivation:

bhdmxe.png


2018 Model with Cylinder Deactivation:

1pgzdt.jpg

FWD improves 0.5L/100KM and 0.1L/100KM respectively
AWD improves 0.4L/100KM and 0.4L/100KM respectively

The FWD only gets a decent improvement in the city figure whilst the AWD gets the same improvement both city and highway figures.
 
I believe the '18 has some QOL differences too doesn't it? Like auto up/down for all windows as an example that the '17 does not have.

There are the big items like cylinder deactivation that's a consideration, but there are those smaller things too.

Myself? Don't know. I'd probably look for a gen 1. I'm just not big on the gen 2's styling.
 
Choose the car you want. The tail does not wag the dog. My experience with zamda is they make more options std as years progress. My touring has heated seats. Probably a 800 dollar value aftermarket if done correctly. Get used 20 times a year. Older MY touring did not have that.

If they release a cheaper trim SV with safety tech as I read somewhere, it's more valuable to me.
 
yup.. just checked. 2017 AWD is listed as 23 city, 29 highway, which i believe had 25 combined.

2018 AWD is back to 24 city, 30 highway... just like Gen 1.

(drive2)
From EPAs FuelEconomy.gov:

attachment.php

attachment.php

38258EB1-6D2E-48AC-9122-6CEB20224806.png24C30351-3A5D-40D0-9865-A12C12C8B43F.png
 
I believe the '18 has some QOL differences too doesn't it? Like auto up/down for all windows as an example that the '17 does not have.

There are the big items like cylinder deactivation that's a consideration, but there are those smaller things too.

Myself? Don't know. I'd probably look for a gen 1. I'm just not big on the gen 2's styling.

+1..short of diesel's appearance on gen2..I'm 16.5>17>18 at the moment..obviously specific find/deal dependent
 
hmm, i thought for 2018 the average for AWD went back up to 26, which was down to 25 for 2017 AWD due to all the extra weight?

that's what i based my math on.

The 2018 is heavier then the 2017 - listed in another thread. About 38 pounds heavier if i recall, but not sure why.
 
Back