HELP! brand new 2015 - horrible mileage - 23mpg for highway
#41
Highway MPG Very Disappointing
I live in Florida where everyone drives 75mph on the highway.
My friends, who have Honda CR-Vs, Nissan Rogues, and Foresters, all get within a couple of miles of their EPA highway mileage ratings when driving at this speed (the CRV exceeds it's rating!).
My 2016 CX5 Grand Touring, which now has 23000 miles on it, has consistently only gotten 28.0 mpg when driving at this normal highway speed (20% below the EPA rating). I follow all the "tips" to improve mileage.
When I complained to the dealer (after 5000 miles) they said it would probably improve with time. This never happened.
I'd never buy another Mazda without first testing the mileage for myself on the highway.
My friends, who have Honda CR-Vs, Nissan Rogues, and Foresters, all get within a couple of miles of their EPA highway mileage ratings when driving at this speed (the CRV exceeds it's rating!).
My 2016 CX5 Grand Touring, which now has 23000 miles on it, has consistently only gotten 28.0 mpg when driving at this normal highway speed (20% below the EPA rating). I follow all the "tips" to improve mileage.
When I complained to the dealer (after 5000 miles) they said it would probably improve with time. This never happened.
I'd never buy another Mazda without first testing the mileage for myself on the highway.
Last edited by Suziesilverado; 05-03-2016 at 04:35 AM. Reason: spacing of text
#42
I'm assuming your measurement is by filling the tank or are you going off of the digital readout? Try holding a steady 70mph and resetting the "avg mpg". Tell us what you get after 10 miles on tha avg. readout. Above 75mph you will drop to 28 or so but at 65-70mph I routinely get 30-32mpg. For an SUV these are good numbers but speed is a major factor for any vehicle. Also, go to Fuelly.com to compare numbers and get tips.
I use an oil additive and the K&N air filter that both help me a wee bit. Just trying to determine if it's the car or not.
I use an oil additive and the K&N air filter that both help me a wee bit. Just trying to determine if it's the car or not.
#43
Please understand it is not physically possible for a K&N (or any other low restriction filter, or even no filter at all) to improve fuel economy. Why? Because modern fuel injected cars weigh the intake charge downstream of both the filter and the throttle body, as such, the proper air to fuel ratio will always be kept intact, regardless of how much or how little intake restriction exists upstream.
#44
Please understand it is not physically possible for a K&N (or any other low restriction filter, or even no filter at all) to improve fuel economy. Why? Because modern fuel injected cars weigh the intake charge downstream of both the filter and the throttle body, as such, the proper air to fuel ratio will always be kept intact, regardless of how much or how little intake restriction exists upstream.
Same with the oil additive. I see small gains with and see small loss without.
#45
Like I wrote before, there is literally a 0% chance a K&N filter will improve fuel economy; if you noticed a bump it was due to a different factor.
Lots of folks believe there are advantages of K&N filters, in the real world there are nothing but negatives. When I'm looking at used cars, if I see a K&N on it, I shut the hood and walk away, this regardless of how good a deal the rest of the car may be.
Lots of folks believe there are advantages of K&N filters, in the real world there are nothing but negatives. When I'm looking at used cars, if I see a K&N on it, I shut the hood and walk away, this regardless of how good a deal the rest of the car may be.
#46
Check date of original post. Just did trip going 75-80 highway from MD to PA to NJ. 28 mpg for tank. But have 2013 FWD w 2.0 engine, not the heavier AWD Grand Touring w 2.5
#47
Like I wrote before, there is literally a 0% chance a K&N filter will improve fuel economy; if you noticed a bump it was due to a different factor.
Lots of folks believe there are advantages of K&N filters, in the real world there are nothing but negatives. When I'm looking at used cars, if I see a K&N on it, I shut the hood and walk away, this regardless of how good a deal the rest of the car may be.
Lots of folks believe there are advantages of K&N filters, in the real world there are nothing but negatives. When I'm looking at used cars, if I see a K&N on it, I shut the hood and walk away, this regardless of how good a deal the rest of the car may be.
Getting back to Suzie's original problem... Did you try resetting the "avg MPG" readout while on the hwy?
Last edited by Sasha5; 05-07-2016 at 05:56 PM.
#48
The problem with low restriction air filters is they let a significant amount of dirt into the engine, and contrary to the popular misconception they save money, they don't. So, no improvement in fuel economy, no improvement in performance, and a significant reduction in filtering. What's to like?
#49
The problem with low restriction air filters is they let a significant amount of dirt into the engine, and contrary to the popular misconception they save money, they don't. So, no improvement in fuel economy, no improvement in performance, and a significant reduction in filtering. What's to like?