|
2016-2018 CX-9 mpg
I am curious what other owners are getting for their CX-9 mpg. I just bought a 2018 model last month and only driven mostly local, a little bit of freeway. So far 1st tank only gotten about 20-21 mpg. Mine is only Fwd so have to say kind of disappointed a little, thought it is rated for 22 local 28 freeway. Hoping maybe is because of break in? I only put in 400+ miles so far. |
Mine isn’t as high as hoped either
Hi! My 2016 has never gotten more than 26.5, and that was highway with just me and one suitcase in the car. Mostly I get 19 city and 21 highway. Very disappointing. |
My large 2-ton AWD is getting a very satisfactory 26+ mpg @ 80 mph. 2016 CX-9. I don't monitor non-highway driving...it's too variable. The roof crossbars take off about 1-1/2 mpg, so I keep them off when I don't need them. I haven't monitored the mpg with the roof cargo box installed.
|
Originally Posted by PTguy
(Post 168109)
My large 2-ton AWD is getting a very satisfactory 26+ mpg @ 80 mph. 2016 CX-9. I don't monitor non-highway driving...it's too variable. The roof crossbars take off about 1-1/2 mpg, so I keep them off when I don't need them. I haven't monitored the mpg with the roof cargo box installed.
|
I have the AWD vision and am getting around 22-24 in the city. I have not taken it on the highway yet.
|
Interesting the variable reports on this car. It does appear that the EPA estimates were a little on the heavy side. Their "average" estimate of 23 mpg might be tough if your applying much throttle and your highway speeds are more like 75 than 65. One would hope that a 4 cylinder engine in this car would have given better fuel economy than the Highlander but that's not the case. Would the CX-9 be better with a similar V6 to the one that Toyota has? Not sure but I know the driving experience is far better in the Mazda. I'll be interesting to see what Toyota does with the new Highlander when they re-do it.
|
So, after 2000 miles, I am getting about 23 MPG (22.7). This is calculated by gallons used and miles driven. The MPG has been getting better in each tank as well. 21 in the first tank and 24 in the last tank. All city driving so far.
|
I'm only about 1200 miles deep on my 2018 CX-9 GT AWD and the computer is telling me we are averaging 21.4 MPG with a solid mix of suburban and interstate driving at speeds of 70-75. I'll start doing proper tests with the next fill up I'm but wondering if people notice that the computer is low compared to real world mileage tests? I'd like to see a couple more combined MPG's. There should be a noticeable benefit to a 2.5 liter 4 cylinder over the V-6's out there in this class.
|
Originally Posted by montanaman
(Post 172801)
I'm only about 1200 miles deep on my 2018 CX-9 GT AWD and the computer is telling me we are averaging 21.4 MPG with a solid mix of suburban and interstate driving at speeds of 70-75. I'll start doing proper tests with the next fill up I'm but wondering if people notice that the computer is low compared to real world mileage tests? I'd like to see a couple more combined MPG's. There should be a noticeable benefit to a 2.5 liter 4 cylinder over the V-6's out there in this class.
My gas is also from Costco. Where we are located, premium is 2.19 a gallon and I can't beat that price! |
Originally Posted by dougal
(Post 172817)
I have found the computer at the moment is reporting a few tenths of MPG higher. That is, on my last fill up, I have 23.9 calculated and the computer was at 24.3. Honestly, this is not a big of a deal but each tank has been consistent. With my CX-5, the computer and manual mode calculation were always within 0.1 MPG when looking at two tanks. Right now, on the CX-9, my real mileage is lower by 0.4.
My gas is also from Costco. Where we are located, premium is 2.19 a gallon and I can't beat that price! |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:04 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands