Automatic tranny, Shipo. I only occasionally utilize the auto stick and I'm pretty sure my wife never uses it...or actually knows that it's there. I'm taking it on a much longer jaunt in May, so I guess we'll see.

 

I've been keeping kind of an informal tally of mileage reports from Mazda5 owners, and as a general rule (and quite to the contrary of the official EPA numbers), the Automatic models return four or five miles per gallon less than the Manual models.

Not that you necessarily want to hear this, but your information is pretty much in line with what others have reported for their 2.5 liter Mazda5s with automatic transmissions.

 

Thanks shipo, I think. Yeah, not what I would have expected, especially dropping from a mid-size SUV with a V6 averaging 18-20 MPG, although I knew the gov't rating of 22/28 going into it. I was just hoping hwy MPG would have been just a couple more. It's a good thing to know I'm not alone in the life raft, though.

 

The fuel economy of the 2.5 liter Automatic Mazda5s is something of a mystery to me as well; consider the following:

• I moved to my 2.0 liter 2009 Mazda3 5-Speed manual from a 3.8 Dodge Grand Caravan which was averaging just a hair over 21 mpg for the last 100,000 miles we had it (my wife used it as her daily driver for its first 80,000 miles of life and I didn't track the mileage). Not great, but not too bad for a two ton minivan with a 3.8 liter V6 with plenty of torque.
• My Mazda3 has averaged right bang on about 30 miles per gallon for its first 57,000 miles, including the ~8,000 miles my teenage son put on it during his first couple of years of driving before he got his own car. I have managed to eek 39.xx mpg out of it on a long highway trip, but 35-36 is more typical.
• The Ford Fusion and the Mazda5 have the same basic engine but the Ford mill is tuned for 175 hp @6000 versus 157 hp @6000 (the Ford's torque is higher is well), and yet the Fusion is rated 5mpg higher than the Mazda5, and per numerous owner reports, I've heard the Fusion is capable of returning up to 35 miles per gallon on the highway. Could it be that the Mazda5 is way heavier than the Fusion? Nope, the Mazda5 weighs in at 3,457 pounds versus 3,446 for the Fusion; a difference of only 11 pounds.
• So why does the Mazda5 Automatic get such crummy mileage? I'm thinking the jury's still out on that one.

 

Hi. After reading the great oil debate I decided to check with Mazda.

Here's what Mazda says...

Dear Pete:

Thank you for contacting Mazda.

In regards to your inquiry, Mazda recommends you use SAE 0W-20 engine oil for your Mazda5 as per your owner's manual, which is synthetic oil. For additional technical questions, I recommend you contact your local dealership.

Hopefully this clears-up the questions.

 

I haven't checked, but could it be that the Mazda has a numerically higher final drive for that "Zoom-Zoom" factor?

 

Very good question. FWIW, I did notice that the Fusion has a 6-Speed automatic while the Mazda has only a 5-Speed automatic; seems to be a fair bet you're correct in that the Mazda has shorter gearing.

 

Hi. What does "shorter gearing" mean? I'm technically challenged.

Thanks very much...Pete

 

Shorter gearing means that the ratio between the number of engine revolutions and wheel revolutions is "shorter" in that the engine has to turn a higher number of revolutions for any given speed compared to another car. As an example, my Mazda3 turns right about 3,100 RPMs at 70 mph, my previous car turned about 2,250 at that same speed, hence the Mazda has "shorter" gearing. Said another way, my previous car had "longer legs" or "taller" gearing.

Make sense?

 

In short its automotive slang for a wider ratio final drive.
A simplier example would be a ratio of 4:1 vs. 3:1.
In a 4:1 ratio, the transmisson output shaft has to turn four times for the wheels to turn 360* once.
Vs. the 3:1 ratio where the output shaft only has to turn 3 times for the wheels to go around 1 full turn.

BTW: The slang term Shorter is usually in reference to how quickly the final drive gear selection helps the vehicle accelerate.
A higher ratio, such as our 4:1 example, is multiplying the torque output of the engine, which is essentially what a transmission and final drive gears do. The engine will rev to the gear change rpm quicker ("shorter" time between gear changes. Quicker acceleration) so you can change up to the next gear sooner (and at a lower ground speed, same rpm.)
The cost is higher engine rpm's for a given speed and of course lower fuel mileage.

See?