Does anyone else feel they were lied to with regard the fuel economy on their Mazda CX5? I purchased my Mazda CX5 2.5 AWD with salesman telling me that the fuel economy was; 7.4 litres of fuel per 100k is the government rating and the true average would be around 8.7 to 9.2 litres per 100k. At the time of purchase the average on the vehicle was showing 9.1 litres per 100k. After 5 months and 5,000 k's of driving the average is now 11.6 litres of fuel per 100k. Which is almost the same as my 11 year old 6 cylinder Ford Falcon which gives me 11.7 litres per 100k. I don't carry heavy loads or tow anything.
The dealer has checked the vehicle and tells me that there is nothing wrong with the vehicle. I purchased the vehicle thinking I would be saving approximately 20% in fuel costs in comparison to my old, comfortable, reliable, 11 year old Ford Falcon. I do the same routes and travel as I do with my Falcon. If the true economy is around 11.6 then that is what every Mazda dealer should be telling every prospective buyer what the true fuel economy is.
Would love to hear from anyone else with same issue and how they may have resolved it.
Bought the car new. Promised 6.4L per kilometer and after 5000km can't get more than 8.3. Understand car is fairly new and told by work mates it should improve after first service? My driving habits are better than the previous vehicle but consumption still higher than the previous 6.5? I see there is a class action suite in the states with the skyactive motor....?
- Richard H.,
Witbank, South Africa
Search CarComplaints.com for these popular complaint phrases...
A D V E R T I S E M E N T S
Does anyone else feel they were lied to with regard the fuel economy on their Mazda CX5? I purchased my Mazda CX5 2.5 AWD with salesman telling me that the fuel economy was; 7.4 litres of fuel per 100k is the government rating and the true average would be around 8.7 to 9.2 litres per 100k. At the time of purchase the average on the vehicle was showing 9.1 litres per 100k. After 5 months and 5,000 k's of driving the average is now 11.6 litres of fuel per 100k. Which is almost the same as my 11 year old 6 cylinder Ford Falcon which gives me 11.7 litres per 100k. I don't carry heavy loads or tow anything.
The dealer has checked the vehicle and tells me that there is nothing wrong with the vehicle. I purchased the vehicle thinking I would be saving approximately 20% in fuel costs in comparison to my old, comfortable, reliable, 11 year old Ford Falcon. I do the same routes and travel as I do with my Falcon. If the true economy is around 11.6 then that is what every Mazda dealer should be telling every prospective buyer what the true fuel economy is.
Would love to hear from anyone else with same issue and how they may have resolved it.
- colh, Gold Coast, Australia