I usually get well in excess of 40 mpg in mixed driving, rising to 44 - 45 on a long journey in summer.
These days, '44 - 45 on a long journey in summer' is not especially good economy, even for a 2-litre. Otherwise all that has been said above sounds like good advice.
Perhaps, but the CX-5 isn't a small car. The Mazda3 with the same spec and engine will likely get 10-15% more on a similar journey pattern and time of year, just by virtue of it being smaller, lighter and more streamlined.
I agree with many that C-Sector cars are well worth a look, as long as the boot (and access) are sufficient, given they cost about 10-20% less to buy and run. The CX-5 has a decent-sized boot, but it's not the largest in its class by any means, and a good number of C-sector cars have decent sized boots.
Personally speaking (even as a Mazda car owner and general fan of the brand), if I were the OP, I'd seriously consider getting a KIA Ceed or Sportage, given their mileage won't be huge and they come with a 100k/7 year warranty.
As also has been said, avoid the 'Sport' spec cars with big wheels/low profile (50 and below) tyres because they'll give an overly firm ride, poorer mpg and will be more susceptible to damage and need changing (at far greater expense) much more often than 'standard' wheels and tyres.
Most mid-spec cars (especially oriental ones, including both Kia/Hyundai and Mazda) will have more than enough kit.
One thing the OP will need to bear in mind is that many larger towns and cities, like London, will be introducing more stringent ULEZs, which rules out vehicles with diesel engines if they are not EU6 compliant and petrol ones that aren't EU4 (which could be upped in the not too distant future), so it's by far easier to source a petrol vehicle to meet those standards, and without having to break the bank to buy one that's far newer.
|
