Mitsubishi ASX vs Mazda CX-5 fuel economy

When comparing compact SUVs, fuel economy is often a top priority for budget-conscious drivers, and the Mitsubishi ASX and Mazda CX-5 present distinct options in this segment. Both vehicles are known for their practicality, but they differ significantly in efficiency, engine technology, and overall running costs.

While the ASX typically offers a more economical base engine focused on city driving, the CX-5 balances performance with competitive fuel consumption through its SkyActiv technology.

Examining their real-world mpg ratings, fuel tank capacities, and hybrid alternatives helps buyers determine which model delivers long-term savings without sacrificing daily usability. This comparison highlights the key figures and factors that set these two popular crossovers apart.

Fuel Economy Comparison: Mitsubishi ASX vs. Mazda CX-5

When comparing the Mitsubishi ASX vs. Mazda CX-5 fuel economy, it is essential to note that these two SUVs sit in different segments, which directly impacts their efficiency. The Mitsubishi ASX is a compact SUV that typically prioritizes affordability and lower consumption, while the Mazda CX-5 is a larger crossover focus on performance and premium features.

Generally, the ASX offers better miles per gallon (MPG) in both city and highway driving due to its smaller engine and lighter weight, whereas the CX-5, with its more powerful Skyactiv engines, tends to be slightly thirstier but compensates with superior driving dynamics.

City Driving Efficiency: Mitsubishi ASX vs. Mazda CX-5

In urban environments, the Mitsubishi ASX often excels with its smaller engine options, typically achieving around 24-26 MPG in the city, depending on the drivetrain.

The Mazda CX-5, especially in its base 2.5-liter configuration, usually records 22-24 MPG in the city, making it less economical for stop-and-go traffic. The ASX’s lighter curb weight and smaller displacement give it a clear advantage in congested areas, while the CX-5’s more refined transmission and higher torque can offer a smoother ride at the cost of fuel.

Highway Fuel Consumption: A Closer Look

On the highway, the gap in fuel economy between these two models narrows significantly. The Mitsubishi ASX can achieve 30-33 MPG on open roads, which is respectable for a compact SUV.

Meanwhile, the Mazda CX-5 often reaches 28-31 MPG on the highway, thanks to its efficient Skyactiv-G technology and optional cylinder deactivation. While the ASX remains the leader in raw numbers, the CX-5’s highway performance is competitive, especially when considering its larger size and better aerodynamics at sustained speeds.

Real-World Fuel Economy and Driving Impact

Real-world tests often reveal that the Mitsubishi ASX delivers closer to its EPA estimates under normal driving conditions, making it a reliable choice for budget-conscious drivers.

In contrast, the Mazda CX-5 tends to vary more, with aggressive driving or heavy loads reducing MPG by up to 10-15%. The CX-5’s all-wheel-drive models also consume more fuel than the ASX’s front-wheel-drive variants. However, the CX-5 offers a more engaging drive, which some owners consider a fair trade-off for slightly lower efficiency.

Detailed Fuel Economy Comparison: Mitsubishi ASX vs. Mazda CX-5

Which offers better fuel economy, the Mitsubishi ASX or the Mazda CX-5?

When comparing fuel economy, the Mitsubishi ASX generally offers slightly better fuel efficiency than the Mazda CX-5, primarily due to its smaller engine options and lighter vehicle weight.

The Mitsubishi ASX, particularly with its 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine, achieves an EPA-estimated combined fuel economy of around 26 to 28 miles per gallon (mpg) depending on the drivetrain, with front-wheel-drive variants toward the higher end. In contrast, the Mazda CX-5, which is larger and heavier, and typically equipped with a 2.5-liter four-cylinder engine, delivers an EPA-estimated combined fuel economy of approximately 24 to 26 mpg for front-wheel-drive models, and slightly less for all-wheel-drive versions.

The ASX’s smaller displacement and less powerful output contribute to fewer fuel consumption during typical driving conditions, whereas the CX-5’s focus on performance and refinement leads to a modest penalty in fuel economy. However, real-world results can vary based on driving habits, maintenance, and specific trim levels, with the CX-5’s Skyactiv technology helping to mitigate some efficiency losses.

Isuzu D-Max vs Toyota Hilux reliability Australia

Overall, the Mitsubishi ASX provides superior fuel economy in this direct comparison, though the difference is not drastic and may be offset by other factors such as space or driving dynamics.

Engine Options and Their Impact on Fuel Efficiency

Comparing the powertrain choices between the Mitsubishi ASX and Mazda CX-5

The Mitsubishi ASX is primarily offered with a single 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine, which is tuned for balance and economy, producing around 148 horsepower. This engine is paired with a continuously variable transmission (CVT) that optimizes fuel usage by keeping the engine in its most efficient rev range.

The Mazda CX-5, on the other hand, offers a choice of engines, including a standard 2.5-liter four-cylinder with approximately 187 horsepower and an optional 2.5-liter turbocharged unit. The larger displacement and higher output in the CX-5 necessitate more fuel per mile, especially under acceleration, while the ASX’s smaller engine and CVT combination require less fuel for similar commuting tasks.

Additionally, the CX-5’s Skyactiv-G technology improves efficiency through high compression ratios and advanced injection, yet it still cannot match the ASX’s lower fuel consumption figures due to the inherent size and power differences.

1. The ASX’s 2.0-liter engine and CVT achieve a combined EPA rating of up to 28 mpg, while the CX-5’s 2.5-liter engine with a six-speed automatic achieves up to 26 mpg.
2. In city driving, the ASX often reaches around 24 mpg, whereas the CX-5 typically manages 22 mpg under similar conditions.
3. On highways, the ASX can achieve up to 31 mpg, slightly surpassing the CX-5’s 30 mpg rating for the base engine.

Vehicle Weight, Size, and Aerodynamics in Fuel Consumption

Evaluating how physical attributes influence fuel economy

The Mitsubishi ASX is a subcompact crossover with a curb weight ranging from approximately 2,900 to 3,100 pounds, depending on the configuration, and it features a smaller frontal area that reduces aerodynamic drag. The Mazda CX-5, classified as a compact crossover, is heavier, weighing between 3,400 and 3,700 pounds, and has a larger body that increases air resistance at higher speeds.

Lower weight directly reduces the energy required for acceleration and climbing, which is a key reason the ASX uses less fuel in stop-and-go traffic.

Additionally, the ASX’s narrower tires and slightly lower ride height contribute to less rolling resistance, further improving efficiency. The CX-5, while benefiting from aerodynamic refinements like underbody covers and active grille shutters, cannot fully compensate for its greater mass, leading to higher fuel consumption across driving cycles.

1. The ASX’s lighter curb weight (up to 600 pounds less than the CX-5) provides a direct advantage in city fuel economy by up to 2-3 mpg.
2. Aerodynamic drag on the CX-5 is higher due to its larger profile, reducing highway fuel economy by about 1-2 mpg compared to the ASX.
3. Tire rolling resistance is lower in the ASX due to standard 16- or 18-inch tires versus the CX-5’s 17- to 19-inch options, improving overall efficiency.

Real-World Driving Conditions and Fuel Economy Variations

Analyzing how everyday use affects fuel comparisons

In real-world driving, the Mitsubishi ASX tends to maintain its fuel economy advantage across mixed conditions, especially in urban environments where stop-start traffic is common. The ASX’s lighter build and CVT allow for smoother, more efficient power delivery, often yielding around 25-27 mpg in suburban commuting.

The Mazda CX-5, when driven conservatively, can get close to its EPA ratings, but its larger engine requires more fuel during frequent acceleration, with typical real-world results of 23-25 mpg in similar settings.

On long highway trips, the difference narrows, as both vehicles can achieve their respective highway estimates, but the ASX still edges ahead due to lower aerodynamic drag. Factors such as cargo load, use of air conditioning, and terrain can amplify the gap, with the CX-5 suffering more efficiency loss under heavy loads or uphill driving.

1. In city traffic, the ASX consistently delivers 24-26 mpg, while the CX-5 often falls to 21-23 mpg in dense conditions.
2. Under highway cruising at 70 mph, the ASX averages 29-31 mpg, compared to the CX-5’s 28-30 mpg.
3. With a full load of passengers and cargo, the CX-5’s fuel economy drops by up to 2 mpg more than the ASX, highlighting the weight penalty.

How does the fuel economy of the Mitsubishi ASX compare to that of the Mazda CX-5?

When comparing the fuel economy of the Mitsubishi ASX and the Mazda CX-5, the Mazda CX-5 generally offers better fuel efficiency across its engine options, while the Mitsubishi ASX tends to be slightly less efficient, particularly in older models.

For example, the 2023 Mitsubishi ASX with a 2.0-liter petrol engine and front-wheel drive achieves an official combined fuel consumption of approximately 7.0 liters per 100 kilometers (L/100 km), depending on the specific market. In contrast, the 2023 Mazda CX-5 with a 2.5-liter petrol engine and front-wheel drive records an official combined figure of about 7.4 L/100 km, but its Skyactiv-X technology in some variants can reduce consumption to around 6.5 L/100 km.

The ASX is lighter and smaller, which helps its economy, but the CX-5 uses advanced engine technologies like cylinder deactivation and compression ignition to improve efficiency despite its larger size. Overall, while both are compact SUVs, the CX-5 tends to be more economical in real-world driving, especially with diesel or high-efficiency petrol options, whereas the ASX is more affordable but less fuel-efficient.

Fuel Economy Comparison Based on Engine Options

Petrol Engine Variants

The Mitsubishi ASX primarily uses a 2.0-liter petrol engine in most markets, producing around 150 horsepower, with a combined fuel economy of approximately 7.0 to 7.5 L/100 km.

Best SUV between Mazda CX-5 and Mitsubishi ASX

The Mazda CX-5 offers multiple petrol engines, including a 2.0-liter and a more powerful 2.5-liter, with the 2.5-liter achieving around 7.4 L/100 km and the 2.0-liter reaching as low as 6.8 L/100 km with front-wheel drive. The CX-5's Skyactiv technology, including a high compression ratio and direct injection, enhances efficiency, while the ASX's older engine design is less advanced.

1. The ASX 2.0-liter petrol averages 7.0 L/100 km combined in official tests.
2. The CX-5 2.0-liter petrol can achieve 6.8 L/100 km combined.
3. The CX-5 2.5-liter petrol averages 7.4 L/100 km combined.

Diesel and Alternative Fuel Options

The Mazda CX-5 is available with a 2.2-liter turbo diesel engine in many regions, achieving an impressive combined fuel economy of around 5.5 to 6.0 L/100 km, making it significantly more efficient for long-distance driving.

The Mitsubishi ASX lacks a diesel option in most markets, relying solely on petrol powertrains, which limits its fuel-saving potential for highway use. This gives the CX-5 a clear advantage for buyers prioritizing lower fuel costs on longer journeys.

1. The CX-5 diesel produces about 5.5 L/100 km on the highway.
2. The ASX petrol averages 7.0 L/100 km combined.
3. The CX-5 diesel offers up to 30% better fuel economy than the ASX petrol on motorways.

Real-World Driving and Efficiency Factors

Urban vs. Highway Fuel Consumption

In city driving, the Mitsubishi ASX often performs comparably to the Mazda CX-5 due to its lighter weight, with both achieving around 8.5 to 9.0 L/100 km in stop-start traffic. However, on highways, the CX-5 excels with its advanced aerodynamics and engine technology, often achieving 6.0 to 6.5 L/100 km, while the ASX settles at about 7.0 L/100 km.

Real-world tests show that the CX-5's fuel economy is more consistent across different driving conditions, whereas the ASX tends to decrease efficiency more noticeably in high-speed driving.

1. City driving for both models averages 8.5 to 9.0 L/100 km.
2. Highway economy for the CX-5 is 6.0 to 6.5 L/100 km.
3. Highway economy for the ASX is about 7.0 L/100 km.

Impact of Drivetrain and Weight

The Mitsubishi ASX is typically lighter, weighing around 1,350 kilograms, which aids fuel economy, especially in urban settings, but its front-wheel-drive system lacks the efficiency-boosting features found in the CX-5.

The Mazda CX-5 weighs more, around 1,500 kilograms, but compensates with aerodynamic design, lower rolling resistance tires, and optional all-wheel drive that minimally impacts fuel consumption due to intelligent systems that reduce drag. The CX-5's weight penalty is offset by its more efficient drivetrain, resulting in similar or better overall fuel economy than the lighter ASX.

1. The ASX weighs about 1,350 kg versus the CX-5's 1,500 kg.
2. The CX-5's all-wheel-drive system adds only 0.2 L/100 km to consumption.
3. The CX-5 achieves 7.4 L/100 km despite being heavier.

Technology and Features Affecting Efficiency

Engine Technologies

The Mazda CX-5 incorporates Skyactiv-X technology in some models, which uses spark-controlled compression ignition to optimize combustion, achieving fuel economy as low as 6.5 L/100 km combined.

The Mitsubishi ASX relies on more conventional MIVEC variable valve timing, which improves efficiency but cannot match the advanced compression ignition system. Additionally, the CX-5 includes cylinder deactivation to shut down two cylinders under light load, while the ASX lacks such features, making the CX-5 more frugal in everyday driving.

1. The CX-5 Skyactiv-X achieves 6.5 L/100 km combined.
2. The ASX MIVEC engine averages 7.0 L/100 km combined.
3. The CX-5 cylinder deactivation saves up to 10% in fuel on highways.

Transmission and Driving Modes

Both vehicles offer automatic transmissions, but the Mazda CX-6's 6-speed automatic is tuned for better efficiency with quick gear shifts and an efficient lock-up torque converter, while the Mitsubishi ASX's CVT (continuously variable transmission) can be less efficient under heavy acceleration due to increased engine noise and slip.

The CX-5 also features drive modes like Sport and Normal, which adjust throttle response and gear ratios for improved fuel economy, whereas the ASX has a simpler setup. Real-world testing shows the CX-5 automatic is about 0.5 L/100 km more efficient

Frequently Asked Questions

How does the fuel economy of the Mitsubishi ASX compare to the Mazda CX-5?

The Mitsubishi ASX typically offers better fuel economy than the Mazda CX-5, especially in city driving. With its smaller engine and lighter design, the ASX achieves around 26-30 mpg combined, depending on the drivetrain. The CX-5, though more powerful, averages roughly 24-28 mpg combined. However, the CX-5’s SkyActiv technology helps narrow the gap on highways.

Does the Mazda CX-5 have better highway fuel efficiency than the Mitsubishi ASX?

Yes, the Mazda CX-5 often matches or slightly outperforms the Mitsubishi ASX on highways due to its advanced SkyActiv-G engine and efficient transmission. While the ASX gets about 31-33 mpg on highways, the CX-5 can achieve 30-31 mpg, but its superior torque and aerodynamics make long trips more economical. Real-world tests show the CX-5 often exceeds EPA estimates in steady driving.

Which model offers better fuel savings for city driving: ASX or CX-5?

The Mitsubishi ASX is more fuel-efficient in city conditions, averaging about 25-27 mpg, whereas the Mazda CX-5 typically gets 22-24 mpg. The ASX’s lighter curb weight and smaller 2.0-liter engine reduce fuel consumption in stop-and-go traffic. However, the CX-5’s i-Stop system (idling stop) helps offset some losses. For daily urban commutes, the ASX clearly saves more at the pump.

Best Mitsubishi ASX model for first car

Are there hybrid or diesel options that improve fuel economy for these SUVs?

No, neither the Mitsubishi ASX nor Mazda CX-5 offers hybrid or diesel variants in most markets. The ASX is only available with gasoline engines, while the CX-5 previously had a diesel option in some regions (now discontinued). For better fuel economy, choose the ASX’s 2WD version for optimized efficiency. The CX-5’s gasoline models benefit from cylinder deactivation on certain trims to boost MPG.