Ummm nope. I'm Cdn and I converted to miles per imperial gallon. Simple trick. Divide the mileage rating in l / 100 km into the number 281 and you get the approx. miles per imperial gallon.
Not to be a jerk about it, but I think you're missing my central point. If you Google about Mazda5 mileage seen by real people, you'll find that real-world mileage is somewhat (maybe even a bunch) less than the published figures, much as they are with the Santa Fe.
The 18-25 & 35 numbers posted are people's reported real-world US MPG values for the Mazda5 from edmonds.com. Published economy in US MPG for the Mazda5 on mazdausa.com are 22/28 for 5speed manual and 21/27 for 5speed auto with the standard YMMV disclaimer. Some folks are reporting upwards of 35MPusG on their trips and others doing 75-80mph are reporting ~30MPusG. Is that "poor" mileage? What do people think it should get such that the Mazda5 no longer rates "poor"?
*I* am saying that is interesting to try to compare the Santa Fe to the Mazda5 and with a bit of hocus pocus and spin worthy of a politician you can make them seem comparable. A little tongue-in-cheek perhaps?
That's just it, the hocus pocus part is comparing your 18 MPimpG vs the edmonds.com posters 18 MPusGs.
But, ya, the 2.5L should really help the Mazda5.
And Edmunds.com is an authority on cars? You probably think Consumers Reports is too.
Here's a post on Canadian Driver. It's a test report from Laurance Yap on the 2006 Mazda 5 GT:
http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/ly/06mazda5.htmAccording to that report,
Fuel consumption Mazda5
------------------------------------------
City: 10.6 L/100 km (27 mpg Imperial) Hwy: 8.0 L/100 km (35 mpg Imperial)
Again, another post on Canadian Driver, here's a test report on the 2007 Santa Fe in the New Car Buyer's Guide:
http://www.canadiandriver.com/buyers-guide/2007/hyundai/santa_fe.phpFuel consumption Santa Fe 3.3 litre engine
-----------------------------------------
City: 12.2 L/100 km (23 mpg Imp) Hwy: 8.8 L/100 km (32 mpg Imp)
Fuel consumption Santa Fe 3.3 AWD
----------------------------------------
City: 12.6 L/100 km (22 mpg Imp) Hwy: 9.0 L/100 km (31 mpg Imp)
Do you see any big differences? I certainly don't. Can't tell me we're comparing apples with oranges here. Plus people are given to great hyperbole when they are talking about their own fuel mileage. I alway take it with a grain of salt. It's like fishing stories. That's why we have manufacturers' ratings but even they have been open to some disrepute until recently. The manufacturer's ratings in Canada are dictated by MOT guidelines which have always been slightly more stringent than the EPA. Only recently has the EPA published new guidelines which have resulted in gas mileage figures being not as wildly optimistic as they were in the past. In fact, they're much closer to our MOT ratings and on the conservative side too. Thus, you can't fairly compare 2007 mileage ratings from Edmunds (ie: EPA numbers) with 2008 numbers since the testing methodology is completely different.
In the end, there's no way anyone is going to get 35 mpg in a Mazda5 unless its rolling downhill, with a tailwind, and at 70km/h.
I got 37.47 miles / imp. gal (7.5 l / 100 km) recently on a roundtrip to Kingston ON in my Mazda 3 GT 5 spd. I never exceeded 100 km/h and it certainly wasn't on the 401 where my normal speed is ~ 120 km/h. The Mazda5 uses the same engine, weighs more (1,556 kg vs. 1,340kg 5 spd MT and AC) and has a higher drag coefficient. I wonder how many of these people that are reporting astoundingly good fuel economy are taking careful records of their fuel mileage. I know I do.
BTW, I just read through about 100 posted review on the Mazda5 at Edmunds.com The ones who sounded like they were being honest about their real-world fuel economy reported numbers in the low 20's. A significant percentage, as it turns out.
/Eric