2014 CX-5 2.5L Skyactiv Performance

S

STE92VE

Zoom Zoom Zoom
:
2014 CX-5 AWD GT w/Tech Pkg
After test driving the current CX-5 with the 2.0L, I was OK with the vehicles' performance for the type of driving that's planned for it. However, as a Tim the Toolman type of guy, if more power is available, I would prefer to go that route and I'm glad I can wait for the 2014 CX-5 to be available with the 2.5L engine.

I've done a thorough search and have come up empty with 0-60 times or any other performance numbers for the new engine other than the 20% increase in HP & torque. I would like to know what "bang for buck" we can expect from the 2.5L. Anyone have additional info?
 
Compare it to the competitors CUV's with 2.4 + liter engines and 180 horsepower + or - and expect 0-60 between 8 and 9 seconds just like them. The 2.0 liter CX5 in the Car and Driver comparison wasn't the slowest CUV in every category even though it had the least horsepower and torque. In that magazine article they got 0-60 in 9.4 seconds for a CX5 with AWD. I tested my FWD Sport with the G-tech I have and got 0-60 in 8.44 seconds. I think the thing you may notice more with the bigger engine is the increase on torque under normal driving conditions and not the all out pedal to the metal acceleration.
 
I know a bit about Long Island driving, though I mostly drive in the NYC area. I would wait for the 2.5L if at all possible. The 2.0L becomes less of an engine in tighter traffic, especially if you are not a patient, just go with the flow type of driver. It's pretty common for people to plod along in the center or left lanes around here without moving out of the way of faster traffic, so I change lanes pretty often. However I find the faster traffic behind me to come up closer to me in the lane change than my previous vehicle, illiciting a high beam flash on occasion. It happened very rarely on my last car, probably less than 5 times in the 4 years I had it. I have had the CX-5 for three months and it's already been at least five times.

Now my last car wasnt that fast by any means, though it had a lot of low end torque (it was a v6 on a pickup). So I think I am more searching for a particular cruising speed that will get me into the meatier torque range that I'm used to that allows for some acceleration without a downshift. So, this makes me change lanes quite a bit more to get there. At lower RPMs, this 2.0L dogs. The 2.5L should clean that issue up nicely.

v8toilet, you say the same thing - "increase in torque under normal driving conditions" Having that torque available with just a dab of the accelerator pedal is always welcome.
 
Gregx-5 said:
However I find the faster traffic behind me to come up closer to me in the lane change than my previous vehicle, illiciting a high beam flash on occasion. It happened very rarely on my last car, probably less than 5 times in the 4 years I had it. I have had the CX-5 for three months and it's already been at least five times.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you're not downshifting when you need to pass or accelerate. There's no good reason to avoid downshifting if you want to pass - that's what gears are for and the CX-5 has six of them. Sixth is primarily for maintaining speed at an economical fuel consumption rate. The lower gears are for accelerating. If you like passing, switching lanes and generally driving in a sporty manner it makes no sense to leave it in sixth gear - the CX-5 is not designed to be used like that.
 
Lane etiquette and lane discipline on US freeways seems to be rare in US (to put it politely), being somewhat on topic.

Agreed, given wide ratio 6 speed tranny, 6th is for cruising only. Sufficient pedal pressure will get the necessary downshift(s) with the automatic. Otherwise with the manual, manually downshift (this is not the ideal tranny for lazy drivers obviously)

Note: I have 2 rwd sport sedans (only 200 pounds heavier than CX-5) with engines with much higher torque. Sure the driving effect is much more effortless, but the fuel economy with premium fuel is considerably different.
 
Last edited:
Since I wrote that post, I've been changing my habits. I've been staying away from 6th gear and it's made a positive difference. The mpgs havent suffered much for it either.
 
I'm thinking the 2.5 should cut about a full second off the 0-60 time, on average. But more importantly, I think the seat-of-the-pants improvement in "feel" should be substantial.
 
Indeed, increased torque will certainly add more of a "Stab the petal and get power right the f* now" factor to the driving experience, rather than having to wait for or pop a quick downshift. Also why I'm willing to give it a year or so before pulling the trigger on my CX-5 purchase in hopes of the diesel. Definitely test driving the 2.5L as soon as my local dealership gets one, though.
 
Thanks for your comments. I would think that the AT in the CX-5 is similar to others in that it is adaptive to the driving habits of the principle operator. If a more spirited driver is behind the wheel, it should adjust the shift points accordingly. Am I right on this point with the CX-5?

On a side note, I contacted a local Mazda dealer and asked if they would notify me when the 2014 CX-5 with 2.5L engine will be available and, don't choke on your lunch now, this is what they replied:
"they actually comes out in 2014"

With the extensive research that I do before purchasing a vehicle, I often know more about what I'm buying than the person I'm buying it from. I plan an forwarding the press releases form the LA Auto Show to this imbecile and enlighten them.
 
STE92VE said:
Thanks for your comments. I would think that the AT in the CX-5 is similar to others in that it is adaptive to the driving habits of the principle operator. If a more spirited driver is behind the wheel, it should adjust the shift points accordingly. Am I right on this point with the CX-5?

.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's described in owners manual and has been copy/pasted by me into this cX-5 forum.
 
STE92VE said:
On a side note, I contacted a local Mazda dealer and asked if they would notify me when the 2014 CX-5 with 2.5L engine will be available and, don't choke on your lunch now, this is what they replied:
"they actually comes out in 2014"
Click to expand...

Follow up: After sending them all the press releases from the LA Auto Show stating that it would be available in January, this was their next comment:
"yes that is wrong, we would know when we have a new vehicle or when its expected to arrive"

Maybe this person is an ex-CIA operative and is sworn to secrecy....
 
paris1 said:
I think I know what section you're referring to in the OM, but could you repost it here?
Click to expand...

Yes, see page 4-35

Active Adaptive Shift (AAS)

Active Adaptive Shift (AAS)
automatically controls the transaxle shift
points to best suit the road conditions and
driver input. This improves driving
comfort.
The transaxle may switch to AAS mode
when driving up and down slopes,
cornering, or depressing the accelerator
pedal quickly while the shift lever is in the
D position.
Depending on the driving conditions and
vehicle operations, it may not be possible
to shift gears, however, this does not
indicate a problem because the AAS
mode will maintain the optimum gear
position.
 
I think most dealers will have great incentive to sell what they have, rather than tell you the 2.5 will be available in a few weeks. Ed
 
CX-SV: I'm afraid I interpret that text in an entirely different manner than you, especially after taking note of how my CX-5's automatic responds to the conditions noted (mainly up and down grades). The gearbox definitely is adept at recognizing when it needs to hold a lower gear when pulling a grade or going downhill for an extended period. This can be easily verified by switching over to manual mode to find that your're in fourth gear and the box won't shift up til the grade levels out. But you seem to imply that this behavior has some sort of permanent effect on the computer's logic circuit that is cumulative over time. Is that correct? And, if so, where did you get this idea? I know that there are transmissions out there that have this kind of sophistication, but I don't believe the CX-5's is one of them.
 
paris1 said:
CX-SV: I'm afraid I interpret that text in an entirely different manner than you, especially after taking note of how my CX-5's automatic responds to the conditions noted (mainly up and down grades). The gearbox definitely is adept at recognizing when it needs to hold a lower gear when pulling a grade or going downhill for an extended period. This can be easily verified by switching over to manual mode to find that your're in fourth gear and the box won't shift up til the grade levels out. But you seem to imply that this behavior has some sort of permanent effect on the computer's logic circuit that is cumulative over time. Is that correct? And, if so, where did you get this idea? I know that there are transmissions out there that have this kind of sophistication, but I don't believe the CX-5's is one of them.
Click to expand...

No I think we are in agreement for the most part (based on driving the cX-5). I think the transmission is adaptive and as sophisticated in that respect as any available automatic tranny sold today. Driving in hilly conditions is just one environment to see how it adapts. But I am not suggesting some "permanent effect on computer's logic circuit that is cummulative over time", since the tranny adapts, nothing is permanent. My Mercedes C300 7 speed operates and adapts in similar fashion for example.
 
CX-SV said:
No I think we are in agreement for the most part (based on driving the cX-5). I think the transmission is adaptive and as sophisticated in that respect as any available automatic tranny sold today. Driving in hilly conditions is just one environment to see how it adapts. But I am not suggesting some "permanent effect on computer's logic circuit that is cummulative over time", since the tranny adapts, nothing is permanent. My Mercedes C300 7 speed operates and adapts in similar fashion for example.
Click to expand...
OK; I've read about transmissions that adapt to a particular driver's input by semi-permanently altering shift points to suit that driver's driving style (would have guessed that the likes of BMW and Mercedes were among them) until someone else drives the car and then it does the same thing all over again. Maybe I have misinterpreted how those boxes actually function. What I do know is that after 3k miles I have pretty much adapted my driving style to this gearbox, but I do wish this thing had a sport mode because this is what I amagine eco mode to be similar to in some other brands.
 
paris1 said:
OK; I've read about transmissions that adapt to a particular driver's input by semi-permanently altering shift points to suit that driver's driving style (would have guessed that the likes of BMW and Mercedes were among them) until someone else drives the car and then it does the same thing all over again. Maybe I have misinterpreted how those boxes actually function. What I do know is that after 3k miles I have pretty much adapted my driving style to this gearbox, but I do wish this thing had a sport mode because this is what I amagine eco mode to be similar to in some other brands.
Click to expand...

My 3 current vehicles do what you describe, from an adaptation standpoint, but yes the CX-5 is most eco-minded of the 3. My Lexus IS350 does it more dramatically than the other 2, to the point of actually burning rubber when shifting into 2nd gear after it adapts to repeated aggressive driving.

I see what you mean regarding the CX-5, it does adapt, but it still remains somewhat biased towards fuel economy even if downshifts occur with less pedal input by aggressive driver. I understand why a sport mode doesn't exist, Mazda knew they would hear a slew of complaints about fuel economy in sport mode. I agree with Mazdas choice to force the driver to use manual/sport mode, with the expectation that most would be too lazy and just use full automatic mode (getting best MPG by default).
 
paris1 said:
but I do wish this thing had a sport mode because this is what I amagine eco mode to be similar to in some other brands.
Click to expand...
It kind of does, if you put it in manual mode. That way you can dictate how long you can stay in a certain gear, to a point. Yes, it's not like the sport mode on my BMW but then again, for $10K less, I think most of us can adapt to it's "shortcomings".
 
STE92VE said:
It kind of does, if you put it in manual mode. That way you can dictate how long you can stay in a certain gear, to a point. Yes, it's not like the sport mode on my BMW but then again, for $10K less, I think most of us can adapt to it's "shortcomings".
Click to expand...

Come on; how much could it cost to put an extra logic circuit in the tranny computer and a button on the shifter? Quit making excuses for a car you paid 25-30 grand for. If someone at Mazda reads about it here, maybe they will build it into the next generation model!
 
Please log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
    • Like
    • Wow
2017~2024 CX-5 Chirp Noise from Automatic Transaxle on 3-4 upshift - Bulletin 05-005/23
2
Replies
23
Views
5K
cz5gt
cz5gt
W
1-2 misfires on 2014 CX-5 2.5L - Should I be worried?
2
Replies
24
Views
3K
weitau
W
D
2014 Mazda CX-5 misfire
Replies
14
Views
1K
sm1ke
sm1ke

Latest posts

Back