Drag race : Mazda Cx5 2016 vs 2018

THIS ^^^^

Are we related? (rlaugh)

When the day comes that I can non longer buy a non electric, non manual transmission car...just give me a self driving appliance. All the fun will be gone anyway so what's the point? I may as well be able to work/read/surf the net while my appliance shuttles me from A to B.

Freaking joyless lemmings...

You can always do this, probably lots more fun :D

CheapUnfoldedAmoeba-size_restricted.gif
 
THIS ^^^^

Are we related? (rlaugh)

When the day comes that I can non longer buy a non electric, non manual transmission car...just give me a self driving appliance. All the fun will be gone anyway so what's the point? I may as well be able to work/read/surf the net while my appliance shuttles me from A to B.

Freaking joyless lemmings...

As annoying as it is for me to admit this, a gas-electric hybrid could offer absolutely hellacious launch without sacrificing on the big end. The Porsche 918 as well as I believe the McLaren P1 is an example.
 
It's like the typewriter, VHS player and cassette player. It's time to let it go

Manuals are eventually going to be all but gone. They have autos that can be put into manual mode....

stop it.

Honda sells enough of everything that they could take a loss on a few specialty items. But they don't do it for long.
Mazda sadly can't afford to subsidize our wishlist.
Solid, shmalid. We're not their bros, we're just their customers.
But we can dream and complain.

It's about damn time someone explained this.

Horse doody.

People still do all manner of things because they're fun regardless of how practical or pragmatic.

Auto's, no matter how well they're designed - more efficient, faster or otherwise - are simply not as engaging or fun to drive. It's isn't about obsolescence.

100% Agree

And to get back to the drag, I stomped it today from a stop [I almost never drive like that], and it was by far the worst few seconds of driving satisfaction that I've had with this car.

In normal driving it feels great, peppy but not squirrelly. But when you've really got to move, it just ain't there. (drive2)

the skyactiv engines in stock form are not designed to be high performance, especially not using 87 fuel. that stoplight lag you experience is because of the 87 octane. if you want your 2.5L to really impress you, I would suggest an ECU tune and some quality ethanol-free 91 octane fuel. if emission laws arent too stringent where you live, some custom-made exhaust headers would be fantastic along with the proper tune.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b01aSDqKpsY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DPFlKe2_Cw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEQw9Cf-6VY
(trans was shifting really nice in this last clip)

pretty solid performance, also the transmission shifts well, but would hugely benefit from being remapped for quicker shifting.

Has anyone tried brake torquing their Gen2? If so, how'd it go?

If the TC doesn't like to slip, as is reported here, does that make it harder on the tranny [than it would ordinarily be, which is plenty]?

True confession: I blew up my old man's 64 Impala powerglide doing that [doing it over and over and over]. So I hesitate to try it on my new CX-5. But if it's relatively safe, it might be the only way to get off the line quick.

automatic transmissions hate being brake-torqued. it is so absolutely terrible on your torque converter - it forces the trans to essentially be in a forward and reverse gear at the same time, just fighting against each other. a few times here and there won't really hurt anything, but it's not going to make the car significantly faster (unless you're tuned) for it to be worth the damage.
 
Heads up guys, don't bother replying to the post directly above this one. Banned user.

Nothing to see here.

1Z4dL.gif


Anyways back to the topic at hand :D
 
Last edited:
Moistenor?

Yes

Anyways, the 42KG difference in weight (which is for top spec Akera 2.5L here) would explain the slower 2018 model and would counter Mazda's changes to sharper throttle/trasmission improvements done on KF
 
Last edited:
Yes

Anyways, the 42KG difference in weight (which is for top spec Akera 2.5L here) would explain the slower 2018 model and would counter Mazda's changes to sharper throttle/trasmission improvements done on KF

42kg doesn't explain almost a full second lapse in 0 to 60.
 
42kg doesn't explain almost a full second lapse in 0 to 60.

I'd say it would considering the 2.5 doesn't have the bottom end torque that it really should have. You basically need to rev it to get the best out of it.

Plus it is already lugging around a decent weight and any extra would affect it more so than say it would in a 6 or 8 cylinder engine or for the fact of the matter a turbo charged engine.

The 2.5 is better suited to Mazda 3 and Mazda 6

There could be other issues too but unless Mazda says something then probably extra weight is the issue.

One other thing - that CX-5 could be a dud. Need a few tests to be done to find out
 
Last edited:
I'd say it would considering the 2.5 doesn't have the bottom end torque that it really should have. You basically need to rev it to get the best out of it.

Plus it is already lugging around a decent weight and any extra would affect it more so than say it would in a 6 or 8 cylinder engine or for the fact of the matter a turbo charged engine.

The 2.5 is better suited to Mazda 3 and Mazda 6

There could be other issues too but unless Mazda says something then probably extra weight is the issue.

One other thing - that CX-5 could be a dud. Need a few tests to be done to find out

In my experience, torque is meaningless if the vehicle is geared properly, which the cx5 is in my opinion.
 
In my experience, torque is meaningless if the vehicle is geared properly, which the cx5 is in my opinion.

Maybe but all reviewers here say it lacks bottom end push/thrust due to the torque not being stacked at the bottom of the rev range.

Anyways I don't really care if it is a little slower. To me when I did the 2 test drives, I was happy with what I experienced and for personal preference, I like Gen 2 more than Gen 1

Each to their own :)
 
In my experience, torque is meaningless if the vehicle is geared properly, which the cx5 is in my opinion.

In mine gearing is almost meaningless if the vehicle is torqued properly. The 2.5g has very good bottom end torque output for an atmo4.
 
X..what kind of bottom end torque should an effecient 2.5l na4 have? What ones are currently available and better?
 
X..what kind of bottom end torque should an effecient 2.5l na4 have? What ones are currently available and better?

The reviewers moa... sorry compare to turbocharged units.

Personally I find it has enough (it's not a sports car or powerful sedan so I am realistic) but again when comparing to the previous gen 1, the power & torque output style is the same but the extra heft of the Gen 2 is starting to impact on performance.

Take a look at some 0-60mph/0-62mph/0-100kmh clips on youtube, from standing start for the Gen 2, there is a bit of steady movement of the needle at the bottom end but as the revs rise the needle moves more quickly. Need the needle to move more quickly from the get go.

As mentioned previously, the weights of the Mazda 3 and 6 are just about "right" for the 2.5 and you may also include Gen 1 CX-5. The Gen 2 CX-5 is going over this "right" spot
 
Last edited:
Maybe but all reviewers here say it lacks bottom end push/thrust due to the torque not being stacked at the bottom of the rev range.

Anyways I don't really care if it is a little slower. To me when I did the 2 test drives, I was happy with what I experienced and for personal preference, I like Gen 2 more than Gen 1

Each to their own :)

To be fair, the 2.5 SA has a very good torque curve for a 4 cylinder na engine.
 
Back