CX5 Turbo confirmed!

So? I dont buy vehicles out of pity for the underdog,lol!
I am being realistic. Until Toyota can consistently shed it's white goods image, it's a pass from me. IMHO Mazda is more engaging in terms of driving and image and they have done this with far less money.
 
Well, the CX-5 with the 2.5 is at ~25 MPH so that would not be terrible. It is down to personal choice. You want the MPG or the 250 HP/ 310 lb/ft torque?
Fuel costs here play a major factor. If they we were consistently cheaper, would go for power and torque no question
 
Well, the CX-5 with the 2.5 is at ~25 MPH so that would not be terrible. It is down to personal choice. You want the MPG or the 250 HP/ 310 lb/ft torque?
Actually the EPA ratings on Mazda6 2.5T turbo is based on using regular gasoline, where the engine is rated at 227hp. I wonder how many CX-9, Mazda6 turbo, and future CX-5 turbo owners are willing to use 93-octane which is 40 ~ 60 cents more expensive per gallon than 87-octane?

Based on the 3~4 mpg drop-off of EPA FE ratings on Mazda6 from 2.5L to 2.5T, 25 mpg combined EPA FE rating on CX-5 2.5T, which is only 1 mpg drop-off, is highly unlikely.

Over 65% of CX-5s or CX-9s sold in the US are AWD. We should use EPA rating on AWD CX-9 for comparison, which is 20/23/26. Based on the 3~4 mpg penalty from 2.5L to 2.5T on 2018 Mazda 6, I believe similar drop-off is very likely on CX-5 2.5T.

Also SkyActiv-G 2.5T is running out of breath after 4,000 rpm due to its relatively smaller turbo, itd affect 0~60 greatly during acceleration.

attachment.php

View attachment 219728
 
Fuel costs here play a major factor. If they we were consistently cheaper, would go for power and torque no question


Yeah, I think it is up to what people want. Honestly, if I just drove my car locally and did not take too many big road trips, I would say the 2.5 NA is still the best bet. For long distance highway trips - with MPH of 75+ - the 2.5T might be a better option.
 
Fuel costs here play a major factor. If they we were consistently cheaper, would go for power and torque no question

Fuel costs are highly overrated. The efficiency loss between a 25 and 30 MPG car is only 15%. Assuming the 12k/year mileage and assuming 375 miles per tank, that amounts to about 32 fill-ups annually. The less efficient vehicle would require 5 extra fill-ups, or $300 higher annual expense (15 gal tank, $4 gas price).

Quibble all you want over the assumptions, the numbers will work out to roughly $25/mo. Not that hard to find ways to recoup that increased cost elsewhere in life. Its a barely a dinner for two at Chipotle, for crying out loud, haha.
 
Fuel costs are highly overrated. The efficiency loss between a 25 and 30 MPG car is only 15%. Assuming the 12k/year mileage and assuming 375 miles per tank, that amounts to about 32 fill-ups annually. The less efficient vehicle would require 5 extra fill-ups, or $300 higher annual expense (15 gal tank, $4 gas price).

Quibble all you want over the assumptions, the numbers will work out to roughly $25/mo. Not that hard to find ways to recoup that *increased cost* elsewhere in life. It*s a barely a dinner for two at Chipotle, for crying out loud, haha.

No it is not highly overrated. When regular unleaded here is now $1.60 per litre and premium unleaded is as high as $1.90 litre now, it adds up.

You guys enjoy cheapish prices. We don't.
 
Front seats are fine for majority of owners otherwise we would see more complaints online

There are complaints out there (thought not here for some reason), but you are quite right we are the minority not the majority. But there is something...... weird about the design of the foam that makes it an absolutely huge deal-breaking problem for the people who experience it. I think it would be in Mazda's interest to learn from it and correct it.

They've lost me as a customer over it. Car manufacturers want repeat buyers. I don't think my experience is irrelevant.
 
No it is not highly overrated. When regular unleaded here is now $1.60 per litre and premium unleaded is as high as $1.90 litre now, it adds up.

You guys enjoy cheapish prices. We don't.

Yeah double up your fuel cost (as displayed above) and then say its overrated..no wonder diesel is still king there..ouch! Surprised/impressed you didn't go hybrid with those numbers..
 
Yeah double up your fuel cost (as displayed above) and then say its overrated..no wonder diesel is still king there..ouch! Surprised/impressed you didn't go hybrid with those numbers..

Hybrid is a small limited market and can be expensive here at this time although some smaller vehicles are getting it now.

The only mainstream brand that sells them is Toyota and frankly having driven a few of them.... bit of a zzzz fest
 
Fuel costs are highly overrated. The efficiency loss between a 25 and 30 MPG car is only 15%. Assuming the 12k/year mileage and assuming 375 miles per tank, that amounts to about 32 fill-ups annually. The less efficient vehicle would require 5 extra fill-ups, or $300 higher annual expense (15 gal tank, $4 gas price).

Quibble all you want over the assumptions, the numbers will work out to roughly $25/mo. Not that hard to find ways to recoup that *increased cost* elsewhere in life. It*s a barely a dinner for two at Chipotle, for crying out loud, haha.

Which is why increasing MPG overall is the only way to reduce fuel usage. On a one by one basis, the savings are minor but when examined with all the cars out there, there are huge benefits.
 
Which is why increasing MPG overall is the only way to reduce fuel usage. On a one by one basis, the savings are minor but when examined with all the cars out there, there are huge benefits.

Dont disagree, but thats not really at the front of customers minds.
 
For us, more than likely fast half of next year.

this is where Mazda's product cycle drives me crazy.
2019's should be in production now so you can get them BEFORE the calendar year, not 4 months into it.
I"m wondering if it'll be at the LA auto show.
 
this is where Mazda's product cycle drives me crazy.
2019's should be in production now so you can get them BEFORE the calendar year, not 4 months into it.
I"m wondering if it'll be at the LA auto show.

Over here, 2019 vehicles regardless of manufacturer are actually sold in 2019. Some instances they are sold late this year but it's in the minority.

I suspect an announcement around LA motor show given Gen 2 was announced then if memory serves
 
Back