Super dissatisfied with the CX-5 2.5 Turbo Part 2

boandlkramer said:
So weird. BMW manages to squeeze a lot out of the TT-4cyl....
Click to expand...

Yes, but the 2.0T class cars like RDX, Q5, X3 have turbo lag. Pick your poison. Do you want a dead pedal and then a blast of acceleration or do you want seamless acceleration with less "blast"? If the answer is both, then go test drive a GC Trackhawk.

P.S. The CX-5 gives you the option to get more "blast" if you choose to use 93 octane fuel and Sport mode which alters the shift point higher up the RPM band. Did you try it that way? The other cars require premium. Mazda gives you the choice of "butt dyno" or wallet.
 
Last edited:
Also those engines have a different cycle and design. The B cycle 2.0T from VW would be more similar to the Skyactiv T.

The BMW and VW/Audi 2.0T really doesnt have lag and feels very linear. Its not as fuel efficient though.
 
ourlee said:
Well I drove the turbo a few days ago and the engine behaves exactly like it does in the 9. It is so neutered, no fun to be found anywhere in the power band. Im passing.
I also had issue with the seat. Whats with the seam that runs right under your butt? It felt like I was sitting on a wire, very strange. (GTR)
I also drove a Volvo XC40. I liked it more but it wasnt significantly better than my 14 GT. Hope you guys enjoy your new cars, they certainly look fantastic inside and out.
RL
Click to expand...
This SkyActiv 2.5T is designed specifically for bigger and heavier CX-9 replacing a V6 and emphasizing low-end torque. The small turbo will be running out of the breath over 4,000 rpm. Mazda didn't change anything to this 2.5T setup to fit into CX-5, even the gear ratios are exactly the same as CX-9! We shouldn't expect too much on acceleration、performance、and fuel economy from this new 2.5T CX-5 as proved by official specs:

2019 CX-5 Signature 2.5T:
0-60 speed (seconds): AWD 7.3
EPA Mileage City/Highway/Combined: 22/27/24 (AWD)
Total Curb Weight (lbs) (AWD): 3,825

2019 Mazda CX-9 Signature 2.5T:
AWD, Automatic transmission (city/hwy/combined): 20/26/23
Curb weight (lbs): 4,383 (AWD)

It'd have worked out much better in every area if Mazda added a turbo to its SA-G 2.0L and fit into the CX-5 with different programming and gear ratios!
 
davefr said:
Yes, but the 2.0T class cars like RDX, Q5, X3 have turbo lag. Pick your poison. Do you want a dead pedal and then a blast of acceleration or do you want seamless acceleration with less "blast"? If the answer is both, then go test drive a GC Trackhawk.

P.S. The CX-5 gives you the option to get more "blast" if you choose to use 93 octane fuel and Sport mode which alters the shift point higher up the RPM band. Did you try it that way? The other cars require premium. Mazda gives you the choice of "butt dyno" or wallet.
Click to expand...

I wouldnt be caught dead a Jeep....

Sport Plus in my X3 essentially removes lag.

Nor is stoplight racing a priority for me. If it was I would have kept my M4.
 
joeca said:
⋯ It test drove the brand new 2019 Rav 4 just after driving the Mazda Signature. I liked it a lot, it's bigger than the previous model, the interior room was surprisingly plentiful, particularly the back seat. The interior was wide, lots of shoulder room.

The only problem is that the 203HP engine was a dog, and likely a deal killer for me. If Toyota had put a V6 in this thing, it would have been awesome
Click to expand...
Wait, new 2019 Toyota RAV4 is available now? The Toyota dealer here told me it won't be available until January!

I wouldn't compare Toyota's 203hp naturally aspirated 2.5L to Mazda's 227/250hp 2.5T. But curious if it'd feel a little stronger than my current 184hp 2.5L. Of course fuel economy is another big thing for me too as new RAV4 with 40/41% thermal efficiency on 2.5L and an 8-speed transmission the FE should be the best among all compact CUVs except its own hybrid RAV4.
 
boandlkramer said:
So weird. BMW manages to squeeze a lot out of the TT-4cyl....
Click to expand...


BMW's 2.0T, Audi/VW/Porsche and I would add Honda all have really good 2.0T engines and they are all different. The German ones are clearly the most refined and developed. I know the Honda 1.5 and 2.0 T engines get little love around here but they are really good engines. Very racer boy feeling and not "refined" feeling in anyway but nice.

I have always wanted to see Mazda put a turbo on the 2.0. Our Mazda 3 has the 2.0 engine and I prefer it to the 2.5 NA in our CX-5. Revs easier and feels better doing it.
 
Doesn't the 2.0L lack counterbalance shafts too while the 2.5L has them?

dougal said:
I have always wanted to see Mazda put a turbo on the 2.0. Our Mazda 3 has the 2.0 engine and I prefer it to the 2.5 NA in our CX-5. Revs easier and feels better doing it.
Click to expand...
 
dougal said:
BMW's 2.0T, Audi/VW/Porsche and I would add Honda all have really good 2.0T engines and they are all different. The German ones are clearly the most refined and developed. I know the Honda 1.5 and 2.0 T engines get little love around here but they are really good engines. Very racer boy feeling and not "refined" feeling in anyway but nice.

I have always wanted to see Mazda put a turbo on the 2.0. Our Mazda 3 has the 2.0 engine and I prefer it to the 2.5 NA in our CX-5. Revs easier and feels better doing it.
Click to expand...

I think Savageese describes it well. With the VW/Audi and BMW there are no tuning issues. Its smooth and linear power delivery all the way to redline and little to no lag. If you didnt know any better you would probably think its a V6. Most of the others like Honda and Subaru ect have odd tuning issues. Theyll eventually get it probably.
 
davefr said:
Yes, but the 2.0T class cars like RDX, Q5, X3 have turbo lag. Pick your poison. Do you want a dead pedal and then a blast of acceleration or do you want seamless acceleration with less "blast"? If the answer is both, then go test drive a GC Trackhawk.

P.S. The CX-5 gives you the option to get more "blast" if you choose to use 93 octane fuel and Sport mode which alters the shift point higher up the RPM band. Did you try it that way? The other cars require premium. Mazda gives you the choice of "butt dyno" or wallet.
Click to expand...

So did my 1999 180bhp Audi 1.8T, 180 was available with premium fuel, and less with lower octane, so its nothing new. I used the cheap stuff 90% of the time.
 
Last edited:
yrwei52 said:
Wait, new 2019 Toyota RAV4 is available now? The Toyota dealer here told me it won't be available until January!

I wouldn't compare Toyota's 203hp naturally aspirated 2.5L to Mazda's 227/250hp 2.5T. But curious if it'd feel a little stronger than my current 184hp 2.5L. Of course fuel economy is another big thing for me too as new RAV4 with 40/41% thermal efficiency on 2.5L and an 8-speed transmission the FE should be the best among all compact CUVs except its own hybrid RAV4.
Click to expand...
Checked the EPA fuel economy ratings on new 2019 RAV4, it can't really beat Honda 1.5T on paper, but offers 13 more HPs.


attachment.php

attachment.php

IMG_0392.PNGIMG_0393.PNG
 
Does anyone know the rev band that the max torque is given over, or is it like the Mazda diesel with a peak point of probably 100 rpm. Most turbo petrol cars I've looked at would have max torque over a wide band, not just a peak reading.
 
Kedis82ZE8 said:
Doesn't the 2.0L lack counterbalance shafts too while the 2.5L has them?

dougal said:
I have always wanted to see Mazda put a turbo on the 2.0. Our Mazda 3 has the 2.0 engine and I prefer it to the 2.5 NA in our CX-5. Revs easier and feels better doing it.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Yeah balance shaft is not needed on SA-G 2.0L but SA-G 2.5L does need it to counter the vibration caused by a big 4. Definitely another advantage to a 2.0T!
 
yrwei52 said:
Wait, new 2019 Toyota RAV4 is available now? The Toyota dealer here told me it won't be available until January!

I wouldn't compare Toyota's 203hp naturally aspirated 2.5L to Mazda's 227/250hp 2.5T. But curious if it'd feel a little stronger than my current 184hp 2.5L. Of course fuel economy is another big thing for me too as new RAV4 with 40/41% thermal efficiency on 2.5L and an 8-speed transmission the FE should be the best among all compact CUVs except its own hybrid RAV4.
Click to expand...


I drove one yesterday
 
yrwei52 said:
Yeah balance shaft is not needed on SA-G 2.0L but SA-G 2.5L does need it to counter the vibration caused by a big 4. Definitely another advantage to a 2.0T!
Click to expand...

I do remember 2.0L in Mazda 3 feeling smoother than my 2.5L when my CX-5 was in for warranty work within the last year or two.
 
Its no secret that 2.0 is a sweet spot for 4 cylinder engines which is why its so ubiquitous. Same with 3.0 for a 6.
 
yrwei52 said:
Yeah balance shaft is not needed on SA-G 2.0L but SA-G 2.5L does need it to counter the vibration caused by a big 4. Definitely another advantage to a 2.0T!
Click to expand...

I'd delete it if there was a kit. Weight like 40lbs... however the sprocket on shared the timing chain/ oil pump sprocket
 
xtrailman said:
Does anyone know the rev band that the max torque is given over, or is it like the Mazda diesel with a peak point of probably 100 rpm. Most turbo petrol cars I've looked at would have max torque over a wide band, not just a peak reading.
Click to expand...

I believe it should be ~2k to ~4.5k. Not sure on the "official" numbers.
 
That sounds about right for top end but might kick in a little lower.

Edit: googled it and according to Wards its 310 at 2000 rpm.
 
Last edited:
Please log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
CX-5 Engine Cover Turbo Badges
Replies
10
Views
778
chickdr
C
GTXT23
    • Haha
    • Wow
Should you buy a Turbo CX-5?
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
12K
Odrapnew
O
A
Comparing the 2019 GTR and 2024 Premium Turbo CX-5 models
Replies
7
Views
2K
Apollothedog
A

Latest posts

Back