I don*t think what you*re feeling is actually turbo lag but programmed into their ECU. On my ST I had before you could eliminate that with a tune from Cobb ect. On the GTI you can cut it out with Obdeleven or VAGCOM. I*m pretty sure Cobb tunes BMW also.
CD: You said you will tune your Gen1? I think OV Tune will stop new tunes for Mazda vehicles and focus on toyota suv / trucks from Jan 2019.
So it has to be other option to tune it.
On resale value - I think it makes very little difference beyond 120-150K miles whether you have any of the Japanese imports. With regards to unob's argument on resale - its pretty easy to blow his theory.
He bought a used 15 rental CX5 AWD Touring in 2016 for 22K (too costly). When told that it was too costly - he said he did it because they gave him an above avg. resale on his Jeep GC. So they Jeep GC resale is tied to the whole deal. In an ideal world his Jeep GC is not fetching him 17.5K USD unless he is spending more on the 'other' car. The CX5 he bought should have been 20K tops. And its possible that his neck of the woods Mazda resale sucks. Subaru resale sucks in DFW as well since no one cares for AWD here.
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.
This is all I could find regarding HP/Torque Curve for the 2.5T. Although this was done for a CX-9 it should be the same for the CX-5 since it is the identical motor/trans combo. If this 'manufactured/generated' chart is accurate and assuming 93 octane fuel the 2.5T falls flat on it's face at 5000 RPM. To extract the most out of the engine I would say you rev up to 5200-5300 RPM with the upshift bringing RPM down to 4000. Still substantially better than the NA engine.
From the automobile-catalog website; Mazda CX-9 Signature AWD (aut. 6 speed) as offered for the year 2019 for North America
The Horsepower / Torque Curve below was generated by the ProfessCars software, based on the factory data:
View attachment 220028
View attachment 220029
Horsepower / Torque values for the curve above:
1000 rpm: 151.7 lb-ft / 28.9 hp
1100 rpm: 181.7 lb-ft / 38 hp
1200 rpm: 208.6 lb-ft / 47.6 hp
1300 rpm: 232.3 lb-ft / 57.5 hp
1400 rpm: 252.9 lb-ft / 67.4 hp
1500 rpm: 270.2 lb-ft / 77.1 hp
1600 rpm: 284.4 lb-ft / 86.6 hp
1700 rpm: 295.5 lb-ft / 95.6 hp
1800 rpm: 303.4 lb-ft / 103.9 hp
1900 rpm: 308.2 lb-ft / 111.4 hp
2000 rpm: 309.7 lb-ft / 117.9 hp
2100 rpm: 309.7 lb-ft / 123.7 hp
2200 rpm: 309.5 lb-ft / 129.6 hp
2300 rpm: 309.3 lb-ft / 135.4 hp
2400 rpm: 308.9 lb-ft / 141.1 hp
2500 rpm: 308.4 lb-ft / 146.7 hp
2600 rpm: 307.8 lb-ft / 152.3 hp
2700 rpm: 307.2 lb-ft / 157.8 hp
2800 rpm: 306.4 lb-ft / 163.3 hp
2900 rpm: 305.5 lb-ft / 168.6 hp
3000 rpm: 304.5 lb-ft / 173.8 hp
3100 rpm: 303.4 lb-ft / 179 hp
3200 rpm: 302.2 lb-ft / 184 hp
3300 rpm: 300.9 lb-ft / 188.9 hp
3400 rpm: 299.5 lb-ft / 193.8 hp
3500 rpm: 297.9 lb-ft / 198.4 hp
3600 rpm: 296.3 lb-ft / 203 hp
3700 rpm: 294.6 lb-ft / 207.4 hp
3800 rpm: 292.8 lb-ft / 211.7 hp
3900 rpm: 290.9 lb-ft / 215.8 hp
4000 rpm: 288.8 lb-ft / 219.8 hp
4100 rpm: 286.7 lb-ft / 223.6 hp
4200 rpm: 284.4 lb-ft / 227.3 hp
4300 rpm: 282.1 lb-ft / 230.8 hp
4400 rpm: 279.6 lb-ft / 234.1 hp
4500 rpm: 277.1 lb-ft / 237.2 hp
4600 rpm: 274.4 lb-ft / 240.2 hp
4700 rpm: 271.6 lb-ft / 242.9 hp
4800 rpm: 268.7 lb-ft / 245.5 hp
4900 rpm: 265.8 lb-ft / 247.8 hp
5000 rpm: 262.7 lb-ft / 249.9 hp
5100 rpm: 256.5 lb-ft / 248.9 hp
5200 rpm: 248.5 lb-ft / 245.9 hp
5300 rpm: 238.9 lb-ft / 240.9 hp
5400 rpm: 227.7 lb-ft / 233.9 hp
So the 310 torque is a peak only like the diesel car, but the petrol drops off a lot quicker, seems strange to me as most other turbo petrol's give max torque over a very wide band.
Because they know most of the market would not use the top end potential of a 300hp/300 tq engine in this car, or in general really care about the difference between 220 and 300 hp on their daily drive.. I overtake people all the time and always see faster vehicles than mine driving like they are in a slow car with no passing or merging power. Unless your an enthusiast, it probably doesn't matter to you. How many people do you know or see on forums that act like going into high RPM is "bad" or will damage your engine .. mid range performance makes sense for the average driver because that's where they'd notice it most. I don't like test driving things I don't intend to buy but I might have to give it a try and see what kind of data I can get from the reader.
So the 310 torque is a peak only like the diesel car, but the petrol drops off a lot quicker, seems strange to me as most other turbo petrol's give max torque over a very wide band.
All thee people so worried about max performance probably never take the car out of D..you cannot get max performance on these engine/ecu unless you learn what rpm is good for blipping/throttle combo or when to manual shift during WOT to blip before the fuel cutoff... like if you are in 5th at 67 mph and need to manually go into 3rd (tops out about 80) for a hard accelerate because the kickdown might put you in 4th and not use 500-8000rpms available in 3rd for WOT.. little things that mean the difference between getting the power you want (in the context of your specific engine) and getting a disappointment when you press the gas. I'd imagine the 2.5t would benefit greatly from this assuming tires/motor mounts can transmit on the ground and not in the suspension or spinning (resulting in a ECU powercut). Knowing how the 2.0/2.5 perform, a lot of useable power is probably wasted to skinny eco tires, soft motor mounts, and long suspension.
These numbers show 270 lbft from 1500 RPM to 4700 RPM (3200 RPM Range) Although not very wide it is a lot better range than diesels I'm used to. Yes, Mazda designed this to have a power band for typical use without having to wind it out. It's not going to feel progressive like your typical turbo but then again it makes up for what it doesn't have at the top end with what you get down low. Never going to feel like a rocket and wasn't designed to.
Compared to the NA engine which has only 131 lbft @1500 and get to only 183 lbft @ 4700 the Turbo has twice the torque at 1500 RPM and 50% more torque at 4700 RPM.
Feel wise it's not going to blow anyone away...I know it didn't for me and yet we still bought the Turbo. I hate vehicles that are always searching for the right gear before it gets moving...one of the reasons I hate automatics. At least with the torque curve similar to a diesel you step on the go pedal and it moves forward.
View attachment 220029
Horsepower / Torque values for the curve above:
1000 rpm: 151.7 lb-ft / 28.9 hp
1100 rpm: 181.7 lb-ft / 38 hp
1200 rpm: 208.6 lb-ft / 47.6 hp
1300 rpm: 232.3 lb-ft / 57.5 hp
1400 rpm: 252.9 lb-ft / 67.4 hp
1500 rpm: 270.2 lb-ft / 77.1 hp
1600 rpm: 284.4 lb-ft / 86.6 hp
1700 rpm: 295.5 lb-ft / 95.6 hp
1800 rpm: 303.4 lb-ft / 103.9 hp
1900 rpm: 308.2 lb-ft / 111.4 hp
2000 rpm: 309.7 lb-ft / 117.9 hp
2100 rpm: 309.7 lb-ft / 123.7 hp
2200 rpm: 309.5 lb-ft / 129.6 hp
2300 rpm: 309.3 lb-ft / 135.4 hp
2400 rpm: 308.9 lb-ft / 141.1 hp
2500 rpm: 308.4 lb-ft / 146.7 hp
2600 rpm: 307.8 lb-ft / 152.3 hp
2700 rpm: 307.2 lb-ft / 157.8 hp
2800 rpm: 306.4 lb-ft / 163.3 hp
2900 rpm: 305.5 lb-ft / 168.6 hp
3000 rpm: 304.5 lb-ft / 173.8 hp
3100 rpm: 303.4 lb-ft / 179 hp
3200 rpm: 302.2 lb-ft / 184 hp
3300 rpm: 300.9 lb-ft / 188.9 hp
3400 rpm: 299.5 lb-ft / 193.8 hp
3500 rpm: 297.9 lb-ft / 198.4 hp
3600 rpm: 296.3 lb-ft / 203 hp
3700 rpm: 294.6 lb-ft / 207.4 hp
3800 rpm: 292.8 lb-ft / 211.7 hp
3900 rpm: 290.9 lb-ft / 215.8 hp
4000 rpm: 288.8 lb-ft / 219.8 hp
4100 rpm: 286.7 lb-ft / 223.6 hp
4200 rpm: 284.4 lb-ft / 227.3 hp
4300 rpm: 282.1 lb-ft / 230.8 hp
4400 rpm: 279.6 lb-ft / 234.1 hp
4500 rpm: 277.1 lb-ft / 237.2 hp
4600 rpm: 274.4 lb-ft / 240.2 hp
4700 rpm: 271.6 lb-ft / 242.9 hp
4800 rpm: 268.7 lb-ft / 245.5 hp
4900 rpm: 265.8 lb-ft / 247.8 hp
5000 rpm: 262.7 lb-ft / 249.9 hp
5100 rpm: 256.5 lb-ft / 248.9 hp
5200 rpm: 248.5 lb-ft / 245.9 hp
5300 rpm: 238.9 lb-ft / 240.9 hp
5400 rpm: 227.7 lb-ft / 233.9 hp
Torque doesnt matter for 0-60 or other acceleration matrices as long as you uave a proper diff and transmission setup. Absolutely irrelevant.
These numbers show 270 lbft from 1500 RPM to 4700 RPM (3200 RPM Range) Although not very wide it is a lot better range than diesels I'm used to. Yes, Mazda designed this to have a power band for typical use without having to wind it out. It's not going to feel progressive like your typical turbo but then again it makes up for what it doesn't have at the top end with what you get down low. Never going to feel like a rocket and wasn't designed to.
Compared to the NA engine which has only 131 lbft @1500 and get to only 183 lbft @ 4700 the Turbo has twice the torque at 1500 RPM and 50% more torque at 4700 RPM.
Feel wise it's not going to blow anyone away...I know it didn't for me and yet we still bought the Turbo. I hate vehicles that are always searching for the right gear before it gets moving...one of the reasons I hate automatics. At least with the torque curve similar to a diesel you step on the go pedal and it moves forward.
Tesla drag races beg to differ.
Because they know most of the market would not use the top end potential of a 300hp/300 tq engine in this car, or in general really care about the difference between 220 and 300 hp on their daily drive.. I overtake people all the time and always see faster vehicles than mine driving like they are in a slow car with no passing or merging power. Unless your an enthusiast, it probably doesn't matter to you. How many people do you know or see on forums that act like going into high RPM is "bad" or will damage your engine .. mid range performance makes sense for the average driver because that's where they'd notice it most. I don't like test driving things I don't intend to buy but I might have to give it a try and see what kind of data I can get from the reader.
Horsepower should peak maybe 4-800rpm prior to redline, depending on how "peaky" it is, and depending on how many gears are in the box. With a 6-speed, and a relatively non-peaky manner, I'd say 800rpm is something I wouldn't complain too much about. I think this is fine. Let's see some real data first (like 0-60, 0-100, 1/4 mile).