Car and Driver 2019 CX5 article.

2 things I want to point out:

1: 6.2 is impressive given the CX-5's programming is set to provide smooth power delivery. In other words not not even performance oriented "speed" model. You'd get sub 6 numbers easily after even after a light tune. Otherwise Stock, Mazda isn't trying to be the 0-60 king in its class but it just is without even really trying.

2: Tires Tires tires. This thing is faster to 60 than the Mazda6 which is lighter. Just proves how much grip makes a meaningful difference. In this case AWD helps make better use of 300lbs tq. An AWD Mazda6t with summer tires should be in the mid 5's.

Yes. The tires are very important to get the max out of this engine. You can feel that they are limiting even on the CX-9. People have reported significant improvement in performance with new tires.
 
Did C&D state whether the speed times were done with SPORT MODE on or off?

I notice in sport mode that the trans holds the gears longer and the shifts are faster than when in normal driving mode.

I also think with AWD versions, when in sport mode from a dead stop, the computer puts power both to the rear and of course front tires. This helps with preventing tire spin.

The 0-60 times with Car and Driver are always run using the fastest settings on a car - if Sport mode is faster they'll use it. They pretty much launch the car in the most abusive, fastest way possible to get their time and thus tend to have the fastest test times - eg. their Civic Type R times are a half second faster than all the other car mags and they are the ones that have consistently been able to get sub-6s times for the Miata.

The rolling 5-60 times are the more accurate indicator of what daily driving performance is like and the CX-5 does a great job there too and shows pretty minimal lag.
 
The 0-60 times with Car and Driver are always run using the fastest settings on a car - if Sport mode is faster they'll use it. They pretty much launch the car in the most abusive, fastest way possible to get their time and thus tend to have the fastest test times - eg. their Civic Type R times are a half second faster than all the other car mags and they are the ones that have consistently been able to get sub-6s times for the Miata.

The rolling 5-60 times are the more accurate indicator of what daily driving performance is like and the CX-5 does a great job there too and shows pretty minimal lag.

The cx5t 5-60 is what most impressed me. 6.7 5 to 60 is far more impressive than 6.2 0 to 60.
 
The cx5t 5-60 is what most impressed me. 6.7 5 to 60 is far more impressive than 6.2 0 to 60.

Also don't forget these numbers too:

Top gear, 30*50 mph: 3.5 sec = Good street passing power.
Top gear, 50*70 mph: 4.6 sec = Good Highway merging power.

For reference...the Accord 2.0T auto

Top gear, 30-50 mph: 3.4 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 4.4 sec

The CX-5 T really is impressive considering the Accord has a TypeR engine only slightly detuned with high performance summer tires. The CX-5 has a regular 2.5T non sport engine and SUV tires...and is an SUV.
 
Last edited:
Also don't forget these numbers too:

Top gear, 30*50 mph: 3.5 sec = Good street passing power.
Top gear, 50*70 mph: 4.6 sec = Good Highway merging power.

For reference...the Accord 2.0T auto

Top gear, 30-50 mph: 3.4 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 4.4 sec

The CX-5 T really is impressive considering the Accord has a TypeR engine only slightly detuned with high performance summer tires. The CX-5 has a regular 2.5T non sport engine and SUV tires...and is an SUV.

I remain fuzzy on that data...is it really top gear, or did they floor it, or what? Because unless they e lock it, they cant floor it in top gear at that speed.
 
Essentially both cars are rolling at 50 mph as per that 50-70 test. By default the CX-5 should be at 6th gear= its highest gear. The Accord has a 10 speed so not sure where its at. To get from 50 to 70 both cars have to start from its highest cruising gear at 50 timed through 70 mph. At that point I bet the CX-5 downshifts to probably 4th or 3rd gear momentarily.

The underlined is your reference point upon start of the test. This also mimics real world application too. When we are cruising in an automatic at 50 its already set to highest gear at that speed since its tuned for mpgs.
 
Last edited:
Not sure if this is related or off topic. My wife has a 2018 Touring FWD that I drive on occasion. Took it in for its first oil change and of course took out a 2019 Signature AWD for a spin. I dont know if its mental or not but the car felt a lot more stable and planted generally and at speed. I know they tweaked the suspension some between 2018 & 2019 and also between FWD and AWD. Is that the difference that Im feeling?

Also it goes without saying I love the new engine in the CX5. Made me briefly think about trading my 6. Briefly... lol.
 
Also don't forget these numbers too:

Top gear, 30*50 mph: 3.5 sec = Good street passing power.
Top gear, 50*70 mph: 4.6 sec = Good Highway merging power.

For reference...the Accord 2.0T auto

Top gear, 30-50 mph: 3.4 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 4.4 sec

The CX-5 T really is impressive considering the Accord has a TypeR engine only slightly detuned with high performance summer tires. The CX-5 has a regular 2.5T non sport engine and SUV tires...and is an SUV.

The 2014 CX5 did the 50-70 in 4.4 as well.
 
This, too:

The extra oomph exacts a toll at the pump, as the turbo's EPA estimates are 2 to 3 mpg lower than the naturally aspirated version's. However, we recorded a strong 30 mpg in our 75-mph highway fuel-economy test*3 mpg better than the EPA estimate*and averaged 22 mpg overall.

Not sure what CD's highway test protocol is, but I fear the EPA numbers are probably going to be closer.
 
Sorry, bad attempt at forum humor. Was trying to play on the idea of the new 2.5T not being as good as the old Gen 1 CX-5...

It's not. The Gen 1 CX5 has 1" more ground clearance and gets better economy and is just more "raw". Totally more "driver's car". Yeah. Mazda. Zoom Zoom. It's not about speed. It's about connection with the road.


Wait...it's 2019, my argument is invalid.
 
Man all this 0-60 talk is making me want to upgrade but that would be such a bad financial decision. Must resist.

Im in the same boat. Ill honestly probably cave, but not for 2 more years or so. I want to see if I can get the 2.5T in a Touring trim, or at least have a pick of certified <20k mile GTRs. Also, if I wait 2 years it will be time for tires again and brakes soon after, and that's $1500-2k, plus the uncertainty of a 150-160k mile old vehicle, and that will probably be enough to push me to do it.

The "older" I get, the more I cringe about taking on debt for depreciating assets, or even worse, paying cash for one and then risking it every day by driving it.
 
Im in the same boat. Ill honestly probably cave, but not for 2 more years or so. I want to see if I can get the 2.5T in a Touring trim, or at least have a pick of certified <20k mile GTRs. Also, if I wait 2 years it will be time for tires again and brakes soon after, and that's $1500-2k, plus the uncertainty of a 150-160k mile old vehicle, and that will probably be enough to push me to do it.

The "older" I get, the more I cringe about taking on debt for depreciating assets, or even worse, paying cash for one and then risking it every day by driving it.

You can buy a CPO Mazda and its possible you will get more warranty than a brand new one.
If you get a CPO GTR with 10k miles that was bought by first owner 6 months ago you get 3.5 years/38k miles bumper to bumper and 6.5 years/90K drivetrain warranty. But you will most likely end up paying close to new car prices.
 
I always thought the Tacoma forum was the biggest collection of know-it-all clowns...apparently that honor goes to an unassuming Japanese SUV forum
 
Yea I was just saying lower ride height is subjective and a positive to some like myself. It often is listed as a negative. Again subjective and it kinda depends on what youre into. In other words not really inherently bad/good. But that got way out of control and makes me second guess participating here.
 

Latest posts

Back