2019 CX-5 2.5L vs. 2.5T

You do gain Porsche ststus with the macan s though. Thats worth something.

That seems to be the crazy ridiculous madness that is driving me. The willingness to spend wildly for a status is beyond nuts and yet it is eating me inside like an extreme mid-life crisis gone berserk.
I've at least calmed my desire to own a Porsche brand to a lower cost Macan S instead of the 992 GT3 that I really want. Now if I can calm it more and just stick with the CX-5, all (wife / retirement savings) will be happy. Edit: not yet retired
 
For comparison, my current car is a 2013 Camry hybrid. Sounds tame, but it actually zips from 0-60 in 7.4 seconds, which puts it squarely between data I've seen for the 2.5L (~8.6 sec) and the 2.5T (~6.4 sec).

Car & Driver posted a 0-60 time for the 2.5L FWD CX-5 at 7.8 seconds.

That is the model I would choose if I were you.
 
If your only concerns are acceleration and performance, I would be looking at either a 2016 CX-5 or the 2019 CX-5 GT Reserve. There's a pretty significant price difference between the two. The 17-19 2.5 NA would only be an option if you really wanted the quieter cabin and newer interior.

Test drive both and see what you think. As Uno suggested, chances are good that you can find a decent CPO GT Reserve by Q4.
 
That seems to be the crazy ridiculous madness that is driving me. The willingness to spend wildly for a status is beyond nuts and yet it is eating me inside like an extreme mid-life crisis gone berserk.
I've at least calmed my desire to own a Porsche brand to a lower cost Macan S instead of the 992 GT3 that I really want. Now if I can calm it more and just stick with the CX-5, all (wife / retirement savings) will be happy. Edit: not yet retired

Doesn't sound too ridiculous but I think spending for status is silly, I've kinda gone the other way in that I find it more rewarding now to give status a big suck it, its driving fun I'm after so bmw has lost me (just crazy $ for anything I'd want from them anymore)..but Biermann seems to get it. Who needs a Cayman S anyway(one i envisioned having) I found the perfect middle finger car and my kid can even fit in it..just not in blue:
https://www.caranddriver.com/hyundai/veloster-n

So keep or even upgrade your current cx5 with a 16 or 17 and go for something truly fun but still frugal on the side..my 2c
 
Last edited:
I haven't driven one with the turbo so I can't comment on the quickness. But I can't justify an extra $6,000-$7,000 to shave 1.5 seconds off the 0-60. If I want quickness while merging, etc., the Sport Mode function is adequate. Then again, my situation may be different. If I want speed, I have motorcycles.
 
Last edited:
I live at altitude and the 2.5L NA is perfectly fine. A turbo just makes it all the better I am sure, but is not absolutely "necessary" in my opinion. Maybe matters more so in these heavier Gen 2's...I don't know. But I find the Gen 1 2.5L NA's to be very peppy.
 
I haven't driven one with the turbo so I can't comment on the quickness. But I can't justify an extra $6,000-$7,000 to shave 1.5 seconds off the 0-60 and increase smile by 12.5 mm. If I want quickness while merging, etc., the Sport Mode function is adequate. Then again, my situation may be different. If I want speed, I have motorcycles.

There, fixed it for ya LOL.
 
I*m with you on the Porsche want as that*s been a dream car of mine since childhood. Someday!

I learned how to drive stick on a 944 Turbo and spent most of my senior year of high school and early college in a 928 (my brothers car). I can't tell you how easy it was to get girls with those keys...
 
First-time poster here.

I know the only real way to resolve this question is via test drive, but since I won't be buying until 4Q/2019 I wanted to hold off on that so my memory remains fresh when it's time to pull the trigger.

Is the 2.5L "enough" in terms of power? My two main concerns are fast acceleration in aggressive SF Bay Area freeway traffic and decent performance at altitudes of 6-9000 feet in the Sierra. For comparison, my current car is a 2013 Camry hybrid. Sounds tame, but it actually zips from 0-60 in 7.4 seconds, which puts it squarely between data I've seen for the 2.5L (~8.6 sec) and the 2.5T (~6.4 sec).

I have hard budget restrictions (bang) which likely preclude the 2.5T for now leaving me the option of waiting for a gently used GTR or Sig to appear, hoping the 2020's include the 2.5T across cheaper trim levels, or settling for the 2.5L.

Thought? Thanks.

Where do you need the fast acceleration? In city driving? Below 55 mph? If so, yes the 2.5L would be fast enough.

Above a certain speed, like above 60 mph, the acceleration is not fast enough for the 2.5L engine. You can compensate with Sport mode as I do, but if the speed limit is 70 mph on the highway and everyone is in a rush, you will find the 2.5L engine not fast enough.
 
Where do you need the fast acceleration? In city driving? Below 55 mph? If so, yes the 2.5L would be fast enough.

Above a certain speed, like above 60 mph, the acceleration is not fast enough for the 2.5L engine. You can compensate with Sport mode as I do, but if the speed limit is 70 mph on the highway and everyone is in a rush, you will find the 2.5L engine not fast enough.
Perhaps it's semantics I am disagreeing with here, but the 2.5L NA is plenty "fast enough". Again I am at elevation relative to a lot of folks on this forum, yet on freeways find myself at 80-85 mph without even trying and have to slow myself back down. Have highway driven I-80 through Wyoming at 100+ mph. Have driven the very high elevations of I-70 through Colorado on my way to Utah at 80-85 mph in parts.

So the 2.5L NA is " fast enough". The better semenatics to use here is that it loses some of its oomph and pep at the higher speeds, so if you pull out to pass someone going 75+, might take you an extra second or so, but make no mistake it will do it.

Turbo I'd hope helps eliminate that.
 
That seems to be the crazy ridiculous madness that is driving me. The willingness to spend wildly for a status is beyond nuts and yet it is eating me inside like an extreme mid-life crisis gone berserk.
I've at least calmed my desire to own a Porsche brand to a lower cost Macan S instead of the 992 GT3 that I really want. Now if I can calm it more and just stick with the CX-5, all (wife / retirement savings) will be happy. Edit: not yet retired

If you can afford it...your money. Live on your terms.
 
Perhaps it's semantics I am disagreeing with here, but the 2.5L NA is plenty "fast enough". Again I am at elevation relative to a lot of folks on this forum, yet on freeways find myself at 80-85 mph without even trying and have to slow myself back down. Have highway driven I-80 through Wyoming at 100+ mph. Have driven the very high elevations of I-70 through Colorado on my way to Utah at 80-85 mph in parts.

So the 2.5L NA is " fast enough". The better semenatics to use here is that it loses some of its oomph and pep at the higher speeds, so if you pull out to pass someone going 75+, might take you an extra second or so, but make no mistake it will do it.

Turbo I'd hope helps eliminate that.

This is clearly subjective. I agree the 2.5 NA is definitely sufficient to get the car to those speeds. Need to plan that pass more. Some just want it faster.
 
The 2.5 NA drivetrain among the 3, 6 and CX-5 best suits the CX-5 in my opinion. This is for Gen1. The 2.5 Turbo was developed for CX-9 and thrown into the CX-5. You can see the fuel economy is same as a FWD CX-9 which is a much larger and heavier car. 2.5 NA is perfect unless you are driving in the 70-100 mph range which is perfectly legal in some parts of USA. The NA is very much at home under 60 mph which is urban / city style. See what suits you. Btw 2016 CX-9 is still the #1 Mazda in terms of overall refinement and build quality and that still holds true.
 
NA is perfect unless you are driving in the 70-100 mph range which is perfectly legal in some parts of USA. The NA is very much at home under 60 mph which is urban / city style. See what suits you.
Ha, both suit me. I'll routinely do 70-75 on the freeways around here, especially when overtaking. Oh well, the local dealer is right next to an on-ramp, so I'll give 'em both a whirl.
 
Back