Questions for turbo owners

DCdvr said:
Hello,

Current owner of a 2016 CX-5, but my lease is up soon. Have my eye on the turbo, and wanted to see if owners think its worth the upgrade over the standard NA engine.

- How does the turbo cruise and pass on the highway around 75-80 mph compared to the NA engine? Ive always thought my CX-5 feels short of power there, where as my old Volvo turbo could pass with ease. Ive test driven the turbo but didnt have the chance to cruise at high speed (thanks DC Beltway)

- What kind of mileage are you getting, both on the highway and around town? On the highway, my 2016 will hit the EPA rating (32 mpg, its FWD) only if I stay under 65 mph, feather the throttle, and keep the AC off. Drive above 75 mph at all, or pass a few times, and the car will quickly drop to around 28 mpg, but Im convinced its because I have to draw so deep into the power reserve

Any other thoughts/questions appreciated. Im going to trade in next week. Thanks!
Click to expand...
If you really want a new CX-5, get the 2.5T turbo for sure. The potential rocker arm fallen off without warning on cylinder deactivation is good enough the reason to avoid the 2.5L entirely.

Dangerous cylinder deactivation trouble on 2018 CX-5 and 6 models

There's no free lunch. You get more power, you have to pay for it with more gas money. ;)
 
davefr said:
Higher octane fuel is only beneficial >4000 RPM per Mazda. I rarely exceed 4000 RPM so I see it as a waste of $'s.
Click to expand...
2.5T's power curves with 93 and 87 AKI gasolines published by Mazda said exactly the same thing: "To prevent unnecessary spending on premium fuel, both power ratings are published".

shadonoz said:
Here's the torque curve:

TC.png


source: https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2018/12/2019-mazda-cx-5-turbo-first-drive-your-italian-alternative/
Click to expand...
 
Sig cx-5 said:
Same here. 93 is ~60 cents/gal more. I miss the days of 10 cents/gal difference between 87/89 and 89/93.
Click to expand...
So true. I use Shell gas and its 93 octane Shell V-Power Nitro+ premium gasoline here in Dallas area costs at least 70~90 more per gallon (cheapest $3.29/gal now) than regular gas. That's too much to me. Yes, I miss those 10-increase-per-grade days!
 
madar said:
$2.99...for 87 up here in good ol' Pa...you guys are lucky.
Click to expand...
Currently in San Jose area visiting. The lowest Shell regular gas I could find is $3.93 per gallon. The only good thing is there's only 15 increase per grade and 93-octane premium gas is not much higher, at $4.23/gal.

No wonder there're always very long lines at every Costco gas station!
 
yrwei52 said:
Currently in San Jose area visiting. The lowest Shell regular gas I could find is $3.93 per gallon. The only good thing is there's only 15 increase per grade and 93-octane premium gas is not much higher, at $4.23/gal.

No wonder there're always very long lines at every Costco gas station!
Click to expand...
Last time it even got near $4 around here people basically stopped buying gas. I'm not surprised at those prices on California. I'll bet more than half of that price is tax.
 
madar said:
Last time it even got near $4 around here people basically stopped buying gas. I'm not surprised at those prices on California. I'll bet more than half of that price is tax.
Click to expand...
According my brother, high gas price in California is mainly caused by the regulation that the gas stations can only use suppliers from local Californian oil refinery, which has become a monopoly business for the state.
 
yrwei52 said:
According my brother, high gas price in California is mainly caused by the regulation that the gas stations can only use suppliers from local Californian oil refinery, which has become a monopoly business for the state.
Click to expand...

Wow, never knew that. If true, then it cuts out a lot of competition.
 
madar said:
Wow, never knew that. If true, then it cuts out a lot of competition.
Click to expand...
Exactly. The same on electricity. We have many choices for electricity service in Texas with competition for lower rate, although I personally don't like the break-up for utility service. But in California, PG&E is the ONLY choice. Home internet service is the same, no competition!
 
Kaps said:
The Turbo is 1 mpg better than FWD CX-9 which is 700 lbs heavier and 0.6 seconds faster. It wasn't designed for CX-5 it was designed as a generic truck engine and suits the CX9 the best. The other issue is a 300 mile tank (your FWD would do 330 miles which is low to begin with). If you have issues in 75 - 80 which is a common complaint about FWD gen1 as its profile is rather large - try the AWD. It seems AWD does not have this issue. My FWD has been in situations where the needle stayed at 75 for 10 seconds after the pedal was floored all the way down. So I understand what you mean.
Your cheapest to costliest options is Gen1 AWD, Gen2 AWD, Turbo. If you are buying used - late model year 2017 is perfect. Certified. See when production stopped for 17 models and get the one made in last 2 months. If you are leasing a 19 suits best as it has CD but it wont be your problem.
Click to expand...

The powerplant works great. Please explain why you say otherwise?
 
I love my GT Reserve, the power is amazing and I would recommend the car. Currently in California gas is expensive - in the Bay Area I am paying ~$4.30 for 91 (thanks Uncle Sam!) and haven't tried 87 yet (I only have 1K miles on the car, so testing to come).

Features are great: sound system, performance, style and ride. You will not have any issues with acceleration, at 80 if you push it to pass, you barely think about it, it's effortless. I often find myself going faster than I should. (if someone has radar recommendations, I'm all ears).

The cons for the car are limited, but MPG and range are at the top of the list. My current combine is 20 MPG (I hope for an average of 23 after the first oil change)
- I live in San Francisco, most of my rides are short (from cold) true city driving and the "this trip" report often shows MPG averages of 12-15. If I really baby it, coast to lights and drive slow I have gotten to 22 in the city. It is a little better when the engine is hot.
- Freeway driving is a different story, I have had high speed trips with MPG into the 30s (with an average speed of 80).

Other notable cons:
- Small screen (same as your '16?)
- I don't have the 360 Cam / park assist that the signature has (but it would be nice to have)
- Range is low, with the turbo, this car should have a 20 Gallon tank. At 15 Gallons and my current MPG, the range is only 300.


If you can hold off for the 2020 I would expect a few changes:
- A bigger screen, I assume the 8" they put in the 3 and 6
- Potential Cylinder-Deactivation could get you a few more MPGs (This appears in non-turbo CX-5s and the Turbo 6 (I think))
- Wireless Apple Car Play (slowly rolling out)
- Smart-touch handles to replace the keyless button


Finally, If you really are concerned about MPG... You could explore if the dealer will swap the 19" tires with another car for the 17" (and chop a few dollars off). Rolling mass can affect MPGs (not by much and depending on your driving). https://www.performanceplustire.com/blog/do-larger-tires-get-better-gas-mileage/


Hope this helps, happy to answer any questions,

S
 
yrwei52 said:
No wonder there're always very long lines at every Costco gas station!
Click to expand...

Costco was the highest price gas around it this morning, it was $.02 more, at $2.29, Wally World was $.04 more at $2.31. Gas is actually up here, too, an extra state gas tax was passed that wasn*t needed, and it has raised some, but still stays in the Top 1-3 cheapest in the Nation. Works for me, and I don*t Care about gas mileage anyways
 
NelsonLewis said:
Costco was the highest price gas around it this morning, it was $.02 more, at $2.29, Wally World was $.04 more at $2.31. Gas is actually up here, too, an extra state gas tax was passed that wasn*t needed, and it has raised some, but still stays in the Top 1-3 cheapest in the Nation. Works for me, and I don*t Care about gas mileage anyways
Click to expand...

Lol, is it ever needed?
 
NelsonLewis said:
Costco was the highest price gas around it this morning, it was $.02 more, at $2.29, Wally World was $.04 more at $2.31. Gas is actually up here, too, an extra state gas tax was passed that wasn*t needed, and it has raised some, but still stays in the Top 1-3 cheapest in the Nation. Works for me, and I don*t Care about gas mileage anyways
Click to expand...
Your info says only "Dirty South", so not sure which state you're in for one of the cheapest gas price in the US.

Wait until you pay $4.00 per gallon for regular gas, and you'd change your mind about gas mileage. ;)
 
I was already completely turned off to a Gen 2 with the NA engine because with the other design changes from Gen 1, the Gen 2 with the NA actually performs worse than the Gen 1. Now seeing the thread where the CD is apparently leading to rocker arms falling off, count that as another no-go for me on the NA.

The Gen 2 with the 2.5L turbo on the other hand? Absolutely go for that. If I was feeling in the financial mood to trade up, it might seriously persuade me. I'm not though so I'll stick with mine for the time being. Even better, I like Nelson's idea of dropping the turbo in a Gen 1, if such were possible. ;)
 
With Mazda in my stable for long term - 10 years or so atleast my 2nd car will be a hybrid. I have my eyes on new Insight or prev. gen Accord Hybrid / ES300h or Avalon Hybrid. Cheaptest would be an Avalon Hybrid 13/14 MY with 70K miles and driven till 200K. Get a chance to test the stellar Toyota Hybrid power plants. But the new insight drives full electric till 45 mph - great for driving around DFW metroplex.
 
Kaps said:
With Mazda in my stable for long term - 10 years or so atleast my 2nd car will be a hybrid. I have my eyes on new Insight or prev. gen Accord Hybrid / ES300h or Avalon Hybrid. Cheaptest would be an Avalon Hybrid 13/14 MY with 70K miles and driven till 200K. Get a chance to test the stellar Toyota Hybrid power plants. But the new insight drives full electric till 45 mph - great for driving around DFW metroplex.
Click to expand...

Even odds my next car is EV. Im keeping this gtr for 6-8 years, and thats plenty of time to iron out the few remaining kinks of range and "fuel up" convenience/speed.
 
cali-cx-5 said:
- Freeway driving is a different story, I have had high speed trips with MPG into the 30s (with an average speed of 80).

S
Click to expand...

Man, I've never had a tank break 25 MPG although I've had a few trips closer to 26/27. I rarely get on any road faster than 55MPH, and when I do, it's only for 10 miles or so.

Was this well past break in? I've only got 2,000 miles on mine.

You must have been going down Lombard Street!
 
Avoidin Deer said:
Man, I've never had a tank break 25 MPG although I've had a few trips closer to 26/27. I rarely get on any road faster than 55MPH, and when I do, it's only for 10 miles or so.

Was this well past break in? I've only got 2,000 miles on mine.

You must have been going down Lombard Street!
Click to expand...

If I take it easy I can get 28 or so per tank.
 
Unobtanium said:
If I take it easy I can get 28 or so per tank.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind that I'm burning 10% Mazola. I don't have a lead foot, but the roads here are winding roller coasters, so that doesn't help.

How many miles on your car? I'm wondering if my mileage will get better.
 
Please log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GTXT23
The Never-ending Question...What happens to the CX-5 Next Year (2025)?
2
Replies
31
Views
11K
yrwei52
yrwei52
GTXT23
    • Haha
    • Wow
Should you buy a Turbo CX-5?
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
12K
Odrapnew
O
1
    • Like
2023 CX-5 engine break-in trip
Replies
2
Views
2K
yrwei52
yrwei52

Latest posts

Back