Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 40

Thread: Which fuel is better for 2.5 Turbo engine longevity?

  1. #16
    Registered Member

    CX5 GT-R

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    South-Central US
    Posts
    7,570
    Quote Originally Posted by Buzzman12 View Post
    They can't afford to not have this engine work properly, considering it is used across the entire product line. It's their go to engine.
    If it were a badly engineered engine, they'd be in deep doodoo.
    I've driven Nissans over the years, and they're in the same situation with their VQ35 V6 engine.
    It's been used in every Nissan and Infiniti since 2001, and thankfully for them, it's a good engine.
    If it wasn't, Nissan would be up the creek.
    That's why I've been interested in what happens with the 1.5l turbo engine from Honda.
    It's going to be their go to engine for the next 10 years (probably), and if they can't sort out this gas in oil issue, then they're screwed.
    Mazda did really well with SkyActiv, IMO. They really did. It reminds me of GM's LSX engine series. Infinitely modular, and damn well executed with more efficiency and performance than competing brands.

  2. #17
    Banned

    16.5 CX-5 GT AWD w/Tech BRMica

    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Dirty South
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by Unobtanium View Post
    Mazda did really well with SkyActiv, IMO. They really did. It reminds me of GM's LSX engine series. Infinitely modular, and damn well executed with more efficiency and performance than competing brands.
    Performance? 187 hp out of a 2.5L in NA form is piss poor performance, especially running that much compression...

  3. #18
    Banned

    16.5 CX-5 GT AWD w/Tech BRMica

    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Dirty South
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by Unobtanium View Post
    Given t he torque, I'd say the leash is as much for detonation control as it is drivetrain component longevity.
    Although it may help, thatís not why they do it at all...

  4. #19
    Registered Member

    CX5 GT-R

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    South-Central US
    Posts
    7,570
    Quote Originally Posted by NelsonLewis View Post
    Although it may help, that*s not why they do it at all...
    Can you cite a reference for this datapoint? Or is that just your opinion?

  5. #20
    Registered Member

    CX5 GT-R

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    South-Central US
    Posts
    7,570
    Quote Originally Posted by NelsonLewis View Post
    Performance? 187 hp out of a 2.5L in NA form is piss poor performance, especially running that much compression...
    But it's in a 3500# vehicle, and it's about area under the curve and the torque curve. Find me another 2.5 NA motor that runs on 87 octane and provides such a meaty torque curve.

  6. #21
    Banned

    16.5 CX-5 GT AWD w/Tech BRMica

    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Dirty South
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by Unobtanium View Post
    But it's in a 3500# vehicle, and it's about area under the curve and the torque curve. Find me another 2.5 NA motor that runs on 87 octane and provides such a meaty torque curve.
    185 lbs of torque? Meaty? LMAO! May not find that torque, but the examples are by the handful, and most come from almost 20+ years ago...

    I'll go deeper, the 2.5 NA should be producing what the turbo is producing now, sans the 310ft/lb torque. It would easily do it, too...

    I don't want to get yrwei on another binge, but the 2.0L may have been a better platform for the turbo engine, and it could easily produce the numbers they're getting as well...

    This Skyactiv-G is a good one, I totally agree, not trying to say that it isn't, but it's not even close to one of the best 4 cylinders ever made, it doesn't even make the Top 5, and it never will...
    Last edited by NelsonLewis; 07-11-2019 at 09:16 AM.

  7. #22
    Banned

    16.5 CX-5 GT AWD w/Tech BRMica

    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Dirty South
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by Unobtanium View Post
    Can you cite a reference for this datapoint? Or is that just your opinion?
    You can call it my opinion, but you're acting like Mazda is the only one with these hp and torque numbers. It doesn't take a lot of common sense (although we know that doesn't exist much around here) to know all mfgs pull timing and run rich as hell from the factory for a safety blanket, especially on a damn turbo. It's been going on for 20 years, and will continue to do so...

  8. #23
    Banned

    16.5 CX-5 GT AWD w/Tech BRMica

    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Dirty South
    Posts
    2,226
    Just for the record, MAZDA doesn't have an engineering problem, they have a huge Management problem, IMO, just like GE...

  9. #24
    Registered Member

    CX5 GT-R

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    South-Central US
    Posts
    7,570
    Quote Originally Posted by NelsonLewis View Post
    185 lbs of torque? Meaty? LMAO! May not find that torque, but the examples are by the handful, and most come from almost 20+ years ago...

    I'll go deeper, the 2.5 NA should be producing what the turbo is producing now, sans the 310ft/lb torque. It would easily do it, too...

    I don't want to get yrwei on another binge, but the 2.0L may have been a better platform for the turbo engine, and it could easily produce the numbers they're getting as well...

    This Skyactiv-G is a good one, I totally agree, not trying to say that it isn't, but it's not even close to one of the best 4 cylinders ever made, it doesn't even make the Top 5, and it never will...
    Actually...it kindof does. The SA engine architecture and internals are the same on the 2.5T, and it made WARDs list.

    Further, the 2.5T Mazda chose is excellent. It is putting up similar acceleration times to the RDX, GLC300, and Q5, while getting better real-world fuel economy and having near zero turbo lag. Wonderful engine!

    Since you dog the 2.5 SA-G so much, what engine would you allege is a better one for a CUV that is less or equal to 2.5L, and NA?

  10. #25
    Banned

    16.5 CX-5 GT AWD w/Tech BRMica

    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Dirty South
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by Unobtanium View Post
    Actually...it kindof does. The SA engine architecture and internals are the same on the 2.5T, and it made WARDs list.

    Further, the 2.5T Mazda chose is excellent. It is putting up similar acceleration times to the RDX, GLC300, and Q5, while getting better real-world fuel economy and having near zero turbo lag. Wonderful engine!

    Since you dog the 2.5 SA-G so much, what engine would you allege is a better one for a CUV that is less or equal to 2.5L, and NA?
    I actually didn't dog it, I said it was an excellent engine. To answer your question, I would use it and get more out of it. It's really quite simple...

  11. #26
    Registered Member

    CX5 GT-R

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    South-Central US
    Posts
    7,570
    Quote Originally Posted by NelsonLewis View Post
    You can call it my opinion, but you're acting like Mazda is the only one with these hp and torque numbers. It doesn't take a lot of common sense (although we know that doesn't exist much around here) to know all mfgs pull timing and run rich as hell from the factory for a safety blanket, especially on a damn turbo. It's been going on for 20 years, and will continue to do so...
    Yes, and if you go into the ECU tuning, you can see they pull mad timing in the 1-2 and sometimes 2-3 shifts...GM even installed a physical orifice/restriction in the clutch hydraulic lines in an attempt to slow clutch engagement on the 6-speed manuals on the LS1 F-bodies to preserve the diff. The autos received generous amounts of timing retard on shifts in those as well for the same purpose.

  12. #27
    Registered Member

    CX5 GT-R

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    South-Central US
    Posts
    7,570
    Quote Originally Posted by NelsonLewis View Post
    I actually didn't dog it, I said it was an excellent engine. To answer your question, I would use it and get more out of it. It's really quite simple...
    Everything is a compromise. Could you get more power? Sure. but would you get several hundred thousand issue-free miles out of it? Still OK to run 87? Dunno 'bout that. What about intake valve build-up? Tons of variables and moving parts and alterations in internal environ go into play regarding how an engine is tuned.

  13. #28
    Banned

    16.5 CX-5 GT AWD w/Tech BRMica

    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Dirty South
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by Unobtanium View Post
    Yes, and if you go into the ECU tuning, you can see they pull mad timing in the 1-2 and sometimes 2-3 shifts...GM even installed a physical orifice/restriction in the clutch hydraulic lines in an attempt to slow clutch engagement on the 6-speed manuals on the LS1 F-bodies to preserve the diff. The autos received generous amounts of timing retard on shifts in those as well for the same purpose.
    I was talking tuning of the engine, ONLY, of course I can alter shift points and make it do all sorts of things, DUH!

  14. #29
    Banned

    16.5 CX-5 GT AWD w/Tech BRMica

    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Dirty South
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by Unobtanium View Post
    Everything is a compromise. Could you get more power? Sure. but would you get several hundred thousand issue-free miles out of it? Still OK to run 87? Dunno 'bout that. What about intake valve build-up? Tons of variables and moving parts and alterations in internal environ go into play regarding how an engine is tuned.
    Yes, yes, and yes...

  15. #30
    Registered Member

    CX5 GT-R

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    South-Central US
    Posts
    7,570
    Quote Originally Posted by NelsonLewis View Post
    Yes, yes, and yes...
    So the only reason Mazda tunes these the way they do is because they are dumber than you, or they want to give us sub-standard performing products. Can you think of a different reason?

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. All about CX-5 longevity
    By buyingconstant7 in forum CX-5 Lounge
    Replies: 100
    Last Post: 10-15-2015, 12:07 AM
  2. Engine longevity?
    By PR5speed in forum Protege5
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 11-23-2009, 08:50 PM
  3. Longevity
    By mikey1981 in forum Mazda CX-7
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-02-2007, 05:23 PM
  4. Turbo Install: fuel rail/fuel return/fmu
    By Matthew in forum Mazda How-To
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-27-2004, 08:45 PM
  5. Longevity
    By clownphish in forum Lounge
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-29-2004, 07:16 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •