CX-5 Performance Stages

9.0 seconds seems rather slow when every test of a 2015 2.5 touring I have seen has been around 7.8, and even AWD times have been close to that figure.
 
9.0 seconds seems rather slow when every test of a 2015 2.5 touring I have seen has been around 7.8, and even AWD times have been close to that figure.

AWD adds about .5-.9 seconds to 0-60 times. An extra 35 HP on a 3500 lb. vehicle will subtract about .9-1.1 seconds from 0-60 times. But I don't believe 35 HP is achievable with just a tune (at least not any tune I would be comfortable running). I plan to keep my CX-5 a long time and hopefully I just need to deal with fuel, oil and filters.

Mazda does publish much lower figures than these but all the ones I've seen are on Euro spec 14:1 compression engines using higher octane fuel, 17" wheels and on vehicles without sunroofs, roof rails, or other added weight accessories. Of course some of the published magazine times are done on U.S. spec CX-5's (often with sunroofs and even the heavier 19" wheels). But the test drivers will generally use a two footed approach to load the engine/tranny against the brakes right before launch.

A car that can do a sub 5 second 0-60 is quite rare. The fact that we are better than halfway there (in terms of G's of acceleration) is good. A fully loaded school bus can take around 45 seconds to reach 60 mph!
 
Last edited:
Again as stated already, and which should be kind of obvious, I m not using the same instruments (my main device as a cell phones gps), same track, same grade, environment etc that went into the times achieved by the oem or motortrend. Thats simply a reference number good for my car, at my test location.
 
The density altitude here is also higher most of the time compared to wa because of temperature and relative humidity.

True. The easiest way to get more performance from your car is to move to the West Coast! But let's keep this our little secret... (gossip)
 
AWD adds about .5-.9 seconds to 0-60 times. An extra 35 HP on a 3500 lb. vehicle will subtract about .9-1.1 seconds from 0-60 times. But I don't believe 35 HP is achievable with just a tune (at least not any tune I would be comfortable running). I plan to keep my CX-5 a long time and hopefully I just need to deal with fuel, oil and filters.
I'm getting 7.8seconds 0-60 just like magazine published numbers. Are you saying if I had the FWD instead of AWD version, I would be getting near seven flat? I find that hard to believe and see no reason to think that is the case. Can you support that opinion with facts/figures, maybe the same magazine testing hte FWD 2.5 and getting 7.0? Or maybe...ANYONE getting anything NEAR 7.0 out of the FWD?

Mazda does publish much lower figures than these but all the ones I've seen are on Euro spec 14:1 compression engines using higher octane fuel, 17" wheels and on vehicles without sunroofs, roof rails, or other added weight accessories. Of course some of the published magazine times are done on U.S. spec CX-5's (often with sunroofs and even the heavier 19" wheels). But the test drivers will generally use a two footed approach to load the engine/tranny against the brakes right before launch.

A car that can do a sub 5 second 0-60 is quite rare. The fact that we are better than halfway there (in terms of G's of acceleration) is good. A fully loaded school bus can take around 45 seconds to reach 60 mph!

A family car maybe, but sub 5 second 0-60 is not that big of a deal. However, I am leaning more toward 0-100mph times, simply because many vehicles have you shifting into 2nd by 60. Not all, but many, and SOME even force you into 3rd. Often at 55-58mph. So you take a 4.3 second 0-60 and turn it into a 5.0 second 0-60 just because of the extra shift required for those last 2mph. It makes the car seem a LOT slower (on paper) than it is in the real world. 0-100 gives more accurate representation, I think. If you want a real-world example, look at the 2015 WRX STi and compare it to the 2014 WRX STi. Same motor, similar weight, MUCH worse 0-60 times for magazine testing, but in the real world...
 
Very interesting - thanks! Since you aren't increasing power by too much, is that why alternate brakes aren't listed?
 
Very interesting - thanks! Since you aren't increasing power by too much, is that why alternate brakes aren't listed?

Yea upgrading brakes isn't really pertinent unless you are boosted or have issues at an autox/towing
 
If anyone is looking at mods and worried about how it affects drivability feel free to ask questions
 
I think I will only do the Eibach Springs. Any idea how thrown off the alignment might be?

Don't want to do to much to it, thats my my other toy is for

evo_zpsbwve5ddm.jpg
 
Last edited:
Chris -

Being an owner of multiple sports cars over the years and currently owning a 1994 Mustang Cobra and my 2016 EcoBoost Premium w/Performance Package.... Your CX-5 is VERY COOL!

We just bought a 2016.5 CX-5 Touring for my wife last weekend - first Mazda owner and it's a really nice SUV with great power in stock form (especially coming from a 2011 Hyundai Tucson that we traded for it). I googled Mazda CX-5 forums and ended up here and started lurking, then reading more, then joining. Your other thread was one of the first I started to view just to see what it was that you were doing with your CX-5. Then I started viewing the photos threads and then the Exterior/Appearance threads...

You took yours to not only a totally different level, but did it tastefully where all of your upgrades look awesome - not over done and not "blinged" out. Some folks don't get that regardless of vehicle type, if you have the need for speed in your blood and the capabilities to do it, it's gonna get done to satisfy that quest. It's not for everyone, but when someone like you ventures out and modifies such a vehicle as you did - it's definitively COOL in every aspect.

I really like the rims you picked out - again, stuff like that just makes the CX-5 look that much better.

Turbo a CX-5? Increase HP? Sure some will question it or say "It's an SUV, go buy a sports car" - but again, my statement would be "why not"? Hell, why not twin turbo it... :)

Best of luck, keep the threads updated!
 
Chris -

Being an owner of multiple sports cars over the years and currently owning a 1994 Mustang Cobra and my 2016 EcoBoost Premium w/Performance Package.... Your CX-5 is VERY COOL!

We just bought a 2016.5 CX-5 Touring for my wife last weekend - first Mazda owner and it's a really nice SUV with great power in stock form (especially coming from a 2011 Hyundai Tucson that we traded for it). I googled Mazda CX-5 forums and ended up here and started lurking, then reading more, then joining. Your other thread was one of the first I started to view just to see what it was that you were doing with your CX-5. Then I started viewing the photos threads and then the Exterior/Appearance threads...

You took yours to not only a totally different level, but did it tastefully where all of your upgrades look awesome - not over done and not "blinged" out. Some folks don't get that regardless of vehicle type, if you have the need for speed in your blood and the capabilities to do it, it's gonna get done to satisfy that quest. It's not for everyone, but when someone like you ventures out and modifies such a vehicle as you did - it's definitively COOL in every aspect.

I really like the rims you picked out - again, stuff like that just makes the CX-5 look that much better.

Turbo a CX-5? Increase HP? Sure some will question it or say "It's an SUV, go buy a sports car" - but again, my statement would be "why not"? Hell, why not twin turbo it... :)

Best of luck, keep the threads updated!

Why not turbo the Hyundai Tucson?
 
From what I understand, SkyActiv doesn't have any decent tuning, either. You complain about your transmission, etc. last we talked?

Long story short...


...buy a sports car :)
 
From what I understand, SkyActiv doesn't have any decent tuning, either. You complain about your transmission, etc. last we talked?

Long story short...


...buy a sports car :)

Yep. Though sometimes I do wish I had an "all-in-one." Closest thing would be a X5 M or Porsche Cayenne.
 
From what I understand, SkyActiv doesn't have any decent tuning, either. You complain about your transmission, etc. last we talked?

Long story short...


...buy a sports car :)

? There are multiple individual/companies tuning skyactiv motors. Headers, and turbos are showing up too. Including for the ND.
 
Yep. Though sometimes I do wish I had an "all-in-one." Closest thing would be a X5 M or Porsche Cayenne.

A 1-2 year old SRT8 Jeep would also fit, although I'd urge you to get the extended warranty, SRT products have very solid drivelines, historically, and don't suffer from typical Chrysleritis when it comes to that.
 
Back