Is the Turbo CX-5 noticeably faster?

So, we purchased a 2025 CX-5 Turbo. Going by the reviews the turbo engine was supposed to thrill me. It really seems not much more powerful than the 2014 2.5 non-turbo model we also have. I didn't want to thrash it during the test drive before the engine was broken in. If I had known how underwhelming it is in real life we would have just gone with the non-turbo 2025 model.

Anyone else have experience with both engines?
 
We have both.

It's definitely more powerful. The low end torque is much greater and there's no dead spots on the way up. Once you break it in take it out on the interstate and apply power, you'll see the difference.
 
Driving both, you'll notice that the turbo can push its way up to speed without having to downshift and rev up nearly as much.

But yes, the difference between 180 lb ft and 350 lb ft of torque is pretty big. The Turbo basically feels like you are driving an NA V8 around.
 
It’s impressive that Mazda's 2.5L turbo 4 cyl. produces more horsepower and torque than the Corvette’s 350 cid engines of the mid-1970s through early 1980s.
I know that time wasn’t great for factory engine outputs, but still…
 
You could always consider a tuning.

Forum member AL CX5 has done two stages of DRTunes tuning (stage 1, and stage 2) on his fairly new turbo CX-5.

 
We have both.

It's definitely more powerful. The low end torque is much greater and there's no dead spots on the way up. Once you break it in take it out on the interstate and apply power, you'll see the difference.
If I floor the gas while cruising @ 55MPH, it has an absolute flat spot for about 2 seconds. The engine completely ignores me, then downshifts and goes. We have about 1,100 miles on it now. I have taken it on the highway and the power just isn't there.
 
Driving both, you'll notice that the turbo can push its way up to speed without having to downshift and rev up nearly as much.

But yes, the difference between 180 lb ft and 350 lb ft of torque is pretty big. The Turbo basically feels like you are driving an NA V8 around.
I would think that difference would be noticeable. Maybe my car has a problem. I also have two cars with V8s, and this does not feel anything like that, and no more powerful than the NA CX-5 we have.
 
You could always consider a tuning.

Forum member AL CX5 has done two stages of DRTunes tuning (stage 1, and stage 2) on his fairly new turbo CX-5.

Already contacted DRTunes and the response was that I have to wait until Mazda Edit releases the 2025 version.
On the main subject, after driving two NA Mazda CX-5 in the last 10 years, definitely YES, the Turbo is much faster, more fun to drive.
 
The turbo is all torque in the low end, not much hp in the hight end. At 55mph the transmission isn’t that well tuned and the turbo feel flat and is kind out of its stronger range. Especially if it kickdowns and rpms goes above 4000

The power in this engine does not “ramp up” with higher rpm like a naturally aspirated engine does. All the torque is between 2-3750 rpm. This is even more true if you don’t put premium fuel in it. Because with regular fuel the drop off after 4000 rpm is even more severe. It is a faster engine than the old CX-5, but it is also a different engine that feels and work differently. If you have ever driven diesel before it is kind of tuned like that. All the strength at low RPM but doesn’t like to rev.

Put it in manual mode and keep it betwen 2000-4000 rpm and you will see a big difference with the old CX-5 in that range
 
If I floor the gas while cruising @ 55MPH, it has an absolute flat spot for about 2 seconds. The engine completely ignores me, then downshifts and goes.
This doesn't sound normal to me. You shouldn't have to, but what happens if you manually downshift using the paddle in that situation?
 
It may be important to note that the 1st gen didn't have as much sound deadening and NVH mitigation as the 2nd gen, so the 1st gen feels more "raw" and less refined than the newer models, which can make it feel faster than it is. Additionally, the new car may still be "learning" how you drive, but in my experience with almost all drive-by-wire cars, there will always be a slight lag between pedal input and response. If the delay is actually 2 seconds, that seems like there may be a different issue at play, but again, the car's systems could still be learning and adapting to your driving patterns.

Going by the numbers, the 2014 CX-5 usually gets to 60mph in about 7.6s. The turbo CX-5 gets there in 6.1 to 6.8s.
 
 
If I floor the gas while cruising @ 55MPH, it has an absolute flat spot for about 2 seconds. The engine completely ignores me, then downshifts and goes. We have about 1,100 miles on it now. I have taken it on the highway and the power just isn't there.
You sure you got a Turbo?
 
Going by the numbers, the 2014 CX-5 usually gets to 60mph in about 7.6s. The turbo CX-5 gets there in 6.1 to 6.8s.
Yes, go by the 0-60 numbers that are tested and published...usually about a second faster in general. If the OP can't get close, something is probably wrong.
 
No one has noted that the 2014 is a LIGHTER car than the 2025/2nd gen. Thus the 2.5NA in the 2014 is faster than the NA 2025, and the turbo makes up for that (plus a bit more).
 
Both of my Mazda turbo cars have similar engine characteristics while driving. They don’t quite have the throttle response of my old Toyota V6, but there are no exaggerated flat spots or fall-off in power at an early RPM.
 
I had a 14 and have a 21 carbon turbo now. It's a night and day difference for me. Put it in sport mode and floor it. Also, this thing requires just touching the throttle on the highway to go from 50 to 70
 
What's the temperature where you live? There was a post years ago that the turbo wouldn't kick in below 20 degrees F

Good call. I think there was a TSB to reprogram the ECU.

I didn't believe the posts when it was initially reported, but I experienced it first hand when I purposely did test drives when it was very cold (like 0F). Car was gutless in 1st and I think 2nd gears and then took off in 3rd.
 
Back