30 extra horsepower and 34ft-lb more torque with a minimal weight gain will be sufficient for my needs. I don't care to pay for premium fuel and I'd prefer the economy of a 2.5L NA engine over a 2L turbo. The CX-5 is a great all-around vehicle except for the power-plant (Which is less of an issue at sea level, but still present) The 2.5L engine will address the largest issue I have with it. I certainly don't expect to fly off the line - the 2.5L will resolve much of the slowness with acceleration onto the interstate and when tackling inclined gradients that I've experienced during my time with the CX-5.
2014 CX-5 180hp engine release date?
- Thread starter Bmiddy
- Start date
30 extra horsepower and 34ft-lb more torque with a minimal weight gain will be sufficient for my needs. I don't care to pay for premium fuel and I'd prefer the economy of a 2.5L NA engine over a 2L turbo. The CX-5 is a great all-around vehicle except for the power-plant (Which is less of an issue at sea level, but still present) The 2.5L engine will address the largest issue I have with it. I certainly don't expect to fly off the line - the 2.5L will resolve much of the slowness with acceleration onto the interstate and when tackling inclined gradients that I've experienced during my time with the CX-5.
Yes, tbd since nobody has driven the 2.5.
But regarding altitude and power loss, even a 1.6L turbo (such as Escape's) will generate more power than the 2.5L at Colorado's high altitude.
2.0L turbo and/or premium fuel not required.
One need not drive it to have a ballpark estimate of how it's going to perform. - I'm not expecting a night and day difference, I'm expecting a bit of extra oomph when needed for hills and highway acceleration, which the CX-5 with the 2L NA engine lacks, manual mode or not. The 2L engine is peppy enough on flat surfaces for city driving.
The Escape does not require premium, but it is recommended. That and I'd never touch one - The styling is not to my liking, it's priced higher than the majority of the competition at similar equipment levels, and I question its long-term reliability.
I'm not looking to generate more power than a 2.5L NA engine. I'm looking to generate more power than the 2.0L NA engine found in the CX-5, which the new 2.5L NA engine will accomplish assuredly.
155 HP and 150 ft-lb of torque is underwhelming for a 3400lb vehicle. 184 HP and 185 ft-lb of torque for a 3500lb (or so) vehicle is much more palatable and useful.
Last edited:
Wife and I test-drove the CR-V, and neither of us was very impressed with it, I was probably even less impressed than she was. She drove the CX-5 afterward, and much preferred it in nearly every respect, except for lack of power. When I told her the CX-5 would be offered with a 2.5L engine, she was very interested. I'd really like her to hold out for the Skyactiv-D, but she's itchin' to get a new car sooner than later, so I don't know if I can convince her to hold out that long, and I have to be honest, I have a subliminal fear of her putting the wrong fuel into it if she got a diesel, and getting that fateful phone call. (hand)
Nobody at my local dealership would fess up to a ballpark idea of when the 2.5L models would start rolling in - I'm sure that they'd like to play it close to the vest if they did know anything to promote '13 sales, though.
I'd expect both the '14 2.5L CX-5 and '14 Forester to arrive sometime between March and May... but I wish both would arrive sooner. I'm ready to trade in my reliable and faithful 'Stang so I can enjoy Colorado the way it's meant to be enjoyed
Every source, including mazda itself, says that the '14 cx-5 will be available this month. And I hope they are right, if its not, Ill also have to cross shop the forester or even wait until fall if its not out until 2nd quarter.
The Forester will definitely be here between Mar - May. It's already available in Japan and dealers have SOME idea of what's going on. The 2.5L CX-5, on the other hand, seems to have no such foundation. The MY '14 will likely arrive this month or next, but MY '14 lumps in both the 2L and 2.5L engines. I bet we'll see the MY '14 2.0L this month, as for the 2.5L, we'll see.
NinjaNoises
Member
- :
- CX-5 Sport MT
If they release a 2.5 with 6Speed MT, I would beat myself up for not waiting.
dad of jon
Member
- :
- cx-5 se-l 2.2D
138HP! - (eek)my 1995 accent had ...erm... 86HP. You are spoiled in the USA!
Mazda has been playing it close to the chest even with the initial CX-5 launch a year ago.
Based on their official statements, I'd expect you could order a vehicle as early as January, probably for early deliveries of late January into February.
I was seriously considering the Forester 12' but did not like their 4AT nor fuel economy. The Forester 14' will come with Subaru's 2nd gen CVT except for base and will be available after March. The head gasket issue was plaguing older EJ engines a few years back and was resolved. The new FB 2.5 has some tendency for oil consumption, which affects some owners, others less so or not at all. I don't think Subaru will be more reliable than Mazda, both less reliable than Honda / Toyota. I believe the Forester will not live to its lofty MPG claims, same as the Impreza, and in-fact the CX-5 2.5L to get better average MPG (but I obviously don't have data to show you on the 2.5L). IMHO the new Forester, especially the XT looks worse than the outgoing model. I'd expect the Forester to have better AWD system and be somewhat better for light off-road.
I'd expect the CX-5 to be quicker, handle better and be all-around fun to drive vehicle. The Forester to be slower or even slow (without Turbo), have a CVT which requires getting used to, potentially get all first model year defects which Subaru is not going to get resolved quickly and not live up to its MPG claims.
Except for the better AWD system, there is no competition for me.
Based on their official statements, I'd expect you could order a vehicle as early as January, probably for early deliveries of late January into February.
I was seriously considering the Forester 12' but did not like their 4AT nor fuel economy. The Forester 14' will come with Subaru's 2nd gen CVT except for base and will be available after March. The head gasket issue was plaguing older EJ engines a few years back and was resolved. The new FB 2.5 has some tendency for oil consumption, which affects some owners, others less so or not at all. I don't think Subaru will be more reliable than Mazda, both less reliable than Honda / Toyota. I believe the Forester will not live to its lofty MPG claims, same as the Impreza, and in-fact the CX-5 2.5L to get better average MPG (but I obviously don't have data to show you on the 2.5L). IMHO the new Forester, especially the XT looks worse than the outgoing model. I'd expect the Forester to have better AWD system and be somewhat better for light off-road.
I'd expect the CX-5 to be quicker, handle better and be all-around fun to drive vehicle. The Forester to be slower or even slow (without Turbo), have a CVT which requires getting used to, potentially get all first model year defects which Subaru is not going to get resolved quickly and not live up to its MPG claims.
Except for the better AWD system, there is no competition for me.
Last edited:
Yes because you spend most of your time looking UP at the front bumper. That said, I don't care for the front end of the XT model. (I'm interested in the X model) The Forester is based on the new Impreza, which has been major-defect free from what I can tell and it uses the same engine that the previous gen Forester did (for the 2.5 NA model).
The 2.5L Mazda CX-5 will have a good 150lbs or so on the 2.5L Forester which will offset some of the HP/torque difference, too.
If you spend the vast majority of your days in a city or warm environment where the capabilities of the car are not stressed (outside of typical driving fun), the CX-5 is the best choice IMO. If you hope to do a bit more with the vehicle or expect to task it with more challenging weather and environments I'd opt for the '14 Forester.
Also, I actually find the new Forester to be quite handsome
The 2.5L Mazda CX-5 will have a good 150lbs or so on the 2.5L Forester which will offset some of the HP/torque difference, too.
If you spend the vast majority of your days in a city or warm environment where the capabilities of the car are not stressed (outside of typical driving fun), the CX-5 is the best choice IMO. If you hope to do a bit more with the vehicle or expect to task it with more challenging weather and environments I'd opt for the '14 Forester.
Also, I actually find the new Forester to be quite handsome
Last edited:
dad of jon
Member
- :
- cx-5 se-l 2.2D
re: CX-SV comment about the 2014 XT -
I agree,
a cross between a wire-fox terrier and a transformer!
I agree,
a cross between a wire-fox terrier and a transformer!
Last edited:
Subaru's current generation appeals to me - and I think that the Crosstrek is one of the best looking cars I've seen in the segment. I find most of the Subies from prior generations to be pretty barfy on the whole, though.
I do love the styling on the CX-5, as well. I'm new to both brands, so I do not carry an inherent preference
I do love the styling on the CX-5, as well. I'm new to both brands, so I do not carry an inherent preference
I have been following Impreza owners' forums and got first-hand account of several defects and annoyances with the 12' Impreza, all affecting some owners. Oil consumption, bad water drainage from the front doors, creaking driver's seat, bad passenger occupancy sensor, which disables the airbag even though someone is seating there, hard/long to start, bad breaks master cylinder, quirky CVT behavior when accelerating past 45 MPH, too mush transmission breaking going downhill, fan makes much noise with little airflow, dying hands-free microphone, low quality radio in top-level trims and, of course, rattles and squeaks.
Couple this with many complaints about unattainable MPG numbers.
The Crosstrek is a heavier and slower Impreza which gets worse fuel economy, only for a little more ground clearance.
It also has larger brakes and a beefier radiator so it gains a 1,500lb tow rating. I think the fuel economy penalty is worthwhile for the aesthetic improvements, tall stance, improved winter performance, and light off-road capability. It's slightly less underpowered than the 2.0L CX-5, carrying a 21.4lb/HP weight ratio vs. the CX-5's 22.1lb/HP ratio. It IS underpowered for sure, though, and one of the primary reasons why I haven't pulled the trigger on one, despite how much I love its form and function. (That's the primary reason I haven't purchased a CX-5 yet, too
)
Last edited:
jarcher107
Member
- :
- 2014 CX-5, Touring, Bose/moonroof, formerly 1994 RX-7
I asked a semi-local dealer online when they would have a 2.5L 2014 CX-5 on the lot, and the answer...he had to wander off to find someone with an answer or at least a clue....was "We expect them to start trickling in in mid-March, maybe a little sooner, maybe a little later" which was just vague enough I'm willing to believe it's true. Will bug a few more dealers overnight, see what they have to say.
No need to worry about self abuse...the 2.5L will only be available with 6AT in Touring & Grand Touring trim levels.
New Posts and Comments
-
- Sticky
- Article
