2019 CX-5 getting 2.5 Turbo engine??

[unixxus]

If the surprising information just posted on the California Air Resource Board's website is accurate, the 2019 CX-5 will be getting the 2.5 Turbo found in the CX-9 as an option. (drinks)

https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onroad/cert/pcldtmdv/2019/mazda_ldt_a0160456_2d5_u3-125.pdf

 

[yrwei52]

So as the 2.2L diesel ⋯

 

[Xeler8ing]

Good to hear.

Just be aware it might drink more fuel than the 2.5 NA and 2.2 D just like what's happened in the 2018 6

 

[ronakg]

This is very promising. I'm in the market for a new CX-5, I should probably wait a few months.

 

[Xeler8ing]

This is very promising. I'm in the market for a new CX-5, I should probably wait a few months.

Try November. That's when the KF was unveiled in 2016 then went on sale late 2016, early 2017

 

[Puyapim]

I wonder if this means the 2018 SkyActiv 2.5 with CD will be a one year appearance only? Unless, the turbo is trim specific.

 

[Xeler8ing]

I wonder if this means the 2018 SkyActiv 2.5 with CD will be a one year appearance only? Unless, the turbo is trim specific.

I'd say trim specific such as top 2 variants here (GT & Akera) just like it is on the 6 (GT & Atenza)

 

[Xeler8ing]

For me, I am glad I got the KG 2.5NA because I am pretty certain this 2.5T will consume more fuel especially in the city/urban where most of my driving is.

If there is moving traffic and my trips are not short in nature both duration and distance, currently in the KG 2.5NA, I can hit the official city/urban figures of 9.2 L/100KM (25.57 US mpg). But when caught in traffic and short in duration and distance, I get between 10.5 to 11.5 L/100km (20.45 to 22.40 US mpg), sometimes more if really short distance & duration.

The 2.5T in the CX-5 would probably be up there with our BK Series 2 Mazda 3 which does at least 11.0 L/100km in the city/urban (21.38 US mpg) in moving traffic and trips that are not short in nature both duration and distance.

If caught in traffic and short in duration and distance, I suspect the 2.5T CX-5 figure would be north of 12-12.5 L/100km (18.82-19.60 US mpg)

 

[Monterra]

That is surprising, but does it say anywhere that its the 2.5T engine? Or you see them lumping it in w/CX-9 and deducing that info?
I would certainly welcome it as an option but they should be careful about mandating it on higher trims- it should be optional imo (if true).

 

[Lbear]

I couldn't find where the docs show the turbo engine for the CX5

If it's true, the turbo would be available in the Signature trim, just like it is for the Mazda6 version

 

[Monterra]

^ Yeah but its mandated on 6 and not just on sig..gt, gt reserve(my pick) and sig.

 

[Xeler8ing]

That is surprising, but does it say anywhere that its the 2.5T engine? Or you see them lumping it in w/CX-9 and deducing that info?
I would certainly welcome it as an option but they should be careful about mandating it on higher trims- it should be optional imo (if true).

I couldn't find where the docs show the turbo engine for the CX5

If it's true, the turbo would be available in the Signature trim, just like it is for the Mazda6 version

Here's where it indicates it's a turbo engine:

And here is the legend that states it's a turbo:

 

[Unobtanium]

This is very promising. I'm in the market for a new CX-5, I should probably wait a few months.

By months, do you mean years?

 

[Xeler8ing]

By months, do you mean years?

Somewhere between now and 31 December 2019

 

[Unobtanium]

Somewhere between now and 31 December 2019

Still waiting on that diesel. Man, I just dont buy it. Sorry. Would be cool if it was legit. It should catapult the cx5 into the arena with $40-50k competitors at a fraction of the cost. The interior and driving dynamics are there now. Its the anemic powerplant. I'll go ahead and dream with ya...

 

[Xeler8ing]

Still waiting on that diesel. Man, I just dont buy it. Sorry. Would be cool if it was legit. It should catapult the cx5 into the arena with $40-50k competitors at a fraction of the cost. The interior and driving dynamics are there now. Its the anemic powerplant. I'll go ahead and dream with ya...

You are probably right. No other websites have actually picked up on this.

If it comes then all well and good but with Mazda's track record of fuel economy with turbo petrol (gasoline) engines, I think I'll pass considering average fuel prices here for regular unleaded (91 octane) has been hovering around $1.55 per litre and $1.65 per litre for premium unleaded 95 octane. 98 octane premium unleaded is around $1.73 per litre. I suspect the 2.5T in the CX-5 will be somewhere between the 6 and CX-9 in terms of fuel efficiency.

If fuel prices were down to somewhere around $1.10 to $1.30 per litre on a consistent basis, I would definitely consider it.

 

[Unobtanium]

You are probably right. No other websites have actually picked up on this.

If it comes then all well and good but with Mazda's track record of fuel economy with turbo petrol (gasoline) engines, I think I'll pass considering average fuel prices here for regular unleaded (91 octane) has been hovering around $1.55 per litre and $1.65 per litre for premium unleaded 95 octane. 98 octane premium unleaded is around $1.73 per litre. I suspect the 2.5T in the CX-5 will be somewhere between the 6 and CX-9 in terms of fuel efficiency.

If fuel prices were down to somewhere around $1.10 to $1.30 per litre on a consistent basis, I would definitely consider it.

If it arrives, it would actually be a very spirited vehicle. The forester 2.0xt didn't make as much power, and it was fun in a straight line. A 250/310 cx5 would be legit! That's how I know it won't ever happen.

 

[unixxus]

I'd say trim specific such as top 2 variants here (GT & Akera) just like it is on the 6 (GT & Atenza)

In the US, I'd suspect it would be the GT and a new Signature trim.

 

[alphadog00]

You are probably right. No other websites have actually picked up on this.

If it comes then all well and good but with Mazda's track record of fuel economy with turbo petrol (gasoline) engines, I think I'll pass considering average fuel prices here for regular unleaded (91 octane) has been hovering around $1.55 per litre and $1.65 per litre for premium unleaded 95 octane. 98 octane premium unleaded is around $1.73 per litre. I suspect the 2.5T in the CX-5 will be somewhere between the 6 and CX-9 in terms of fuel efficiency.

If fuel prices were down to somewhere around $1.10 to $1.30 per litre on a consistent basis, I would definitely consider it.

I thought i read an article on 6 vs cx-5 real world test, that showed the Turbo 6 returned better fuel economy then the Cx-5, even though epa numbers showed the CX-5 should be better.

 

[Sideswipe]

For me, I am glad I got the KG 2.5NA because I am pretty certain this 2.5T will consume more fuel especially in the city/urban where most of my driving is.

Agreed. If the turbo was available when I bought my 2017, I would definitely have sprung for it. But most of the driving I do has me getting ~11.0-11.5L/100KM, which is worse than I expected out of this car. It's not the biggest deal as I don't do a ton of driving (only 11,000km in this first year), but still not great. So I won't have too much buyer's remorse when/if a turbo CX-5 is available.

EDIT: some rough calculations show that it would cost me ~$300 more per year to drive the turbo (figuring ~13.5L/100km vs. 11L). I guess that's not a ridiculous amount. :/
If I was buying in 2019 with that knowledge, I might go for it. Would depend on the purchase price difference and performance difference of course, and I wouldn't want the turbo to be any louder (in the cabin), because even with all the NVH improvements in 2017, I wouldn't want any more engine noise for sure.