2019 CX-5 getting 2.5 Turbo engine??

:
2017 CX5 AWD Touring
New Mazda6 Turbo does the 1/4 mile in 14.9 @ 97mph

Mazda6 2.5 with NO turbo did the 1/4 mile in 15.5 @ 92mph

The above is fast. When compared to the "muscle car" era, running 14's and 15's would be muscle car era fast.

1969 Super bee 383 4 speed 3.55- 14.0@99
1969 Fairlane Cobra 428 automatic 3.50- 14.0@100.6
1969 Cyclone 428 automatic 3.91- 13.94@100.89
1969 roadrunner hemi automatic 3.54- 13.54@105
1969 Boss 302 Mustang 4 speed 3.50- 14.57@97
1969 Corvette 427 435 hp 4 speed 3.70- 13.8@106.8
1970 Challenger hemi automatic 3.23- 14.1@103.2
1970 GTO 455 4 speed 3.31- 15.0@96.5
1970 Z28 automatic 4.10- 14.2@103.3
1970 LS6 Chevelle automatic 3.70- 13.81@103.8
1970 Duster 340 4 speed 3.91- 14.39@97.2
1970 Boss 302 mustang 4 speed 3.91-14.93@93.45
1971 Roadrunner 440 automatic 3.23- 14.9@95.4
1972 Barracuda 340 4 speed 3.55- 15.5@97.7
 
:
was 175ps Mazda CX-5 Auto AWD Sport Nav, now 190ps DSG Tiguan 4M
New Mazda6 Turbo does the 1/4 mile in 14.9 @ 97mph

Mazda6 2.5 with NO turbo did the 1/4 mile in 15.5 @ 92mph

The above is fast. When compared to the "muscle car" era, running 14's and 15's would be muscle car era fast.

1969 Super bee 383 4 speed 3.55- 14.0@99
1969 Fairlane Cobra 428 automatic 3.50- 14.0@100.6
1969 Cyclone 428 automatic 3.91- 13.94@100.89
1969 roadrunner hemi automatic 3.54- 13.54@105
1969 Boss 302 Mustang 4 speed 3.50- 14.57@97
1969 Corvette 427 435 hp 4 speed 3.70- 13.8@106.8
1970 Challenger hemi automatic 3.23- 14.1@103.2
1970 GTO 455 4 speed 3.31- 15.0@96.5
1970 Z28 automatic 4.10- 14.2@103.3
1970 LS6 Chevelle automatic 3.70- 13.81@103.8
1970 Duster 340 4 speed 3.91- 14.39@97.2
1970 Boss 302 mustang 4 speed 3.91-14.93@93.45
1971 Roadrunner 440 automatic 3.23- 14.9@95.4
1972 Barracuda 340 4 speed 3.55- 15.5@97.7

Not according to this test.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWOAvnpgDkQ

Check out the figures at around 2.58 near the end.
There have the 1/4 mile at 16.16 sec not 15.5, and 0-62 mph at 8.34
 
:
2017 CX5 AWD Touring
Not according to this test.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWOAvnpgDkQ

Check out the figures at around 2.58 near the end.
There have the 1/4 mile at 16.16 sec not 15.5, and 0-62 mph at 8.34

Officially, the 2.5T in the Mazda6 runs 14.9s in the 1/4 mile.

I've been involved in drag racing for 30 years. Everyone knows that driver error plays a huge role. The second factor is atmospheric conditions (hot and humid day). Many variables at play.
 
:
RDX Aspec Adv.
Officially, the 2.5T in the Mazda6 runs 14.9s in the 1/4 mile.

I've been involved in drag racing for 30 years. Everyone knows that driver error plays a huge role. The second factor is atmospheric conditions (hot and humid day). Many variables at play.

+1

Here:
http://www.motortrend.com/news/2018-mazda6-25t-2018-mazda-cx-5-car-compare/


Notice how the non turbo 2.5 SA 6 hit 0-60 identical to the cx5 (mine, not the slower 2017+ as they tested)? 7.9 seconds? Yeah...a turbo 2.5 cx5 would be low to flat 6s with awd.
 
:
'16.5 CX-5 AWD
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.

My best was 32.4 mpg (7.26l/100km) on the freeway using cruise control at 115 kph. It was much like driving from Melbourne to Wondonga at 115, including a 750 meter mountain. I was gentle with the throttle and trying to minimize fuel burn. Saturday, I drove to Birmingham and back (520 km) at 135 kph and it got ~26.5 mpg (8.9l/100k). Will yours not do that? I wonder if there is a difference in the US and Oz cars.

My first CX-5, a 2015, was a lease return and it struggled to get 8l/100 even at 105 kph. I didn't break it in and I think that is the difference.
 
:
'18 Mazda CX-5 Akera KG i-Activ AWD 2.5L In Sonic Silver
My best was 32.4 mpg (7.26l/100km) on the freeway using cruise control at 115 kph. It was much like driving from Melbourne to Wondonga at 115, including a 750 meter mountain. I was gentle with the throttle and trying to minimize fuel burn. Saturday, I drove to Birmingham and back (520 km) at 135 kph and it got ~26.5 mpg (8.9l/100k). Will yours not do that? I wonder if there is a difference in the US and Oz cars.

My first CX-5, a 2015, was a lease return and it struggled to get 8l/100 even at 105 kph. I didn't break it in and I think that is the difference.
The figures above are for city/urban. I've hit 7.2L/100km from a trip to the central coast which included decent amount of motorway driving as well as normal urban driving m
 
:
'18 Mazda CX-5 Akera KG i-Activ AWD 2.5L In Sonic Silver
That is impressive.

Probably should keep the 17 a while but if this is true that would be tempting.

I was wrong. It was 7.0L/100km. Here's the post about that:

Did a 100 km (62 mile trip) last weekend with myself and a passenger onboard. 62 km (38 miles) was on the motorway with speeds varying from 80-110km/h (49.7-68.35mph) with atleast 3 fixed speed cameras (set at 80km/h [49.7mph] & 100km/h [62mph]).

Achieved combined figure below which equates to 33.60 USMPG which I am satisifed with (it was under the official figure of 7.4 L/100KM [31.79 USMPG]):

1pw8w3.jpg
 
:
2021 Acura RDX
I was wrong. It was 7.0L/100km. Here's the post about that:

Might be time to swap out the 17 GT :) haha. But in all reality, they would need a new body style for ment consider it. My 2.5 NA has plenty of power for what I need it to do. However, a turbo would definitely be fun :)
 
:
'18 Mazda CX-5 Akera KG i-Activ AWD 2.5L In Sonic Silver
Might be time to swap out the 17 GT :) haha. But in all reality, they would need a new body style for ment consider it. My 2.5 NA has plenty of power for what I need it to do. However, a turbo would definitely be fun :)
Turbo would be fun. As for new style, try next generation circa 2020/2021
 
:
2013 VRM Mazdaspeed3, 2016 Soul Red CX-5 GT
Wooo this is great news if it comes to fruition. The choice then becomes, do you take the Mazda6 Turbo or the CX-5 Turbo with AWD? That's a good problem to have.
 
:
RDX Aspec Adv.
Wooo this is great news if it comes to fruition. The choice then becomes, do you take the Mazda6 Turbo or the CX-5 Turbo with AWD? That's a good problem to have.

It truly would be awesome! I'd finally have to concede that the cx5 was a choice someone wants to make instead of has to make due to logistics.
 
:
2021 CX-9 Sig
:
2021 CX-5 GT
I thought Mazda has stated the CX-5 and Mazda 6 don't have room for the 2.5T and AWD. What would have changed in the CX-5 to allow this to happen now?

Personally, I think they should do to the 2.5 engine what they did for the 2.0 engine in the new 2019 Miata.