2023 Mazda CX-5 S or 2021 Carbon Turbo

[linuxology]

2021 Carbon Turbo has ~26,000 miles on it or the 2023 CX-5 S. Both vehicles will cost about the same. I don't really need the turbo and leaning towards new as I don't need all of the bells and whistles. Thoughts?

 

[cx5boo333]

If you aren't dying for the turbo, then the fresh warranty and clean history of a new car are pretty nice. I don't have the turbo and don't feel disappointed by the power, it's definitely enough for me. They both have the bigger screen, so I don't see any reason to get the '21 unless you want the turbo/styling more than the perks of a new car.

 

[linuxology]

Based on pricing of used cars. I think it may be best to spring for new. I never bought a new car, but like the aspect that I will know the entire service history of the vehicle. With the price gaps between new and used currently, it seems new is the way to go.

 

[DFZ24]

Well is up to you. 2 different trims

Does the features on the S is enough for you?

What features does the carbon has? I would imagine more. If it have the bose system and other features that I like or want, I would take the carbon edition.

Again I would say is up to you.

 

[potownrob]

isn't carbon trim similar to touring feature wise? linux, have you looked at both cars? even if you think you may not want or need the features of the higher trim, seeing them in person may make you realize you could benefit from some of the extra features, for example heated power seats vs. manual non-heated. i personally wouldn't want to go from my '17 GT to a newer lower trim model without the features I have, though I might if need be.

 

[wlong01]

If you aren't dying for the turbo, then the fresh warranty and clean history of a new car are pretty nice. I don't have the turbo and don't feel disappointed by the power, it's definitely enough for me. They both have CD and the bigger screen, so I don't see any reason to get the '21 unless you want the turbo/styling more than the perks of a new car.

Turbo does not have CD.

 

[linuxology]

Turbo does not have CD.

What is worst for longevity of vehicle CD or turbo. Seems the na engine would be more durable long term.

 

[potownrob]

Turbo does not have CD.

you'd think they would throw in a CD player for paying the extra dough for the turbo; you'd be wrong

 

[potownrob]

2021 Carbon Turbo has ~26,000 miles on it or the 2023 CX-5 S. Both vehicles will cost about the same. I don't really need the turbo and leaning towards new as I don't need all of the bells and whistles. Thoughts?

does the carbon turbo come with any kind of warranty? 26k miles isn't much, assuming the car wasn't mistreated.

 

[cz5gt]

with the 2021 oil burning issues and TSB for the Turbo and since you dont care, I would probably get the brand new 2023 one non-turbo.

 

[wlong01]

What is worst for longevity of vehicle CD or turbo. Seems the na engine would be more durable long term.

Hard to say.
Have a 16 NA CX-5 with 38k and a 19 Turbo CX-5 with 35k and both have experienced no problems whatsoever.

 

[linuxology]

2017-Present CX-5.... Are there any year models to avoid? I'm leaning toward going the NA engine.

 

[wlong01]

2017-Present CX-5.... Are there any year models to avoid? I'm leaning toward going the NA engine.

Not that I have heard. But - probably would be prudent to put as much distance as you can from the 2018's. That was the first year of cylinder deactivation. Hopefully Mazda learned from the rocker arm failures and modified the internals, not just the software.

 

[yrwei52]

with the 2021 oil burning issues and TSB for the Turbo and since you dont care, I would probably get the brand new 2023 one non-turbo.

This makes sense. However, those 2.5L NA’s with CD (cylinder deactivation) have their own issues too. Some are the design issues, meaning IMO they’re inherent by the flawed concept.

 

[yrwei52]

What is worst for longevity of vehicle CD or turbo. Seems the na engine would be more durable long term.

Yes, the NA engine would be more durable long term than the turbo. But when you add the CD (cylinder deactivation), it’s a different story on long-term reliability.

 

[yrwei52]

2017-Present CX-5.... Are there any year models to avoid? I'm leaning toward going the NA engine.

Under this criteria and if you really want a Mazda CX-5, the choice is easy. Get a low-mileage 2017 CX-5 preferably with the CPO. It has a 2.5L NA without CD. And the CPO gives you a good Mazda warranty.

 

[DennisM23]

I have a CX-30 NA, and a CX-5 turbo. Prefer turbo.

 

[ColtX-5]

I'm on my 2nd normally aspirated CX-5. Normally they have plenty of power, but I'll buy a turbo next time. Still watching a firm in TX that's working on a rear mount turbo for a Miata. When they do one for the ND, I'll b after them for one for my CX-5.

 

[ceric]

If you don't mind the MPG decreases, turbo gives you a notch up of performance.
NA tends to struggle on hill climbing with full load.
I got a '17 NA and '22 Turbo.

However, isn't there a class action on '21 turbo engine for oil consumption?

Mazda Oil Consumption Lawsuit Says No Repairs Available

A Mazda class action lawsuit alleges oil consumption issues make these vehicles dangerous to drive. 2021 Mazda3 2021 Mazda6 2021 Mazda CX-30 2021 Mazda CX-5 2021 Mazda CX-9 The Mazda oil consumption lawsuit was filed by California plaintiff Brian Heinz who purchased a 2021 Mazda CX-30 in...

www.carcomplaints.com

 

[Zebo]

Go with the 2023 non turbo. Plenty of power for what you will use the car for, I bet. No issue on hill climbing or any other situations. I drove the mountain rd loaded with absolutely no issues. The autotrans is very smooth with proper handling and a light foot. I mean, I really don’t understand the need for a turbo on those small suv. You will never need it. I see people driving turbos commuting to work, going to the grocery store and dropping the kids to school, seriously, the NA is all yo need and will save you money at the pump as the mpg is really not that good.