2023 Mazda CX-5 S or 2021 Carbon Turbo
- Thread starter linuxology
- Start date
Jack Rabbit
Banned
- :
- 18 Mazda CX5 AW
Yes and No.
I have the 2018 non-turbo and drive in mountain terrain.
With 19 inch tires and when the trunk was loaded (incl some heavy tools) it was a dog.
After dropping weight, lighter mats, lighter 16 inch rims and tire combo, etc., it now drives like a cheetah and plenty of power for ramp merge.
The non-turbo is fine for most, especially if you drop to 17 inch(or even 16 inch) lightweight tire/rim combo. My preference for 16 inch tires was off-road capability but also benefited acceleration. Plus as I get older, i don't like lifting heavy ass tires on and off.
Non turbo for those driving in flat level states is fine.
But for those who like running their fancy 19 and 20 inch wheels and plan to be loaded down, and driving hilly terrain then the turbo is the way to go.
Last edited:
Just curious how much net weight loss per wheel you achieve with a smaller rim and larger sidewall. I prefer the lower profile tire seeing that mine is pretty much a pavement princess. Being and engineer and working for a Japanese company for the last 30 years, I have the utmost respect for the Japanese engineers. I’ve already posted this elsewhere, but the turbo with the 19’s is tuned to near perfection. That is not a knock on the NA engine, as they make both for a reason. How fortunate are we to have a choice? I’d say plenty.
Jack Rabbit
Banned
- :
- 18 Mazda CX5 AW
It's in one of my other threads.
I think it was either 15 or 18 lb loss per corner. From 60 lb tire/rim combo to 42/45 lbs.
Had calculated unsprung loss but would need to go back through threads/posts. Also lost some weight with mats and other areas.
The NA really works best with 17 inch tires . Best of acceleration and cornering. My 16s are best for me, best acceleration, more comfortable ride and off-road capability but less handling than the 17's. Imo, really need the turbo for the 19's.
Having driven on 16, 17 and 19, the best cornering was with the 17's despite what they tell you on paper.
Last edited:
The Toyo tires are my current limiting factor in determining the handling aspects of the 19’s vs other sizes. I’m a huge fan of Michelin Defenders. I will keep the Toyos on until they wear out, which shouldn’t be all that long with a mere 300 tread wear rating. The tires are about the only fault that I can find so far, as I just turned my first 1,000 miles yesterday. Once they are gone, I’ll be swapping for some new kicks.
Have a NA (16) and Turbo (19). MPG is hardly different with the turbo, maybe 1-2 mpg difference and that may be because the 19 weighs more than the 16.
- :
- ‘22 CX-5 SIGNATURE
'24 MX-5 RF GT
That's my experience as well between our 2020 GT and 2022 Signature... ~25-27 vs 23-25 mpg. The Signature may end up slightly higher eventually as it is not yet completely broken in @ barely 4,000 miles to date.
Yes, it's negligible and hardly a reason to not go with a turbo.
- :
- CX5 GT
My experience is different. My 2018 NA can get up to 33-35 mpg highway and avg is 27 while the Turbo cannot easily get above 28-29mpg and avg is about 22-24. All the simillar speeds, all with 91 fuel. The turbo seems most fuel efficient up to 70 miles per hour (sweet spot is around 65) then it gets super thirsty for fuel while the NA can cruise at 75 miles per hour with higher fuel efficiency. Also have to go to refuel much more frequently with the Turbo and the small fuel tank is annoying 
but at the end of the day the Turbo is definetely more fun to drive and has all the extra power needed. Going up on a hill is a breeze and very easy for the car.
The Toyo tires on the Turbo are bordeline dangerous because of the extra torque the engine has. especially on wet surfaces and slippery roads, had few ocassions when accelerating hard there is dangerous torque steer and thankfully the electronics help a bit. Still its a crap tire for the Turbo. Mazda should set the Turbo with different tires from the factory.
but at the end of the day the Turbo is definetely more fun to drive and has all the extra power needed. Going up on a hill is a breeze and very easy for the car.The Toyo tires on the Turbo are bordeline dangerous because of the extra torque the engine has. especially on wet surfaces and slippery roads, had few ocassions when accelerating hard there is dangerous torque steer and thankfully the electronics help a bit. Still its a crap tire for the Turbo. Mazda should set the Turbo with different tires from the factory.
Last edited:
Jack Rabbit
Banned
- :
- 18 Mazda CX5 AW
Same. My NA averages 33 to 37 mpg hwy.My experience is different. My 2018 NA can get up to 33-35 mpg highway and avg is 27 while the Turbo cannot easily get above 28-29mpg and avg is about 22-24. All the simillar speeds, all with 91 fuel. The turbo seems most fuel efficient up to 70 miles per hour (sweet spot is around 65) then it gets super thirsty for fuel while the NA can cruise at 75 miles per hour with higher fuel efficiency. Also have to go to refuel much more frequently with the Turbo and the small fuel tank is annoying
a myth. Turbo will not avoid you collisions when passing or merging. You driving ability will. There is very little advantage (if any) of having more HP ( per se 2.5l turbo vs 2.5 NA) in a congested or stop and go traffic.
I never felt performance issues driving mountain rd and I have 19 inch tires. Maybe I was not as loaded as you were. I drove smaller car and HP in the mountain without thinking I need more HP. Ok I drove manual trans but still. For me the 2.5l NA has already more power than I need.
Myth hardly, proven fact is more like it. Given equal ability the driver with the quicker and faster car always has an advantage. That is just physics, and they don’t lie. Opinions on the other hand are subjective.
Jack Rabbit
Banned
- :
- 18 Mazda CX5 AW
YES and NO
On a racetrack full of professional race drivers given equal ability, the driver with the quickest and fastest car always has an advantage and most of the time wins.
However, in reality, on the street/ highway with common drivers who all vary in ability, the quicker faster car may not always have the advantage and actually may actually may be a disadvantage.
The hotrod in his Vette that accelerates too quickly to merge and rear-ends the vehicle in front trying to be Mario andretti, and almost causes the tractor trailer to jack-knife. Seen it happen and seen other scenarios similar to it multiple times. I usually slow up and stay way back to make sure Mario hasn't caused a pileup.
Granted there are some vehicles that are too slow and scary to even attempt a ramp merge with, but the quicker faster vehicles can also wreak havoc.
The slow vehicle will just stop and wait for break in traffic
The fast vehicle will take a chance and possibly cause fatalities.
Remember Goldilocks...
This ones too hot, this ones too cold, this ones JUST RIGHT!!!
The NA with 19 inch tires was too slow. My NA with 16 inch lightweight tires and less unsprung weight is Just Right for me.
Again for those in mountainous regions , probably should get the Turbo if running the 19 inch tires or do like I did and switch to 17 or 16 inch lightweight rims on the NA.
Last edited:
This is a bit of a reach. It still comes down to poor choices on the driver’s part. I’ve been rear ended by a Focus, hardly a Mario car. I stated given equal ability the faster car has an advantage. It is a given that people have different abilities, on or off the track. I will go on further to say that bonehead choices behind the wheel have nothing to do with whether one would appreciate a quicker car over a slower one. The op’s post asked what others think of the choices they have. I was simply pointing out that there are definite measurable situations where having more power is helpful. One should drive within the safe confines of the vehicle’s designed capabilities no matter what they are behind the wheel of.
I normally do not engage with people who stir the pot with comments like “myth”, but I felt it was in the best interest of the OP, to clarify what I meant so that they can make an informed decision.
Turbo solves both lack of power and cylinder deactivation. It shifts earlier and runs quieter.
Having owned both a '19 2.5 GT and currently a '21 GTR 2.5T I can say while the NA motor is fine, the turbo sure is nice to have. In most situations the NA is fine but when you want it the extra power is welcome (on ramps for example). MPG is 2-3 less per gallion which isn't a big deal IMHO and you even have the ability to pick your power level with 87 vs 93 octane gas..
- :
- 2020 CX-5 GT AWD
37 mpg? Wow! Crazy number! The best I could do on the freeway was 33.x (point something) at cruise, 70 miles per hour, regular gasoline ( 87). And it was agonizing trying to not accelerate at all!
Jack Rabbit
Banned
- :
- 18 Mazda CX5 AW
Best was 39 mpg at 55ph.
Sliding curve from there.
New Posts
-
- Sticky
