CX-5 Turbo: Any Valid Data on Power Mods?

[Jah92]

Hi Folks,

I’ve combed the internet, both this forum and others, for any real data on power increases with bolt ons and tuning/ecu solutions for CX-5 turbo. Pretty much only found info on JB4, which seems like it has mixed results and consistency. Saw some impressive dyno results but not corroborated by other buyers - just one example with a solid dyno but other anecdotes suggest inconsistency. My goal is to increase power past 4k RPMs where it seems to fall off quite a bit.

My question is does anyone have valid data on actual improvements in power with full bolt ons and/or tunes/piggybacks/flashes? Dyno results? Based on what I’ve read, doesn’t sound like bolts ons do much without a tune (unsurprising). 91 octane seems to help on the margin, but not by much. Could just be placebo effect quite honestly, though I know Mazda advertises 20-30 hp with premium. No 93 octane here in CO

I’d really like a bit more pull to red line and am wondering if anyone has gotten a custom tune and seen results. I’d be thrilled with an extra 30-50 hp. Seems like that would be a substantial but responsible increase in power with the right setup (ie not blow up turbo/internals). I suspect that would require both a custom tune and addressing power bottlenecks whether those are intercooler, exhaust, intake etc. I know Corksport and others claim significant gains with exhaust, intercooler etc but no one seems to have dynos to back that up outside what the company publishes. Also heard the quality of their intercooler core is inferior to stock.

Anyway, what insight do you all have? Thanks in advance.

 

[sinistriel@]

I will have before and after dyno results of tuning capabilities in the coming months. My car (21 Mazda3 Turbo) is the development car for DRtuned racing. Results so far have been fantastic. Boost holds to redline, much more responsive and afrs are much more consistent. Power delivery feels great and we are still doing some dev work. Tuning support is currently set to release Q1 of this year.

In the attached picture is showing some of the progress, blue lines are the oem tune, red is after some clean up.

 

[RedBaron]

@sinistriel@ - will this tune apply for all the 2.5t model engines? (I have a CX-50t)

 

[sinistriel@]

@sinistriel@ - will this tune apply for all the 2.5t model engines? (I have a CX-50t)

Yes the current plan is to support all 2.5t variations.

 

[Jah92]

I will have before and after dyno results of tuning capabilities in the coming months. My car (21 Mazda3 Turbo) is the development car for DRtuned racing. Results so far have been fantastic. Boost holds to redline, much more responsive and afrs are much more consistent. Power delivery feels great and we are still doing some dev work. Tuning support is currently set to release Q1 of this year.

In the attached picture is showing some of the progress, blue lines are the oem tune, red is after some clean up.

That's awesome. So glad to hear it. That's a pretty impressive increase in boost. This engine is long overdue for a true high-quality, safe tuning solution. I will be interested to see what sort of increase you have in power.

With that much boost, are you all looking at intercooler upgrades or other supporting componentry to keep engine/turbo temp under control and otherwise mitigate impact on engine longevity? I would guess that exhaust/intake may become bottlenecks as well with that much boost?

Really looking forward to your end results - keep us posted! Sounds like you'll have the first new Mazdaspeed in a decade!

 

[sinistriel@]

That's awesome. So glad to hear it. That's a pretty impressive increase in boost. This engine is long overdue for a true high-quality, safe tuning solution. I will be interested to see what sort of increase you have in power.

With that much boost, are you all looking at intercooler upgrades or other supporting componentry to keep engine/turbo temp under control and otherwise mitigate impact on engine longevity? I would guess that exhaust/intake may become bottlenecks as well with that much boost?

Really looking forward to your end results - keep us posted! Sounds like you'll have the first new Mazdaspeed in a decade!

My current mods are the CS 63.5mm catback and SRI, I have a TIP showing up tomorrow so that will be included in the dyno results. So far at those boost levels the intercooler has kept up just fine. The 3/CX-30 and CX-50 use a liquid to air intercooler and it is more efficient than the air to air that is run on the other versions of the engine. Mazda targets a post intercooler/EGR temperature of 131*. It will run the electric water pump duty cycle to keep it close to that number. The air to air versions would probably benefit from an upgraded intercooler before the air to water cars would need one, that's not to say that the air to water cars wouldn't benefit from a bigger exchanger though.

As far as engine longevity/heat concerns I have a solution in the works to separate the transmission heat exchanger from the engine coolant loop. This will have the added benefit of letting the transmission run cooler as well as not adding more heat into the engine coolant loop.

Honestly the car feels really good.

 

[CarpeDiem]

…With that much boost, are you all looking at intercooler upgrades or other supporting componentry to keep engine/turbo temp under control and otherwise mitigate impact on engine longevity? I would guess that exhaust/intake may become bottlenecks as well with that much boost?…

Good point. Boost value increases don’t by themselves mean a similar power increase. Boost staking due to flow restrictions downstream of the snail will read as manifold boost pressure, including the intercooler, intake piping, TB, valve lift/duration and exhaust. The large boost increase seen at the top end of the graph may be largely an increase in this flow restriction effect and not an increase in actual air flow through the engine - which is what makes power. Hopefully that’s not entirely the case and the engine will be able to use the increase in air to make good power.

 

[Jah92]

Good point. Boost value increases don’t by themselves mean a similar power increase. Boost staking due to flow restrictions downstream of the snail will read as manifold boost pressure, including the intercooler, intake piping, TB, valve lift/duration and exhaust. The large boost increase seen at the top end of the graph may be largely an increase in this flow restriction effect and not an increase in actual air flow through the engine - which is what makes power. Hopefully that’s not entirely the case and the engine will be able to use the increase in air to make good power.

Yeah it will be interesting to see where you see diminishing returns in terms of power gain vs boost increase with all stock. Perhaps like APR for Audi they will eventually consider different tunes. EG Stage 1: full stock components tune, Stage 2: Intake and catback, Stage 3: Intake, catback, intercooler and turbo oil/water cooling system Stage 4: Custom stuff for crazy setups that have intake, catback, headers, intercooler, fuel pump, maybe some internals

The biggest things I would be thinking about are
1.) How much power do I want? What's worth the risk?
2.) Where those restrictions are in the system so each extra pound of boost provides the biggest power increase as opposed to just unproductive increase in pressure which could damage the engine/turbo other components that experience increased pressure
3.) Given the final setup in terms of tune and other upgraded components to max out the amount of power increase for the boost increase (again this could be catback, intake, intercooler), what else might make sense for engine longevity. Turbo and engine cooling system upgrades etc
4.) Where does the bang for my buck decrease? Conservative tune with all stock parts is probably the most effective for power per dollar spent while not screwing up the engine.

As personal preference, I would probably look at higher flow catback exhaust, cold air intake, upgraded turbo tubing and upgraded intercooler. Maybe upgrade turbo/engine cooling systems if theyre running much hotter than stock. I imagine this setup would tick the boxes of engine safety, most power per pound increase in boost, and budget (keeping in mind that engine safety can majorly impact budget down the road so worth spending on that up front!)

I'm definitely not an engineer so would speak with DRtuned and maybe some third parties about all of this, especially engine safety measures.

Very excited to see where you end up!

 

[sinistriel@]

Good point. Boost value increases don’t by themselves mean a similar power increase. Boost staking due to flow restrictions downstream of the snail will read as manifold boost pressure, including the intercooler, intake piping, TB, valve lift/duration and exhaust. The large boost increase seen at the top end of the graph may be largely an increase in this flow restriction effect and not an increase in actual air flow through the engine - which is what makes power. Hopefully that’s not entirely the case and the engine will be able to use the increase in air to make

Good point. Boost value increases don’t by themselves mean a similar power increase. Boost staking due to flow restrictions downstream of the snail will read as manifold boost pressure, including the intercooler, intake piping, TB, valve lift/duration and exhaust. The large boost increase seen at the top end of the graph may be largely an increase in this flow restriction effect and not an increase in actual air flow through the engine - which is what makes power. Hopefully that’s not entirely the case and the engine will be able to use the increase in air to make good power.

Definitely a valid question but not what we've been seeing in testing to this point. In the factory tune the car begins shutting the throttlebody and limiting the torque produced artificially once load targets are met. A few changes and we see charts like this. MAF on the top end equates to 30-40 more G/S in this example after 4000rpm which is when the throttle normally begins to close. This graph has no rescaling of the MAF and so is only recording the additional airflow the engine is ingesting and using. The engine now pulls nicely to redline.

 

[ch3no2]

 

[CarpeDiem]

…As personal preference, I would probably look at higher flow catback exhaust….

The problem is that’s the wrong end of the exhaust system to work on for any real power effect. By the time the exhaust gas gets back to the mufflers it’s volume is significantly reduced, so high flow mufflers won’t do too much. Installing a high-flow cat (good luck with that) and better downpiping would be much more effective as gas volume is still high. I’m not aware of any high flow cats which fit, and gutting the stocker is….problematic. Mufflers will make for an enhanced driving experience however.

 

[skid00skid0]

I made significant bolt-on changes to my Eclipse back in the day. But first, you need to know what some limits may be. To get high boost at low rpm, you need a smaller turbo. Those small turbos will NOT flow a large amount of air at high rpm. (There are variable geometry turbos that can overcome some of this). High RPM in the turbo hugely increases air temps. Engine detonates, and you cry. Smaller exhaust piping and other exhaust restrictions alter the pressure ratio on the exhaust turbine, limiting turbine RPM & power. Too much boost pressure causes detonation, and pistons melt. Back 'then', I ran 16.5 PSI. Most people limited it to 16 PSI.

For safety, you need to keep intake air as cold as possible, so bigger intercooler (air to air). Do NOT use a 'cold air intake' that pulls air from the engine compartment. Honestly, the stock intake probably flows more than enough. I built air ducting into a side-mount intercooler, and cut the plastic fender opening larger, and altered the inner fender shroud to let exhaust out of the intercooler, into the low-pressure wheel well. Keep your air filter clean. I ran a larger turbo-back exhaust. Two and a half inches. This keeps the turbine pressure ratio high, so more boost quicker, and more boost at high engine RPM.

If I was doing this today, I would only attempt to raise the boost pressure a bit, with a tune to make sure the air/fuel ratio was safe. And maybe a nice cat-back for more low-frequency growl. I used to love that my car set off car alarms when I idled past them.

 

[CarpeDiem]

…To get high boost at low rpm, you need a smaller turbo. Those small turbos will NOT flow a large amount of air at high rpm. (There are variable geometry turbos that can overcome some of this)….

Mazda’s DPT snail addresses some of this by reducing lag at tip in, but I’m not aware of its top end flow abilirty. The old Eclipse exhaust was much different, the cat could be more easily replaced with a test pipe for much improved flow and reduced boost stacking.

I agree that most “cold air” intakes aren’t, although some are decent. What may be needed is a larger filter - when I installed a supercharger kit on a 2000 Dakota 5.9 the cone filter supplied was too small. I replaced it with a much larger one and picked up 20 hp on the dyno (same day). Panel filter replacements are a waste of $$$.

 

[Jah92]

Definitely a valid question but not what we've been seeing in testing to this point. In the factory tune the car begins shutting the throttlebody and limiting the torque produced artificially once load targets are met. A few changes and we see charts like this. MAF on the top end equates to 30-40 more G/S in this example after 4000rpm which is when the throttle normally begins to close. This graph has no rescaling of the MAF and so is only recording the additional airflow the engine is ingesting and using. The engine now pulls nicely to redline.

That’s awesome. So that’s essentially an indicator that the stock components aren’t causing a substantial restriction in airflow at the higher boost? Excited to see where power is on the dyno.

Either way I’ll still probably at least get an axel-back for a little extra bark

 

[Jah92]

The problem is that’s the wrong end of the exhaust system to work on for any real power effect. By the time the exhaust gas gets back to the mufflers its volume is significantly reduced, so high flow mufflers won’t do too much. Installing a high-flow cat (good luck with that) and better downpiping would be much more effective as gas volume is still high. I’m not aware of any high flow cats which fit, and gutting the stocker is….problematic. Mufflers will make for an enhanced driving experience however.

Ah so it sounds like any compromising airflow bottle neck would come at the cats…Do we any volunteers for designing and manufacturing CARB legal high flow header back system for good measure jkjk

 

[Jah92]

I made significant bolt-on changes to my Eclipse back in the day. But first, you need to know what some limits may be. To get high boost at low rpm, you need a smaller turbo. Those small turbos will NOT flow a large amount of air at high rpm. (There are variable geometry turbos that can overcome some of this). High RPM in the turbo hugely increases air temps. Engine detonates, and you cry. Smaller exhaust piping and other exhaust restrictions alter the pressure ratio on the exhaust turbine, limiting turbine RPM & power. Too much boost pressure causes detonation, and pistons melt. Back 'then', I ran 16.5 PSI. Most people limited it to 16 PSI.

For safety, you need to keep intake air as cold as possible, so bigger intercooler (air to air). Do NOT use a 'cold air intake' that pulls air from the engine compartment. Honestly, the stock intake probably flows more than enough. I built air ducting into a side-mount intercooler, and cut the plastic fender opening larger, and altered the inner fender shroud to let exhaust out of the intercooler, into the low-pressure wheel well. Keep your air filter clean. I ran a larger turbo-back exhaust. Two and a half inches. This keeps the turbine pressure ratio high, so more boost quicker, and more boost at high engine RPM.

If I was doing this today, I would only attempt to raise the boost pressure a bit, with a tune to make sure the air/fuel ratio was safe. And maybe a nice cat-back for more low-frequency growl. I used to love that my car set off car alarms when I idled past them.

Ah ok that makes sense. So essentially from an engine safety perspective, intercooler is probably the best preventative measure assuming a fairly conservative tune?

 

[sinistriel@]

That’s awesome. So that’s essentially an indicator that the stock components aren’t causing a substantial restriction in airflow at the higher boost? Excited to see where power is on the dyno.

Either way I’ll still probably at least get an axel-back for a little extra bark

Yes, what the MAF tells you is simply the airflow going through the system. With an increase in boost pressure and the MAF readings following it that shows the air is being used. The factory system flows pretty well, we'll run into turbo sizing issues before anything really becomes a major bottleneck.

 

[skid00skid0]

Ah ok that makes sense. So essentially from an engine safety perspective, intercooler is probably the best preventative measure assuming a fairly conservative tune?

If you raise boost, yeah, I'd put a larger intercooler on. That depends on where the stock one is, and if there's room...

If you also get a tune, it's likely they will run the mixture leaner, which *also* raises combustion temps. They might force a richer mixture to keep temps down. You'd need to talk to them about that...

 

[sm1ke]

Bumping this for updates, somehow I missed this whole thread!

Great to see that DRTuned is in the final stages! The only other available tuning option for the 2.5T prior to DRTuned is the JB4, which is a piggyback system that manipulates the signal from the ECU to the engine to adjust performance. The tune from DRTuned is an actual ECU tune that changes parameters at the source. Do I have that right?

BMS has provided dyno graphs for their JB4 on a CX-9 using 91 octane fuel, showing an increase of something like 45hp and 65tq on 93 octane. But I don't think I've seen an owner post their own dyno results (at least, not on these forums).

 

[sinistriel@]

Bumping this for updates, somehow I missed this whole thread!

Great to see that DRTuned is in the final stages! The only other available tuning option for the 2.5T prior to DRTuned is the JB4, which is a piggyback system that manipulates the signal from the ECU to the engine to adjust performance. The tune from DRTuned is an actual ECU tune that changes parameters at the source. Do I have that right?

BMS has provided dyno graphs for their JB4 on a CX-9 using 91 octane fuel, showing an increase of something like 45hp and 65tq on 93 octane. But I don't think I've seen an owner post their own dyno results (at least, not on these forums).

So far I've had great results with fantastic drivability. You are correct in saying it is an actual ECU tune that changes it at the source. Changing torque control in 3rd gear up has so far produced the biggest noticeable difference in quickness of the car.

I will have my car on an independent dyno in Las Vegas showing OEM power vs tuned. I'll likely have video and of course we'll have charts.