CX-5 Turbo vs Non-Turbo

:
'20 Sport '25 Turbo
There is a lot of chatter about n/a and Turbo and the pros and cons. We recently bought a 2025 Turbo Premium to add to the fleet and supplement our 2020 Sport (base). Other cars in the garage are a 2018 Porsche Macan S and a 2010 911 S. The CX5s are "mostly" for our daughters but we drive them too.

I was torn going Turbo or n/a for this car. I personally like the feel and instant response of the n/a and think it punches way above its weight. Sure, it's weak in terms of highway acceleration and passing, but around town it's fun.

After a few hundred miles in the Turbo, I had a couple thoughts:
- The vibe of the turbo is confident and effortless, and not at all "high energy"
- The n/a is more playful and fun until you run out of power at higher speeds
- You just "loaf" and ride the torque in the turbo. It feels like a turbo diesel in that regard. Not a bad thing, just different
- Turbo is more confident at higher speeds. Combination of the torque, the weight, the suspension tuning (including the larger swaybars)
- Interior of the higher trims (this isn't a turbo thing) is VERY nice. That said, I still dig the cloth in our Sport
- If you need speed, you can add throttle in the Turbo and it just goes -- without fuss. n/a will be shifting down and revving a lot and gaining a lot less speed in the process :)

I've had several fun turbo cars in the past. My wife's Macan is a twin turbo v6. Laggy and can a be caught "dead" sometimes in a scary way. The Mazda is *never* without torque. Feels like a big lazy engine.

Also had a tuned Miata Turbo ('00). That was a "fun" turbo that built power up high. The CX5 isn't that.

Anyhow, I'm happy with the decision. It makes me appreciate the turbo but also really appreciate the authentic value of the n/a cars.

CX5s.webp
 
Mazda's turbo feels like a diesel engine.
Got two CX-5s myself. '17 CX5 N/A and '22 CX5 Turbo.
Sold the '17 recently.
I agree with OP's assessment between the two engines.
 
Mazda's turbo feels like a diesel engine.
Got two CX-5s myself. '17 CX5 N/A and '22 CX5 Turbo.
Sold the '17 recently.
I agree with OP's assessment between the two engines.
Not sure about the diesel but I agree with the assessment between the two since I own both.
 
I'm still taking it pretty easy on the engine because I'm at 300 miles and still running the fuel the dealer put in it. Based on the power and torque numbers and where they peak, it sure looks and feels like a "grunty" engine vs an engine that ramps and builds more power towards redline. Hence the diesel reference because they are low redline with massive low end power. I'm hoping the engine "opens up" a bit more with miles and the fuel that will enable it to build power at higher revs. Curious to hear from folks with experience on this.
 
What I read on this forum is the 2.5T can deliver a lot of power- but it requires a lot of fuel to do it. Maybe a special tune or careful driving helps deliver better FE.

Maybe the turbo is designed to deliver at the lower RPMs. Don't some cars have dual turbos to fix this?
 
we have had ours for 2 years and put about 35000 miles on it so far and I think the tranny makes a big difference as far as feeling torq down low. i use sport mode a lot and it will scoot...I have used all 3 fuel grades and not sure I notice a big difference between 87 and 91 (we have 87, 89 and 91 here) I have not really did a top speed run yet but I know at a buck 20 it is still gaining speed.
 
I'm still taking it pretty easy on the engine because I'm at 300 miles and still running the fuel the dealer put in it. Based on the power and torque numbers and where they peak, it sure looks and feels like a "grunty" engine vs an engine that ramps and builds more power towards redline. Hence the diesel reference because they are low redline with massive low end power. I'm hoping the engine "opens up" a bit more with miles and the fuel that will enable it to build power at higher revs. Curious to hear from folks with experience on this.
Mazda's intent was to design a turbo engine with a focus on low end power which would improve towing for whatever SUV they put it in. It was never intended to compete with engines that develop their power at high rpms. So don't expect it to "open up" with age.
 
Yep, big engine (for a 4), relatively high compression for turbo and a small turbo tuned for low end that spools up immediately. Seems like a good choice for an urban runabout.
 
I run 87 and have been for months now due to winter. When I do randomly put in 93 I can tell a difference. I have no gripes about the power this makes for a daily driver.
 

Similar Thread

Back