Speed?

[ColtX-5]

What is the top speed for the CX-5? Does it have a speed governor?

 

[OVT]

yes it does, if I remember correctly it is 130mph

 

[ColtX-5]

Might need to fix that. ☺

 

[Chris_Top_Her]

Well I got to 125.

 

[paris1]

There is no governor. It's a rolling brick with a 4 cyl engine. It's only good for about 125 or so.

 

[Chris_Top_Her]

The diesel is faster its only power/drag limited

 

[inlinev]

Might need to fix that. ☺

Is there an autobahn around you that affords legal speeds excess of three digits?

 

[MikeM.]

There is no governor. It's a rolling brick with a 4 cyl engine. It's only good for about 125 or so.

According to this:

http://www.caranddriver.com/mazda/cx-5

The 2016 2.5L CX-5 is limited by a governor to 120 mph. And the earlier road test of the 2013 2.0L motor said it was drag limited at 123 mph in their testing:

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2013-mazda-cx-5-sport-manual-test-review

So, the 2.0L engine will actually go faster than the 2.5L engine. (spin)

 

[ColtX-5]

I think 122 - 125 is about it. I saw more, downhill.

If 155 HP gets 123, 30 more won't add much speed, maybe 1 mph.

 

[Unobtanium]

120 governor, or so I thought.

MikeM, I doubt there is a road long enough in your state for the 2.0 to reach past 120, so why bother with governing it?

 

[piotrek91]

What is the top speed for the CX-5? Does it have a speed governor?

Here are the official mazda specs for 2016:

2014 specs:

113 MPH for 2.0L AWD
116 MPH for 2.0L FWD AT
122 MPH for 2.0L MT
122 MPH for 2.5L AWD
126 MPH for 2.5L FWD
127 MPH for AT diesel
129 MPH for MT diesel


sources:
http://www.mazda.co.uk/cars/mazda-cx-5/specs-and-prices/
http://www.mazdausamedia.com/download/2016+Mazda+CX-5+Press+Kit_Draft+8.pdf
http://www.mazdausamedia.com/download/2014+CX-5+Specifications.pdf

 

[rwortman]

I think 122 - 125 is about it. I saw more, downhill.

If 155 HP gets 123, 30 more won't add much speed, maybe 1 mph.

On what sort of funny physics do you base that? Almost 20% more power equals 1mph? That would mean that a .008% increase in speed results in 20% more drag. That's not possible. Drag is a function of speed squared. If you ignore the slight increase in rolling drag the extra 30hp would equal a top speed of 134.7. Add a bit of rolling friction in to it and you probably have a bit over 130.

123 squared= 15129 this number times the drag coefficient is the aero drag at this speed. Since the drag coefficient will be constant we can ignore it.

We have 20% more power so we can oppose 20% more drag

15129 x 1.2 = 18154.8

The square root of 18154.8 is 134.7xxx our new speed. We have ignored the increase in friction due to bearings and such because it won't be much. Maybe knock a couple of miles per hour off of that number.

 

[piotrek91]

On what sort of funny physics do you base that? Almost 20% more power equals 1mph? That would mean that a .008% increase in speed results in 20% more drag. That's not possible. Drag is a function of speed squared. If you ignore the slight increase in rolling drag the extra 30hp would equal a top speed of 134.7. Add a bit of rolling friction in to it and you probably have a bit over 130.

123 squared= 15129 this number times the drag coefficient is the aero drag at this speed. Since the drag coefficient will be constant we can ignore it.

We have 20% more power so we can oppose 20% more drag

15129 x 1.2 = 18154.8

The square root of 18154.8 is 134.7xxx our new speed. We have ignored the increase in friction due to bearings and such because it won't be much. Maybe knock a couple of miles per hour off of that number.

see my previous post.
The 2.0 Automatic will not do 123. It tops out at a somewhat sad 113MPH according to mazda.
The 2.0 manual will eventually get to 123 (I assume due to better drivetrain efficiency and gearing optimized for power at speed instead of efficiency).

The 2.5FWD will do 125 so you get an extra 12MPH for 20% more power.
113^2 = 12769
12769*1.2 = 15322.8
root(15322.8) = 123.7 MPH

 

[Unobtanium]

see my previous post.
The 2.0 Automatic will not do 123. It tops out at a somewhat sad 113MPH according to mazda.
The 2.0 manual will eventually get to 123 (I assume due to better drivetrain efficiency and gearing optimized for power at speed instead of efficiency).

The 2.5FWD will do 125 so you get an extra 12MPH for 20% more power.
113^2 = 12769

I think that 110mph in an SUV with relatively weak brakes and plenty of nose-dive is NOT a place you want to be anyway. Most cars that are not dedicated sports cars are far more capable of forward motion than the rest of the car should dictate.
12769*1.2 = 15322.8
root(15322.8) = 123.7 MPH

 

[Unobtanium]

see my previous post.
The 2.0 Automatic will not do 123. It tops out at a somewhat sad 113MPH according to mazda.
The 2.0 manual will eventually get to 123 (I assume due to better drivetrain efficiency and gearing optimized for power at speed instead of efficiency).

The 2.5FWD will do 125 so you get an extra 12MPH for 20% more power.
113^2 = 12769


12769*1.2 = 15322.8
root(15322.8) = 123.7 MPH

I think that 110mph in an SUV with relatively weak brakes and plenty of nose-dive is NOT a place you want to be anyway. Most cars that are not dedicated sports cars are far more capable of forward motion than the rest of the car should dictate.

 

[piotrek91]

I think that 110mph in an SUV with relatively weak brakes and plenty of nose-dive is NOT a place you want to be anyway. Most cars that are not dedicated sports cars are far more capable of forward motion than the rest of the car should dictate.

obviously not many places in the USA to drive that fast, but I saw numerous CX-5's running around Germany at 110MPH+ and they didn't seem to have problems with "weak brakes" or nose-dive.

 

[rwortman]

see my previous post.
The 2.0 Automatic will not do 123. It tops out at a somewhat sad 113MPH according to mazda.
The 2.0 manual will eventually get to 123 (I assume due to better drivetrain efficiency and gearing optimized for power at speed instead of efficiency).

The 2.5FWD will do 125 so you get an extra 12MPH for 20% more power.
113^2 = 12769
12769*1.2 = 15322.8
root(15322.8) = 123.7 MPH

OK, In any case the 1mph estimate was silly.

 

[rwortman]

The brakes on my car work fine and I am actually kind of amazed that it doesn't nose down that much. Even if it did, that's not a problem. Suspension compression doesn't make the brakes stop working. I had it up to 100 once just to see what it felt like. No problems. Didn't take much of a squeeze on the brake to drop it back down to 75. Seems to me the opposite is true. This chassis could handle more power easily. On the other hand, if I wanted to cruise at 100+ speeds all day, I could get something with a bit lower center of mass. Or just jump on my FJR.

 

[MikeM.]

MikeM, I doubt there is a road long enough in your state for the 2.0 to reach past 120, so why bother with governing it?

You really have no clue:

There are tons of roads like this in Washington State. You should really get out and about more.

The fasted published measured speed of any stock USA CX-5 I've seen is 123 mph with the 2013 2.0L. 2.5L models are now governed to a lower speed.

But you would have to be on crack to care whether it's 115 or 123!

 

[Chris_Top_Her]

First time I went to eastern Washington I was like is this another sate lol