The Never-ending Question...What happens to the CX-5 Next Year (2025)?

CX5Nut said:
All I know is that as soon as a hybrid CX5 is offered, I am trading in our 2024 Turbo for one. We just rented a 2025 Camery Hybrid and it was great! Fast pick up and returned 38 MPG around town. Could not even tell when it changed from electric to gas while driving.
Click to expand...
Yes with the lack of public charging stations and we can’t import more affordable longer range (600+ miles) and short charging time (12 minutes charging for 300+ miles 5C charging battery) EVs to the US, the PHEV or hybrid is our second best choice for better fuel economy and cleaner environment.
 
CX5Nut said:
All I know is that as soon as a hybrid CX5 is offered, I am trading in our 2024 Turbo for one. We just rented a 2025 Camery Hybrid and it was great! Fast pick up and returned 38 MPG around town. Could not even tell when it changed from electric to gas while driving.
Click to expand...
The Camry uses a more recent and a slightly more powerful version vs current RAV4 hybrid; perhaps the RAV4 will get this version with their next gen and hopefully the CX-5 too. Just sayin'...!
 
The new changes coming to CX5 are for 2026 model year.
2025 model year is basically a carryover with few tweaks.
 
This was interesting from the release: "CX-5 2.5 S models feature Mazda's Skyactiv-G 2.5-liter, four-cylinder naturally aspirated engine with cylinder deactivation. This efficient powertrain delivers up to 187 horsepower and 186 lb-ft of torque with either regular 87 octane or premium 93 octane fuel."

Question is, why would one use 93 if it gave the same performance as 87?
 
chickdr said:
This was interesting from the release: "CX-5 2.5 S models feature Mazda's Skyactiv-G 2.5-liter, four-cylinder naturally aspirated engine with cylinder deactivation. This efficient powertrain delivers up to 187 horsepower and 186 lb-ft of torque with either regular 87 octane or premium 93 octane fuel."

Question is, why would one use 93 if it gave the same performance as 87?
Click to expand...
Good question - what about 89 or 91 octane?
 
chickdr said:
This was interesting from the release: "CX-5 2.5 S models feature Mazda's Skyactiv-G 2.5-liter, four-cylinder naturally aspirated engine with cylinder deactivation. This efficient powertrain delivers up to 187 horsepower and 186 lb-ft of torque with either regular 87 octane or premium 93 octane fuel."

Question is, why would one use 93 if it gave the same performance as 87?
Click to expand...
I think it's because the Turbo horsepower is described using those numbers which are quite a bit different.
 
Mazdiod2 said:
I think it's because the Turbo horsepower is described using those numbers which are quite a bit different.
Click to expand...
But that has nothing to do with the NA 2.5. This is a Mazda press release and the 2.5 has been around for eons. Why would anyone NOT know the engine uses 87 octane?
 
chickdr said:
But that has nothing to do with the NA 2.5. This is a Mazda press release and the 2.5 has been around for eons. Why would anyone NOT know the engine uses 87 octane?
Click to expand...
I think it's because it's essentially like advertising. It seems like pointless redundancy but then when they describe the Turbo they mention octane again.
 
chickdr said:
This was interesting from the release: "CX-5 2.5 S models feature Mazda's Skyactiv-G 2.5-liter, four-cylinder naturally aspirated engine with cylinder deactivation. This efficient powertrain delivers up to 187 horsepower and 186 lb-ft of torque with either regular 87 octane or premium 93 octane fuel."

Question is, why would one use 93 if it gave the same performance as 87?
Click to expand...
I think it is to say that unlike the turbo, whose power output changes with octane, it will produce the same amount of power with either fuel.
 
It just seems it would be better to say the 187hp is achieved on 87, thus no need to pay for premium to get the most out of your car.
 
chickdr said:
It just seems it would be better to say the 187hp is achieved on 87, thus no need to pay for premium to get the most out of your car.
Click to expand...
Yes. And even on the 2.5T, Mazda has also emphasized this similar statement.

Here by releasing this official power curve on the 2.5T, Mazda wants to show “additional high-rpm performance is possible with higher octane”, and “to prevent unnecessary spending on premium fuel, both power ratings are published”.

That means unless you rev the 2.5T above 4,000 rpm, you won’t get ANY horsepower or torque gain with more expensive premium gas.

E2F447F9-A64B-4E8E-8754-E9149EA7DC1A.png
 
A static graph as shown above does not show the difference in rpm pickup. I have been using 87 for my turbo for 2 yrs since new. For the recent 2-3 tanks, I used 91. I definitely can feel the difference in acceleration (yes, below 4k RPMs). In short, more responsive to pedal.

P.S. I have been driving for more than 35 yrs.
 
ceric said:
A static graph as shown above does not show the difference in rpm pickup. I have been using 87 for my turbo for 2 yrs since new. For the recent 2-3 tanks, I used 91. I definitely can feel the difference in acceleration (yes, below 4k RPMs). In short, more responsive to pedal.

P.S. I have been driving for more than 35 yrs.
Click to expand...
This in’t me saying, it’s Mazda saying officially: “additional high-rpm performance is possible with higher octane”, and “to prevent unnecessary spending on premium fuel, both power ratings are published”.
 
yrwei52 said:
Yes. And even on the 2.5T, Mazda has also emphasized this similar statement.

Here by releasing this official power curve on the 2.5T, Mazda wants to show “additional high-rpm performance is possible with higher octane”, and “to prevent unnecessary spending on premium fuel, both power ratings are published”.

That means unless you rev the 2.5T above 4,000 rpm, you won’t get ANY horsepower or torque gain with more expensive premium gas.

View attachment 330034
Click to expand...
I would like to see this independently tested by a third party. Until then we have to take it at face value.

I would like to see full data logs including timing, knock, AFR, and dyno graphs.
 
N7turbo said:
I would like to see this independently tested by a third party. Until then we have to take it at face value.

I would like to see full data logs including timing, knock, AFR, and dyno graphs.
Click to expand...
This is what Calisto says on the other CX-5 forum. That the power ratings Mazda gives are not standardized, so they are not really an accurate measure against other manufacturers. I have not seen anyone post their findings with a personal 2.5T.
 
I think the title of this thread should be updated to 2026 as it’s intend was to discus the next gen CX-5.

For the next gen CX-5, Mazda is planning to reduce trims by 70%.

www.netdenjd.com

マツダ、新型車の仕様数を絞り込み　次期「CX-5」では7割削減　サプライヤー負担も抑制｜自動車メーカー｜紙面記事

内装などの仕様を絞り、合理化を進めていく（写真はMX-30） マツダは、新型車への切り替えや一部改良に合わせて、グレードやオプション設定など仕様数を絞り込む。次期型「ＣＸ―５」では仕様の組み合わせを約７割減らすほか、２０２８年ごろに本格展開する次世代商品群「第…
www.netdenjd.com www.netdenjd.com

Mazda will narrow down the number of specifications, including grades and option settings, as it switches to new models and makes partial improvements. In addition to reducing the number of specification combinations in the next-generation CX-5 by approximately 70%, the company will also introduce them in the next-generation "8th generation" product line, which will be fully rolled out around 2028. The company aims to improve design and production efficiency as well as reduce fixed costs for suppliers. With the market trend toward electrification uncertain, the rationalization of product design is being promoted...
Click to expand...
 
Please log in or register to reply here.

Similar Threads

J
The never ending question…
Replies
17
Views
1K
coyfish
C

New Posts

Back