Turbo Lag

Has anyone found any turbo lag on the CX5 turbo model?

If so, under what conditions?

I am planning a test drive of the turbo model and want to see if it has lag, say while passing a car you're stuck behind on a 2 lane hwy.
 
I have test driven a few turbo CX-5s. I'm planning on purchasing one in a few months.

I few vehicles ago I drove a VW Jetta GLI and a VW Golf TDI, both with turbos. The GLI had horrible turbo lag. The TDI, with it's 236 ft-lb@1,750 of torque was a lot more responsive. The CX-5 has 310 ft-lb of torque at 2,000 rpms.

While the lag does exist, it is even less noticable than the TDI to me. I am purchasing the Mazda CX-5 for the low lag turbo. If it spooled like my old GLI did, I wouldn't consider it.

The Volvo XC40 is designing their turbo the same way, however, at a bit of a $$$ premium (and a higher overall cost of ownership average by brand). But maybe try test driving both and comparing. Otherwise you may want a V6 if the lag bothers you.
 
Has anyone found any turbo lag on the CX5 turbo model?

If so, under what conditions?

I am planning a test drive of the turbo model and want to see if it has lag, say while passing a car you're stuck behind on a 2 lane hwy.

It should have very little turbo lag, but in the scenario you describe, if I wanted to overtake, I'd put the car in Sport, which immediately shifts me into the previous gear. Check for oncoming traffic, then change lanes and punch it. The car will not need to downshift so the response will be better. Once I'm in front of the car, I'd turn Sport mode back off.
 
I've not experienced any turbo lag during the 3k miles I've put on the odometer.
If anything, power delivery is even more immediate and smoother than the '17 CX-5 it replaced ... and a LOT more of it.
 
I agree with Turborascal! I have not felt any turbo lag, and passing at highway speeds have been a breeze compared to the '17, this is the engine that should of been in the model from the start.
 
Has anyone found any turbo lag on the CX5 turbo model?

If so, under what conditions?

I am planning a test drive of the turbo model and want to see if it has lag, say while passing a car you're stuck behind on a 2 lane hwy.

It has less lag than a N/A motor. Mazda did this one flawlessly. T he only vehicle I've had that is similar was my old LT1 Trans Am. Even my LS7 427 had a bit of laggy feeling down low (in relation to the REST of its powerband, rofl!) The CX5 doesn't really "rev onto cam" or "spool". It's like a diesel, literally. Identical dyno charts.
 
I've had a Reserve for over 3 months, and live in an area with lots of 2 lane 55 MPH roads where you pass into the oncoming lane. I've never noticed a lag at all.

I was just in a crowded area a few days ago doing about 35MPH and had to quickly sprint uphill dodging traffic. The turbo was right there. Same for when on the 70 MPH interstate...no noticeable hesitation.

I don't use the turbo a lot, but when I need it, it has always been right there. I've never used Sport Mode to pass, and have not had any downshift lag. Actually, I've never noticed it downshift when I pass. But where I am, I'm usually at 55 MPH+ when I pass.
 
Roughly 3000 miles on my '19 CX-5 Signature with the turbo engine. I came to it from a 2016 BMW turbodiesel. The Mazda drives better, with basically zero turbo lag and gobs of torque down low when you need it. Maybe there are circumstances when you could trick the engine into lagging a bit, but you'd have to try hard. Highway passing is very nice indeed.

I recently rented an XC40 for a week and have spent significant time in a brand new BMW turbodiesel, and both are shockingly laggy by comparison. If a little company like Mazda can tune their turbos so beautifully, why can't those bigger companies with their costlier cars? My Volvo rental even stalled in a stop-and-go situation. I can't recall the last time an automatic-transmission car stalled on me, but many modern cars give the impression the engine's been strangled to the point it barely idles so maybe that has something to do with it. The Mazda's engine conveys a sense of coiled readiness that I haven't really felt in a popularly-priced vehicle since the '60s. On the other hand, its fuel economy reflects its sportiness. (Still, my best: a 40-mile commute through mixed traffic, repeated over three days, netted 29.2/29.7/32.2 mpg.)

The Mazda's Signature interior is also generally nicer than the XC40 or BMW 3-series', with better seats than the Volvo-- and anyone familiar with Volvo would be shocked by that statement, as great seats were once a defining characteristic of that marque. The XC40's seats seemed right out of Chinese parent Geely's parts bin: hard, too-short and not correctly shaped.

The CX-5 and 3-Series both have superb driving dynamics, while the XC40 seemed ponderous and lazy by comparison.

Only the Mazda's infotainment system is weak by comparison to those two, and CarPlay and Android Auto largely moot any shortfalls. (The Volvo did not have either and refused to allow me to use my phone via a Bluetooth hearing aid adaptor when it was cabled to the console for charging.)

The Mazda's engine also sounds great. It has a V8-like burble at idle (thanks, perhaps, to its unusual exhaust-manifold porting) and it clears its throat quite satisfyingly when you lay into it. Which you'll want to, as it just begs to be beaten around the twisty bits.

Also deserving of praise: Mazda's transmission. Fast, imperceptible shifts, never any hunting around for the right gear. Some condemn it for only having six gears, but okay, so it's the anti-CVT: more isn't necessarily better. It is smoother and just as fast-shifting as a DCT, and there's never the sloppy what-next pause you get with a DCT when a change of more than one gear is needed.

What Mazda has accomplished is entirely impressive.
 
Back