littlebear
Member
- :
- 2017 Mazda CX5
So the CX-5 is stable at highway speeds? Sometimes CUV/SUV's get tossed around due to the wind pushing the higher ground clearance vehicle around.
Undecided: CX-5 vs Escape/Edge
- Thread starter littlebear
- Start date
So the CX-5 is stable at highway speeds? Sometimes CUV/SUV's get tossed around due to the wind pushing the higher ground clearance vehicle around.
i would use the word "adequate". Not "impressive". Not "underwhelming". Merely "adequate" HP. since i "upgraded" from a hybrid 4-cyl with 104-hp, it was really "more than adequate". But i would assume others are coming from similarly powered cars.
boandlkramer
US Specs in Europe
- :
- '17 CX-5 GT AWD; '18 BMW X3
To be fair passing a semi at 110 would cause a disturbance for any car. I'm taking it to Denmark at the end of the month. I'm very comfortable driving it in the autobahn
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
As long as you know the drawbacks of turbo power, this should be a easy choice for you. I still have doubts on longevity of turbo charger and all added components due to the very high temperature they are operated under. It's not a wise decision to get a turbo engine if you plan to keep your car long.
Turbo power is not free either, coming from the turbo sucking more air and fuel. This means the real-world fuel economy will be worse than the EPA estimates which are tested under a controlled environment. The feeling of turbo power with lag can never be the same as a V6 or V8 - there is no replacement for displacement.
- :
- 2015 CX-5 Touring 2.5L FWD
That is what drove me from the Ford dealer to the Mazda dealer, it was a short drive, they are only a couple hundred yards apart.
We also really liked the Edge but actually went with a Subaru to save a little $$$$. If infotainment is important to you, the new Sync3 system in the 2016 Escape and Edge looks awesome and reportedly will soon have Apple CarPlay and Android Auto capability. Food for thought.
littlebear
Member
- :
- 2017 Mazda CX5
I agree, turbos are great for making gobs of power with a small cubic inch engine. The problem is high-mileage engines. Turbos wear out, intercoolers can leak, and all other types of problems can start happening after 50k miles (when the warranty goes out). Turbos are moving parts and impeller blades and waste-gates wear out.
The reason you are seeing more and more turbo engines coming out into the car and CUV/SUV market in the past 2 or so years is because of MPG and EPA. In order to get power HP from a smaller engine, you are stuck with either a turbo charger or supercharger. Otherwise like you said, engine displacement is the next step but that hurts the MPG.
I read that Ferrari was always against turbo charging engines but the EPA has even caught up to them and now they released a twin turbo charged Ferrari.
If the power really matters to you than ignore the horsepower figures. The Ford Escape is significantly heavier than the CX5. In Consumer Reports testing the CX5 with the 2.5 was faster 0-60 and through the quarter mile than the fords most powerful Titanium Escape with the 240 horsepower 2.0 liter turbo 4 engine.
My company owns a 2014 Ford Escape with the smaller turbocharged 4 and in Fords defense I think it does just fine in everyday driving and I think it's also a nice CUV. You need to test drive both to find out for yourself what you like best. The Edge is in a class more inline with a Mazda CX-9.
My company owns a 2014 Ford Escape with the smaller turbocharged 4 and in Fords defense I think it does just fine in everyday driving and I think it's also a nice CUV. You need to test drive both to find out for yourself what you like best. The Edge is in a class more inline with a Mazda CX-9.
FWIW, my wife and I were both coming from V6 engines, so power was a major concern for both of us too. In fact it was probably the one thing that delayed our purchase, as we loved just about everything else about the car. We finally got over it and bit the bullet, and I'm very glad we did. The engine in the CX-5 is definitely not a V6, but it's perfectly fine and it's rare that you ever drive the car and feel like it's underpowered. In fact, I've taken it on several long road trips and have been very impressed with the passing abilities at highway speeds. And that's coming from someone who drives aggressively.
In short, there's no reason to let a lack of power be the reason you don't buy a CX-5.
In short, there's no reason to let a lack of power be the reason you don't buy a CX-5.
I'll just add my two cents about the stability of the car at highway speeds and dealing with wind. Recently we got caught in a tornado producing storm while driving home from an afternoon of boating. I felt like I was in the movie "Twister" with Helen Hunt and at any moment I would have to call out a cow flying by! Scary stuff actually, hard to keep it together emotinally and mentally driving in those conditions for as long as I did. The wind gusts were probably 50+ mph with extremely heavy rain and a lot of lighting. We were traveling on the interstate at about 45 mph and never once felt like the car was being tossed around. It was very stable and composed the entire time. I felt safe in the car even though he'll was breaking loose outside. There actually was a confirmed tornado that touched down a few miles to the south of where we were and we were heading north.
People, like yourself, who are not afraid to put their right foot into it aggressively are the ones who find the acceleration impressive. The ones that seem to have power issues with the CX-5, especially now that it comes with an extra 30 ponies, are the same people who pussyfoot the gas pedal. If you push it too slowly when you want to move on out the computer interprets that as you don't mean business, you just want to hang in a high gear and keep the power on. Then they claim it feels gutless and holds onto too high of a gear. Or the manual drivers who are afraid to go above 3500 rpm's because they don't want to "stress" the engine too much.
I had motorcycles before I had a car and the first two cycles I owned had small displacement engines. Because I wasn't a small guy, this meant I had to spin the engine to get anything out of it. Those who learned to ride or drive with big heavy, slow turning engines never really became accustomed to rpm's and many of them believe it will damage the engine to use it how it was designed. Personally, I take a certain pleasure in it. (hump)
Different strokes for different folks.
I don't have much experience with fast machines other than my snowmobiles which would give many modern vehicles a run for the money, my current 306HP G35x and as a kid my brother's '87 Buick Grand National GNX but the CX-5 scoots fine from a start. I know how to drive the CX.... most times I am trying to get the best MPG over acceleration... I am impressed for a 4-banger if you jump on it at low speeds.. it does get up and go.
- :
- RDX Aspec Adv.
It really does exceptional. I took my father and his wife (He is 215#, she is what, 140ish? I don't know, and I am 185#) on a trip to see my property a while back. It was loafing up 30% grades easily at 2-3K rpm doing 45mph or so. Honestly, it loafs up grades almost as sedately as my 360hp/390# tq Grand Cherokee did with its HEMI. If that is your concern, put it to bed. It does very well. I would video it, but videos do not do grade %'s much justice, as a POV video of a 30% grade looks almost flat due to the reference points in the video.
- :
- RDX Aspec Adv.
My CX-5 is pretty stable. For what it is, I'd say it's excellent. I do not feel awkward driving at 75mph in windy weather.
- :
- RDX Aspec Adv.
One of my friends just leased a 2.0XT. He gets identical mileage to me, in my CX5 2.5L. Mazda "gamed" the EPA ratings, IMO, and set up gearing and all that to maximize return on their specific testing, I bet. This is the only negative I've found from my CX5. Gets about 2-3mpg less than "it should" where every other vehicle I've owned matched EPA ratings.
- :
- RDX Aspec Adv.
Consumer reports can't drive.
The 2.0T Escape is almost a full SECOND faster 0-60 than the 2.5L CX-5.
- :
- RDX Aspec Adv.
Bah! My last vehicle redlined at 7500rpm (226ci motor) and the one before that, at 7K rpm (427ci motor). I'm not scared of the red part of the tach in the least. The CX-5 is a 3600# car with only 184hp. I get that some people find that "impressive", but let's face it, it's down quite a bit compared to my past vehicles, and most other vehicles out there, in the power/weight ratio department. It's not fast. It's not even quick. No amount of rhetoric of "point of view" is going to make it so. I mean,com on, Mike, you're driving around in a 3600# vehicle with the Miata's drivetrain...and the Miata was never sold "because it was fast!"...
That said...I find it adequate for daily driving.
Last edited:
Can't speak to Ford turbos but yesterday I sold my 2003 VW GTI with 212,000 miles on it - original turbo.
It's impressive for a naturally aspirated 4-banger. Anyone who says otherwise simply doesn't have much driving history with this class of engine/vehicle. But even your "performance" cars were slow and overweight by real performance standards. And they burned gas like it was the end of the world if you actually used them to their (rather poor) performance capabilities. Try a modern, sub 500 pound superbike and you will learn what performance is. A CUV is a utilitarian people mover, grocery picker-upper, commute to work/school kind of vehicle. No one seriously races them, they drive them in traffic which us why I think those who harp on power deficiencies are utterly ridiculous. In fact, I think a CX-5 with 300 HP would be a worse car (in so many ways I won't even list them).
