I am replacing my wife's CX-3 with CX-5 GT Turbo. Currently, I am driving a 2019 CX-5 GT and it has difficulty in the hills of Colorado I-70 expressway, on the rolling hills of MO, AZ, etc. I will trade in the CX-3 with the CX-5 Turbo and my wife can have my CX-5. The CX-5 GT Turbo has 250 horsepower and 310 Lb-Ft torque compared to only 185 HP and 187 Lb-Ft torque of the non-turbo! I hope will not disappoint me. The reason why I'm sticking with the Mazda's is because other manufacturers are going to CVT trans, which I really hate - I had a Subaru Crosstrek before the Mazda and I hate that engine whine at startup.

 

Here's the thing about that 185 hp on the normally aspirated 2.5, that is at sea level on a "standard day" (i.e. 59°F); going over Loveland Pass you may only be squeezing 120 hp (at the very most) out of that engine. The critical altitude (i.e. the peak altitude before engine power starts to drop off) for a typical turbocharged engine these days is roughly 9,000' MSL (versus 0' MSL for normally aspirated engines), or, said another way, the CX-5 GT Turbo will continue to put out its full rated power until 9,000' MSL while the normally aspirated engine will be chugging along with literally half that power.

One other thing to keep in mind, at altitude, turbochargers do not spool up as fast, and they also need to spool up to higher RPMs to account for the thinner air; all this means blown engines will eventually produce some pretty good power, but if you take the old road over Loveland, stop the car, and then mash the throttle from a standing start, your initial acceleration will be leisurely at best.

 

Thank you for your educational comment on turbo. This will be my first turbo! I was just impressed by looking at the horsepower comparison between the CX-5 turbo and the non-turbo. The same 2.5 liter engine size!

I'm already in touch with my dealer and they have the Soul Red.

 

Our mileage comparison to our 2016 CX-5 is based on driving our 2019 the same way , on the same driving routes, by the same person.

The 16’ avg 23 mpg and our new 2019 is averaging 19.5 mpg based on 3 fill ups .

Not good

 

Is your 2019 one of the models with a turbocharged engine?

 

No turbo

 

Did your 2016 have a 2.0 liter engine?

 

This is probably Not a good comparison. I don't know where you get your 19.5 mpg. Probably city driving and short drive? I traded in my 2017 GT with a 2019 GT (both no turbo) and with the 2019 I average 28 mpg on a trip from Arizona to Illinois (and reverse) with speeds of up to 85 mph at times. With my 2017 GT, I was only averaging 26.5 mpg on the same stretch and with the same aggressive driving. (Got a warning citation in Texas!).

I will probably trade in my 2019 GT non-turbo with a 2019 GT Reserve turbo because the naturally aspirated 2.5 gasps for breath climbing up hills in Colorado, Northern AZ, Missouri, etc.