I am 90% certain I am going to buy a new 2025 CX-5 in the next couple weeks. For several reasons that are not important at the moment I prefer the Premium Plus non-turbo. But I am concerned about how the non-turbo performs on steep grades at high altitude and at high speeds. I live in Denver, which means the 187 hp engine is already only 158 hp. But if you drive west on I-70, by the time you reach the Eisenhower tunnel at 11,000+ feet you are driving a 125 hp car. So for those who have actually done it, how is it? Are you white-knuckling it in the right lane with your foot on the the floor and the engine screaming or are you going 75+ without issue in the left lane passing all the campers? Coming up the 11 mile long hill climb on the "backside" from Silverthorne to the tunnel is even worse and can be scary even in a powerful car the way people drive. Anyway, very interested in real-world experiences.

 

I have had both the non turbo (a 19) and now a '21 Turbo. Highly recommend you go for the turbo with your post. You won't be disappointed. Test drive both and see if you agree.

 

I am not questioning that the turbo would be better in that circumstance. I've owned lots of turbo cars and drive one every day. For the moment my question is not whether the turbo would be better - that's a given - I am just wondering how "adequate" or inadequate the non-turbo is in that circumstance. There are many non-turbos in Denver, so somebody is driving them up there. But I'm not sure I will find a dealer willing to let me drive even a used one the 120 mile round trip to the tunnel.

 

Pretty subjective question then. I suggest you try and find one to rent (Turo maybe?) and make the drive yourself. Asking someone else who has one seems unlikely to yield the results you need. If someone owns anNA CX-5 they are unlikely to tell you their car is inadequate....

Have you driven both?

 

We have owned a normally aspirated 2017 CX-5 Gran Touring since new. We live on the front range at 5300' and the engine has plenty of get up and go around town. Driving east or west on I-70, we have never needed to mat the accelerator or shift down to a lower gear. It's not like my Duramax or LS6 by any means but never left me saying "wow I really wish this had a turbo or SC"

 

Thanks, That's the sort of reassurance I was looking for - especially if it does not even downshift. I've driven NA cars up there in the distant past where the car would constantly downshift, build up some speed and upshift, then quickly downshift again.

The reasons I would prefer the non-turbo are, in this order:

1. I like light colored interiors and headliners. Not sure I will like the brown seats and dark headliner in the Signature turbo, but I'll see.
2. Operating costs - i.e., gas. Until May my daily driver was a twin-turbo 445 horsepower car. You quickly realize how pointless a car like that is 99% of the time, all while watching the gas gauge drop on a short run to Home Depot. I think I'm past that phase of my life. Obviously the difference is not that dramatic with a CX-5, but a turbo won't give me much extra thrill at this point.
3. Initial $5,000+ price difference. Not a big deal if I truly valued that difference, but I'm not sure I do.

 

You will have cylinder deactivation which has proven to be an issue in the NA cars. The turbo does not have CD. I strongly advise a long test drive of both engines....

 

I don't want to get into an argument or debate but your statement is not really fundamentally accurate concerning, and we will say specifically a Mazda Skyactiv engine (production 2015 to present aprox.) with onboard complete ECU engine programing management. Now if you have had direct experience with an ECU programing software for a MAZDA like Versa Tune and have seen the base line operational PIDs and have had the opportunity to do some real world calibrations then you would know that the MAZDA base ECU programing does a very good job at least with my direct experience to roughly 8000ft in both summer and winter. I data logged traveling in both those extremes and only made minor adjustments that really probably didn't need but I am a detail of sorts and this was on a 2018 N/A engine before I made mechanical engine changes. So basically, still almost all stock. My guess those same adjustment would also be likely in the Turbo model Mazda as we.

My guess is your blanket statement about power relates possibly post 2002 vehicles?
Please only reply if you have had any direct and personally done ECU Calibration(ECU Tuning) experience

When members on various forum post information about the power of their past and present vehicles or any vehcle they have been reading about they often are assuming the power specification from the advertisements and even the auto manufacture are accurate. Yet very few are not close or even state how they acquired the power rating thy used to place in the specifications. If they are real power numbers then they would have the required certification alone with the numbers posted for the horsepower as well the torque.
About SAE J1349® Certified Power - Standards Development - Standards - SAE International

 

I drove my wife's 2022 2.5 non-turbo from Denver to Aspen then on to Telluride and had no issues at all. I used cruise along a light traffic 70 and went up to the tunnel with ease and never even went over 3500 rpm with some passing. I have a 2020 turbo and the 2022 non-t and would get a naturally aspirated Mazda 2.5 again in a heartbeat. I've had many more issues with the turbo (all fixed under warranty).

 

Thanks. That's what I was hoping to hear.