When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
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
You tend to leave enough words out of sentences in your posts that I'm not sure what "statement concerning," you are referring to, and I am only assuming you are addressing me. But ECU programming only makes a car run as efficiently as possible under a given set of conditions. This is particularly relevant at high altitude where the ECU has to radically adjust air/fuel ratios to compensate for the reduced air density, not reduced air volume. So although modern ECUs can adjust for less dense air to make the car run well under those conditions, they cannot alter the law of physics that less dense air reduces power. NA cars lose 3% of their power for every 1,000 feet of altitude gain. They just do. But since you have ordered me not to reply, I won't.
You tend to leave enough words out of sentences in your posts that I'm not sure what "statement concerning," you are referring to, and I am only assuming you are addressing me. But ECU programming only makes a car run as efficiently as possible under a given set of conditions. This is particularly relevant at high altitude where the ECU has to radically adjust air/fuel ratios to compensate for the reduced air density, not reduced air volume. So although modern ECUs can adjust for less dense air to make the car run well under those conditions, they cannot alter the law of physics that less dense air reduces power. NA cars lose 3% of their power for every 1,000 feet of altitude gain. They just do. But since you have ordered me not to reply, I won't.
if you have never seen a data logging of an ECU at higher elevation maybe you should.
Then move on to what can actually be done if you get out of the box of theory
And it is truly apparent from your responses u don’t understand a few performances related topics
For the record I never told anyone not to reply unless they did not have some ECU calibrating experience. Which apparently by your response you have none.
And I never quoted you until this response either.
It's fine I just wanted to see if my worm bait caught the fish
To be clear N/A (normally aspirated) is often and IMHO categorically should be abbreviated for an engine performance standpoint referring to only carburetor and not fuel injected gasoline engines.
As for grammar, sentence structure and other writing skill or lack of correcting or mentioning it on most any forum there are a name member that do that and it’s not complimentary.
At any rate moving along … sorry to respond to what was some questionable comments from a member
Last edited by Callisto; Dec 27, 2024 at 09:28 AM.
Reason: corrected a few things before any grammar Nazi sees them
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....
Since when has Mazda had any issues with Cylinder De-activation?
we have a 2020 non turbo. The car feels like it has 250 hp, its very responsive and downshifts quickly, you can pass people with no problems at 30 and at 70. I have many high hp performance cars. the cx 5 non turbo is peppy and fun. Throw 5 big adults in it, different story i guess.
we have a 2020 non turbo. The car feels like it has 250 hp, its very responsive and downshifts quickly, you can pass people with no problems at 30 and at 70. I have many high hp performance cars. the cx 5 non turbo is peppy and fun. Throw 5 big adults in it, different story i guess.
Yah it does not feel like it has 250 horsepower LMAO. I drive both the naturally aspirated and turbo engines frequently, and the turbo with a rating of 250 horepower (from Mazda's claims) actually does what you're describing. With the naturally aspirated motor, it has good power for what it is. However, passing does take a while...
Yah it does not feel like it has 250 horsepower LMAO. I drive both the naturally aspirated and turbo engines frequently, and the turbo with a rating of 250 horepower (from Mazda's claims) actually does what you're describing. With the naturally aspirated motor, it has good power for what it is. However, passing does take a while...
lmao i drive an 800 hp car as a dd and i totally disagree.
we have a 2020 non turbo. The car feels like it has 250 hp, its very responsive and downshifts quickly, you can pass people with no problems at 30 and at 70. I have many high hp performance cars. the cx 5 non turbo is peppy and fun. Throw 5 big adults in it, different story i guess.
I drive a 2020 CX-5 turbo and my wife drives a 2022 cx-5 non-turbo. The non-turbo doesn't pull as hard as the turbo in those mid-speed ranges and is definitely noticeable. That said, the non-turbo feels a bit more nimble because most trims are 300lb lighter. When I go between mine and hers each time I am surprised how punchy the non-turbo is. It's a really well tuned base engine and the transmission is fantastic.
I drive a 2020 CX-5 turbo and my wife drives a 2022 cx-5 non-turbo. The non-turbo doesn't pull as hard as the turbo in those mid-speed ranges and is definitely noticeable. That said, the non-turbo feels a bit more nimble because most trims are 300lb lighter. When I go between mine and hers each time I am surprised how punchy the non-turbo is. It's a really well tuned base engine and the transmission is fantastic.
It's definitely tuned very well. However when passing/going uphill it can feel like dragging a rock. The turbo covers those things, along with carrying a lot of weight.
It's definitely tuned very well. However when passing/going uphill it can feel like dragging a rock. The turbo covers those things, along with carrying a lot of weight.
I am only replying to you! Mainly because i can say things that wont get into a beetch fight with other members that don't have experience or understanding of some subjects. LOL
very basic information. Sea level and average temperatures
When owners compare a turbocharged or supercharged engine to a Normally aspirated and state where the power level is rarely are they also including the RPM ranges? Any block that has had their vehcle DYNO'd and compared their results to a version of their close year and engine but different induction systems will see why blanket statements about where an engine "pulls" is exactly related to where the TORQUE is produced . There is a peak at which the TORQUE generally drops off and in some case sharply. So is the none pressurized engine i.e. Turbocharged engine was run and compared Torque peaks and RPM range that comparison of seat of the pants power would not be so dramatically stated.
This can also be seen often at local Drag strips when like platforms are run. The 60 ft times are very similar between the engines with different intake system Turbo vs none Turbo.
To be clear this is for you as I know you understand this response.
