I'm just speaking from the cars being stock in this case. Obviously getting a tune would change things, but we don't need it lol.

 

By the way, the new Dodge Challenger SRT Demon 170 only makes its 1000 HP when running a on a high mixture of E85. This is stated from the factory.

 

wow and the cost ... lol you can build a more fun vehicle for a lot less, like a AC Cobra (more power and waaaaay better handling) for what they want for those. And I could even install AC if you really wanted.. LOL (joke)

Well this is a MAZDA forum and not a MOPAR forum which the power levels of a few MOPARS have been exhaustively talked about on a couple of those forums that i have participated in......
Unless otherwise noted UNCERTIFIED power levels.

While I did not look extensively to fact find this may be an example of HYPed power ratings. I could not find on MOPAR that it was certified power output? To many adds showing the features and tossing the BIG power numbers around with no certification? Many auto manufactures will post power output not certified and that information is passed on to even well known sources like Car and Driver, Road and Track, etc. and it then becomes a weird un-fact of information that continues to get passed down the internet and other information portals.

Look I have personally performed more then 4 to 500+ DYNO testing in the last several decades and a couple things seem to always come up.... real power levels if the DYNO operator knows what they are doing are generally lower then what was thought to be the power rated numbers or guessed power levels. And more then half of the owners or those having their vehicles tested are never happy with the true results.

 

So according to this forum I should by a Hellcat.

Or go buy a different turbo CX-5.

Or I could put 2 gallons of E85 mixted with 13 gallons of 91 octane and end up with 93 octane for the price of a tank of 87 octane in California.
Then end up with a very nice daily driver with Tesla like torque off the line, That's smoother, quieter, less downshifting, less drama, and lowers my blood pressure while driving.

The choice is obvious...

I should buy the $100k+ hellcat and put 10 gallons of E85 in it so I have a 1000hp commuter car to get to work in.
The decision practically makes itself.

 

No stick with your MAZDA, much more realistic and affordable fun!

 

Nope, no one ever said buy a Hellcat, just asked why you didn't as you seem to want torque and hp.
Things the CX-5 is not noted for.
I choose my CX-5 because of the handling, safety, mpg and my towing requirements.
It wouldn't have been on my list of vehicles if torque and horsepower were my reasons for buying.
But then we all have our own "eccentric ways" of doing things.

 

"Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries."

Took me a minute to figure out what your forum picture was.

 

Where did I get the info? From Mazdas own web site. I will add a link (https://www.mazdausa.com/vehicles/cx...pecs-and-trims) so you can see it yourself. If you think an NA 2.5 CX-5 will hold a candle against the 2.5T you must be smoking some pretty good stuff Cali. There is simply no comparison. 250hp and 320ft/lbs vs 187hp and 186 ft/lbs. Even if your claims of unverified power figures are true, we are talking about figures Mazda themselves list, so they will obviously be comparable to each other as the same company makes the motors and tests them. I don't know why you keep spreading this myth about the 2.5T motor not having an advantage over the NA motor. And as I have said numerous times in the past, while I currently have a GT-R with the 2.5T motor, I had a '19 GT for 2yrs and 20k miles before it, so I have lots of seat time in both cars. I made the decision to buy the 2.5T after living with the NA motor for a while to make sure I wanted the extra power. You are the only person I have ever heard make such a ridiculous claim about the 2.5T CX-5. Who is the troll now?

 

You must be a s.l.o.w learner in general? Mazda does not use the certification and therefore can post any power number they want . And often do which is passed on by people like you on forums.
Thank you for yet again supporting my past responses and information.

Can you please read what the requirements for an auto manufacture to post power numbers that are actual !
I have posed that information on various threads and also forums dozens of times or more.

 

Cali, you are the one missing the big picture here. I don't have to verify anything. Look at the road tests of both cars. The turbo smokes the NA car every time. I don't give a rats a** about Mazda not certifying the figures, road test results don't lie. You wouldn't see the vast difference in 1/4 miles times between the two cars if there wasn't a significant difference in power. Even with the extra weight of the turbo variants, we are looking at 20lbs/hp in an NA vs 15.5lbs/hp in a 2.5T.

The way you make it sound I am saying I used my own stopwatch and a home made dyno and came here to post about it.... Sheesh...