Mazda CX-5 TSB Turbo Engines - Oil Consumption
#31
It is interesting how variable this is. I had a '19 GT which never used a drop in 20k miles. So far my '21 GTR is also not burning any oil in the 5k it has traveled. We will see how it does over time. I had a 1988 323GT and 2000 Miata as well. Neither of them burned oil either.
#32
That's fine. I just replied to chickdr19 so say that I've always driven aggressively, and high RPM driving causes oil consumption, so that's not lost on me. But the CX-5 is my wife's car and she drives it 95% of the time and not at all aggressively. I left out an important piece of info though. We've had a 2008 Toyota Highlander Sport 4WD since new and even though that motor screams to the red line and drives like a race car SUV, it has never once in 225,000 miles consumed a drop of oil. Never.
#33
That's fine. I just replied to chickdr19 so say that I've always driven aggressively, and high RPM driving causes oil consumption, so that's not lost on me. But the CX-5 is my wife's car and she drives it 95% of the time and not at all aggressively. I left out an important piece of info though. We've had a 2008 Toyota Highlander Sport 4WD since new and even though that motor screams to the red line and drives like a race car SUV, it has never once in 225,000 miles consumed a drop of oil. Never.
btw
WELCOME TO THE FORUM!
#34
You're lucky? I'm curious - how aggressive a driver are you? I love my upper rev range - I like accelerating briskly and shifting at the red line. Not every time, I have my moments though. That kind of driving causes consumption, but the CX-5 Turbo shifts at about 4,800 rpms anyway, so it's not like anyone in my family is driving it like an Indy car.
Would that not result in a HUGE decrease in MPG compared with the 2.5L NA? Does the Turbo always kick in as you upshifting your way through the speedometer?
I am just a year short of Methuselah's record and I have no desire to redline an engine any longer. Maybe I should go on Testosterone therapy.
Best Wishes, RMV
#35
The Turbo takes it up to 4,800 rpm as standard shift points? The 2.5L NA is geared nothing like that. Why would the Turbo take it up that high?
Would that not result in a HUGE decrease in MPG compared with the 2.5L NA? Does the Turbo always kick in as you upshifting your way through the speedometer?
I am just a year short of Methuselah's record and I have no desire to redline an engine any longer. Maybe I should go on Testosterone therapy.
Best Wishes, RMV
Would that not result in a HUGE decrease in MPG compared with the 2.5L NA? Does the Turbo always kick in as you upshifting your way through the speedometer?
I am just a year short of Methuselah's record and I have no desire to redline an engine any longer. Maybe I should go on Testosterone therapy.
Best Wishes, RMV
I have DYNO'd both models and they were the same?
#36
The Turbo takes it up to 4,800 rpm as standard shift points? The 2.5L NA is geared nothing like that. Why would the Turbo take it up that high?
Would that not result in a HUGE decrease in MPG compared with the 2.5L NA? Does the Turbo always kick in as you upshifting your way through the speedometer?
I am just a year short of Methuselah's record and I have no desire to redline an engine any longer. Maybe I should go on Testosterone therapy.
Best Wishes, RMV
Would that not result in a HUGE decrease in MPG compared with the 2.5L NA? Does the Turbo always kick in as you upshifting your way through the speedometer?
I am just a year short of Methuselah's record and I have no desire to redline an engine any longer. Maybe I should go on Testosterone therapy.
Best Wishes, RMV
and make it your designated red-liner and drive the Japanese family cars like you are on Clonazepam?
That seems like an idea to me. I don't get much satisfaction out of red lining a car with an automatic transmission. With a manual, when you hit
your desired rpm (one way up there that has the engine about to explode and shoot shrapnel all over the road, you get the satisfaction of up-shifting
and hearing the huge sigh and relief coming from in front of the firewall. That works for me.
But again, I just want my CX-5 to last and for it to be buried with me like a Viking Cheftain and his ship. And I get plenty of power, IMHO, taking it up to 3,00RPM.
And, finally, we have Police here and doing the redline thing on a local street is a good way to get a speeding ticket on your record that doesn't go away for years.
Maybe a risk on the highway as well. But then I am Methuselah.
#37
The Turbo takes it up to 4,800 rpm as standard shift points? The 2.5L NA is geared nothing like that. Why would the Turbo take it up that high?
Would that not result in a HUGE decrease in MPG compared with the 2.5L NA? Does the Turbo always kick in as you upshifting your way through the speedometer?
I am just a year short of Methuselah's record and I have no desire to redline an engine any longer. Maybe I should go on Testosterone therapy.
Best Wishes, RMV
Would that not result in a HUGE decrease in MPG compared with the 2.5L NA? Does the Turbo always kick in as you upshifting your way through the speedometer?
I am just a year short of Methuselah's record and I have no desire to redline an engine any longer. Maybe I should go on Testosterone therapy.
Best Wishes, RMV
#38
No, the turbo does not shift at 4800 unless you are really going for it. It will shift just like the NA 2.5 if you take it easy. That being said the average MPG is quite different between the two in my experience. The NA runs about 4-5 MPG higher MPG than the turbo. I get just under 22 MPG around town in my GTR where my GT ran 26-27 MPG. The GTR will run around 26 MPG on the highway while my GT was around 30 MPG.
that what he is describing is how he likes to take it up while accelerating. I like my gas mileage with the NA motor, especially where the price of gasoline is
today and where it will go this Summer. I don't own EXXON stock so have no reason to burn gas like water. I can't afford it with retirement income at 968 Years
of Age. I have had people call me a F_G on other forums because of my driving. Mind you I get it up to 80mph plenty of times on the Highway when I have cover
from other cars, front, back, sides. Maybe 80-85 mph sometimes, then I bring it down as I like chatting with police but not when pulled over I don't have radar. Do
you, just as a point of interest? Who invests in radar? Just curious.
Thank you again and a permanent thanks to Callisto who always has something very thoughtful and with deep mechanical knowledge to add.
God bless you both.
#39
That's fine. I just replied to chickdr19 so say that I've always driven aggressively, and high RPM driving causes oil consumption, so that's not lost on me. But the CX-5 is my wife's car and she drives it 95% of the time and not at all aggressively. I left out an important piece of info though. We've had a 2008 Toyota Highlander Sport 4WD since new and even though that motor screams to the red line and drives like a race car SUV, it has never once in 225,000 miles consumed a drop of oil. Never.
#40
No, the turbo does not shift at 4800 unless you are really going for it. It will shift just like the NA 2.5 if you take it easy. That being said the average MPG is quite different between the two in my experience. The NA runs about 4-5 MPG higher MPG than the turbo. I get just under 22 MPG around town in my GTR where my GT ran 26-27 MPG. The GTR will run around 26 MPG on the highway while my GT was around 30 MPG.
This can clearly be seen using a OBDII monitor and watching the timing vs RPM and the % of throttle vs the instant and "true" mpg (not the dash monitor which is "smoothed" for easy reading).
I might add that on soft DYNO run between the MAZDA Turbo and NA the engine produced the exact same power and torque. So this would also support both engines should get the same MPG when the Turbo is not boosting. I should also mention that boost levels are scaled so even in most average daily drivers when throttling even during passing or merging onto a highway seldom boost level beyond 50% for that short time accelerating to desired speeds.