My wife is in the process of buying a CX-50 and we just drove the turbo and naturally aspirated versions. There is a definite significance in power with the turbo. I am a gear head who's into performance cars and my daily drivers are always V8 powered pickups or full size SUV's because I tow and I just like them. I found the non turbo sluggish but my wife felt it was fine. I'd say if you find the base engine adequate and you keep your vehicles for a long time I'd go with the non turbo as they are always more durable. If you don't mind the extra $2500 and a little less MPG and aren't planning to put hundreds of thousands of miles on it, the turbo is the way to go. Also if you have car full of people/gear often or tow much of anything I think you'd prefer the turbo as the non turbo was fairly sluggish accelerating onto hwy and passing with just myself and my wife in it.
CarPlay and android auto have touch screen on the CX-50. So when you connect your phone and use either one of those options the screen becomes touch screen.
Mazda is like a expensive brand they really make their SUVS look top of the line styling looks just like high end vehicles. Love the interior design sad this brand is so underrated strange a Mazda ad just popped while writing. I love Mazda SUVS and Mazda sports car.
I purchased the turbo premium model yesterday. If the base model didn't have cylinder deactivation, I probably would have gone for that instead. The only way to get around the cylinder deactivation is to constantly drive the CX-50 in sport mode. The turbo model has the i-stop feature, but that can be defeated by simply flicking a switch on the dashboard. Would prefer not to have either feature (why, Mazda?) but at least the i-stop can be disabled. Odd thing is that during my test drive of the turbo model, the engine never stopped once despite some terribly long stop lights.
I HATE TURBO- they just wear an engine down faster-- burn the oil so it gunks up faster- somtimes cause fires- melt the plastic parts and have TERRIBLE LAG.... I'm getting the regular engine and possibly having it SUPERCHARGED- they're MUCH better and give better performance and KEEP the gas mileage..
One detail I don’t like is that one can only get an all black interior on the non-turbo model. The terracotta interior is only available on Turbo models and that is the only other option. I get the desire to keep option combos to a minimum but this isn’t a cheap car.
Red Grey, White Black and Blue are the only colors this car does well with not making it look like it belongs off-road. The poly metal grey and Zircon sand colors make it look weird
I was able to test drive with the turbo, around a busy small city downtown. As much as I like naturally aspirated, that turbo power felt right for the chassis. I don't think less would have done it, unless I was just highway cruising. Maybe the upcoming hybrid option will work even better (if it has turbo levels of power).
I just picked up a brand new CX 50 S premium plus in the soul red crystal color! Wow, what an impressive car! Believe it or not I first test drove the non-turbo model, then I test drove a turbo model but I had to come back and test drive another non-turbo model because I felt like the engine in the non-turbo had less vibration on idle and seemed a little quieter. And believe it or not, it had quite enough power for me. And that’s coming from a V6 2010 RX 350 that had, what, 90 more horsepower! I was pretty blown away by this new Mazda!
I just recently purchased the CX-50 Turbo trim. I highly recommend the turbo engine. After test driving both the non-turbo and turbo engines, you'll regret not getting the turbo. The extra power makes the ride so much better. I was going in looking for the PP trim but after driving the turbo I knew I had to get this one instead. Plus the rear signature tail lights on the turbos you'll definitely want. I know it's just a small minor thing and it is only for aesthetics, but it makes a whole lot of difference believe me. Same with the extra larger exhausts you get and the way they're slightly cut differently than the non-turbos makes it look better. Minor differences but it looks way better.
Friend got the non-turbo because after test driving both, the turbo was kind of boring. 0-60 in 7 seconds is not worth an extra $4000 imho but if it ran it in under 5 seconds like sooo many other turbos vehicles including the Ford ECO Boost, now *THAT* would be worth 4 grand. No offense but I've had many cars that do 0-60 under 5 seconds without a turbo and a motorcycle that did it under 3 seconds.
I felt the opposite way. Just picked up my Saul red crystal CX 50 S in the premium plus trim. I drove the non-turbo and then the turbo and then I drove a non-turbo again because I was noticing less vibration and a little bit more quietness with the non-turbo😁
I've been driving a 2014 Mazda 6 with Skyactiv, and I believe the transmission in that is the same that's available now (if I'm not mistaken). I never have a problem with it shifting or even downshifting when punching the gas pedal into a passing gear or merging onto a highway. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Just ordered a CX-50 turbo yesterday to replace the 6.
so want one in that same color and trim level, I would so replace the 20 inch rims with the oem 18 inch rims though for the better ride
Great review Ben. Picking up a CX-50 on Saturday.
I do Love the “Ben hardy” approach to content. It’s simple, concise, and informative without being preachy or over hyped.
Thanks for the videos Ben...I purchased my CX-50 Turbo two weeks ago in Murray, Utah at the Tim Dahle there....loving it! 😀
If I get a good one, I’ll drive it for 15 years. I would think that the non-turbo would likely be more reliable.
My wife is in the process of buying a CX-50 and we just drove the turbo and naturally aspirated versions. There is a definite significance in power with the turbo. I am a gear head who's into performance cars and my daily drivers are always V8 powered pickups or full size SUV's because I tow and I just like them. I found the non turbo sluggish but my wife felt it was fine. I'd say if you find the base engine adequate and you keep your vehicles for a long time I'd go with the non turbo as they are always more durable. If you don't mind the extra $2500 and a little less MPG and aren't planning to put hundreds of thousands of miles on it, the turbo is the way to go. Also if you have car full of people/gear often or tow much of anything I think you'd prefer the turbo as the non turbo was fairly sluggish accelerating onto hwy and passing with just myself and my wife in it.
Good summary.
CarPlay and android auto have touch screen on the CX-50. So when you connect your phone and use either one of those options the screen becomes touch screen.
Damn dude slow down when you talk. I had to go back 5 times to understand what you were saying about HP and torque
Mazda is like a expensive brand they really make their SUVS look top of the line styling looks just like high end vehicles. Love the interior design sad this brand is so underrated strange a Mazda ad just popped while writing. I love Mazda SUVS and Mazda sports car.
I purchased the turbo premium model yesterday. If the base model didn't have cylinder deactivation, I probably would have gone for that instead. The only way to get around the cylinder deactivation is to constantly drive the CX-50 in sport mode. The turbo model has the i-stop feature, but that can be defeated by simply flicking a switch on the dashboard. Would prefer not to have either feature (why, Mazda?) but at least the i-stop can be disabled. Odd thing is that during my test drive of the turbo model, the engine never stopped once despite some terribly long stop lights.
I HATE TURBO- they just wear an engine down faster-- burn the oil so it gunks up faster- somtimes cause fires- melt the plastic parts and have TERRIBLE LAG.... I'm getting the regular engine and possibly having it SUPERCHARGED- they're MUCH better and give better performance and KEEP the gas mileage..
One detail I don’t like is that one can only get an all black interior on the non-turbo model. The terracotta interior is only available on Turbo models and that is the only other option. I get the desire to keep option combos to a minimum but this isn’t a cheap car.
Has anybody had any oil consumption concerns or heard of any
Red Grey, White Black and Blue are the only colors this car does well with not making it look like it belongs off-road. The poly metal grey and Zircon sand colors make it look weird
I was able to test drive with the turbo, around a busy small city downtown. As much as I like naturally aspirated, that turbo power felt right for the chassis. I don't think less would have done it, unless I was just highway cruising. Maybe the upcoming hybrid option will work even better (if it has turbo levels of power).
I just picked up a brand new CX 50 S premium plus in the soul red crystal color! Wow, what an impressive car! Believe it or not I first test drove the non-turbo model, then I test drove a turbo model but I had to come back and test drive another non-turbo model because I felt like the engine in the non-turbo had less vibration on idle and seemed a little quieter. And believe it or not, it had quite enough power for me. And that’s coming from a V6 2010 RX 350 that had, what, 90 more horsepower! I was pretty blown away by this new Mazda!
I just recently purchased the CX-50 Turbo trim. I highly recommend the turbo engine. After test driving both the non-turbo and turbo engines, you'll regret not getting the turbo. The extra power makes the ride so much better. I was going in looking for the PP trim but after driving the turbo I knew I had to get this one instead. Plus the rear signature tail lights on the turbos you'll definitely want. I know it's just a small minor thing and it is only for aesthetics, but it makes a whole lot of difference believe me. Same with the extra larger exhausts you get and the way they're slightly cut differently than the non-turbos makes it look better. Minor differences but it looks way better.
Congrats on getting the car. I got my turbo in July and I still get excited to drive it.
Friend got the non-turbo because after test driving both, the turbo was kind of boring. 0-60 in 7 seconds is not worth an extra $4000 imho but if it ran it in under 5 seconds like sooo many other turbos vehicles including the Ford ECO Boost, now *THAT* would be worth 4 grand. No offense but I've had many cars that do 0-60 under 5 seconds without a turbo and a motorcycle that did it under 3 seconds.
@@carrickdubya4765 good for you I have the turbo it’s great merging don’t strain the engine that’s the point and the tourge
I felt the opposite way. Just picked up my Saul red crystal CX 50 S in the premium plus trim. I drove the non-turbo and then the turbo and then I drove a non-turbo again because I was noticing less vibration and a little bit more quietness with the non-turbo😁
@@eleanormassaro5195 Cylinder deactivation turned me off to the base engine...want nothing to do with it.
I don’t care what you put in the car - just don’t make me sit on a zipper
Yap, that was the feeling, I don't who advise mazda about bench cover but that stich in the middle it's a deal breaking.
Agree. I test drove one and the stitches bothered my backside. Plus they didn’t even look good! What were they thinking?
No touch screen..nope sorry
It’s good to hear your opinion that the 6 speed tranny shifts quick enough. There’s alot of different opinions out there…
I've been driving a 2014 Mazda 6 with Skyactiv, and I believe the transmission in that is the same that's available now (if I'm not mistaken). I never have a problem with it shifting or even downshifting when punching the gas pedal into a passing gear or merging onto a highway. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Just ordered a CX-50 turbo yesterday to replace the 6.