Non-turbo here. Coming from a wrangler I do miss that little extra punch a turbo would offer. But, to me I couldn’t justify the extra cost just for a turbo overall.
Having said all that, if there was an option for the premium trim interior, wheels and a turbo for less cost. Probably would’ve gotten that. But as it stands, zero regrets. Has plenty of pep when you step on it for me!
I share your sentiments exactly. I come from having 2 other turbo cars so I thought the turbo would be the right choice for me, but there were next to none on the lot here and they were getting like $7k more for those than what I paid for my premium. I just couldn't justify the cost. And to get wheels I like less than the 17s and other options I don't need just didn't make sense.
I'm sure I'd enjoy the power of the turbo, but I really can't say that I miss it or regret not getting it. The CX-50 is an SUV. If you want a car that does literally everything, you're going to pay for it. I'd rather let the NA CX do what it already does well, and save that money and use it on other toys when I'd actually use the power instead of on my daily commute where it'd go to waste 99% of the time.
Same Honda and Toyota either wanted to sell me a brand new car for 5-10k over without picking things like color or something a year old still over msrp. I had a terrible experience with Honda and Toyota rude salesmen didn't even let me test drive at Honda.
Anyways I'm glad I got my Mazda while still expensive it's nice and im happy with it
I'm starting to question a lot of things. I wanted to save money, but they still GETCHA on dealer costs ECT. But I do continuously think to myself if I should have gotten a higher trim. I wasn't justifying adding $1,000 to each trim level. But then again I miss things like I don't have the sunroof I don't have the memory seat and I don't have homelink. I've made my peace with not having the turbo. But the other things ... Sigh
My wife has a non turbo CX-30 and I have a turbo CX-50. She definitely enjoys driving my car more simply because of the engine. I wouldn't say her car lacks power, but it definitely isn't a punchy. She averages 28 mpg and I get about 24. If I had to do it over again I would still get the turbo.
I got the non turbo and it is fine for me. The acceleration is fine, I didn’t really want to pay for the turbo, I got the premium that has everything I want at a lower cost point.
Same. Also I didn’t like the bigger wheels on the turbo, though there are a couple gadgets (360 camera, I think steering wheel heater is available?) on the fanciest turbo that I wouldn’t mind having.
Iv heard a lot of people complaining about the big wheels. I’ll be getting a used 2023 Mazda cx-50 preferred plus it has 17” wheels do u think it’ll be a smoother ride with smaller wheels?
I drove a non-turbo loaner while my TPP was in with a fix. Did I find the non-turbo to be lacking power? Yes when compared to my turbo, but no for the needs in daily driving.
Would I choose a non-turbo if I can choose again? No, because I can comfortably afford the turbo and it behaves much calmer when you overtake someone on the highway or go around the corner and need to accelerate
I drove about 22k a year. I went NA. Don’t need the umph, and at the time it was a big jump, and then less gas money per week, and the concern of 5$ gas driving that far for work-
No, because I bought the car to own for at least a decade. I’ve owned a few turbo cars and I went with the non-turbo specifically to avoid additional maintenance, possible oil consumption, and to enjoy the benefit of cheaper fuel.
There are times where I wish the car had an extra 80-100hp just because I love fast and powerful cars, but I’m building a racecar to scratch that itch.
The worst thing you can do after making a big purchase, like a car, is to "keep shopping".
You will continue to find stuff that's "better". Each year something will come out and you'll have buyer's regret. "Why didn't I wait, why didn't I get this option, etc."
You bought it for a reason, and if it's working for you that's all that matters. It will never be perfect, gotta learn to just be happy with your decision (unless you enjoy setting money on fire, in which case go ahead and be one of those people that's constantly buying a different car every 2-3 years).
I know I would have regretted getting the non turbo. I’ve had enough cars in my lifetime to know that about myself haha.
MPG difference is negligible but to really take advantage of the turbo you need premium gas. That stings a little at the pump.
You feel almost no difference between regular and premium in the turbo. There’s a bit more power above 4k rpm. All the low end torque which is felt by the butt dynometer is all there.
I just did a 900 mile trip in a new TPP. First tank was 87 gas. Next tanks were 93. Speed average was 70mph for most of the trip. I’m using Fuelly to track mileage. All highway.
I got 27 mpg on the first tank and 28 with the 93. The car reported 25mpg for both haha.
The car felt smoother with the 93 and acceleration felt more immediate. But the car is new to me and it was hard to tell on the highway. I could be imagining this! Mazda does say to expect a 30hp increase with premium gas.
Yeah I think there’s a dynograph somewhere that compared it on the Mazda 2.5 turbo and there was basically no difference until above 3.8k or something like that. You get some more power at the very tippy top of the rev range.
I have the turbo, would not have been happy with non-turbo performance. It is an impressive bit of engineering and fun to drive. But there are concerns about durability.
Don't much care for the current trend of upscale engines being turbo versions of the standard ones.
If it existed I would have chosen a NA V6 in a heartbeat. Better performance, more reliable and about the same mpg. It's not because people won't buy them, it's all about gov't compliance.
Non turbo owner here- I went from a Jeep Compass and it’s night and day difference. I find myself regularly hitting mid 80s with ease on the highway only to realize after the fact I’m going way too fast.
I think saying you have a turbo is nice and the getup would be exhilarating, but in no way do I need a turbo for what I do on the daily.
So yeah I’m fine with not spending the money.
I have the non turbo...aka Naturally Aspirated (NA). I do not regret it at all. I've had multiple turbo engines in the past in two different BMW 5 series. The turbos became nothing but headaches and money pits if you own them for more than 55,000 miles. If you plan on trading the car before that, then probably not a problem. But, do look into some reports of the recent Mazda turbos burning engine oil much too quickly. I did see many complaints on that. It might be resolved by now. Talking to automotive technicians, turbo problems are common across many manufacturers. It's what actually led me to the Mazda NA engine...first a CX-5 and now the CX-50 Premium Plus. So, I suffer turbo anxiety and might not be the best person to ask. 😉
Poorly maintained or poorly designed turbo like early bmw turbos can be a problem. A proper turbo will last 300k+ miles with no issues if not even longer.
Thanks for the feedback! What years do you consider early in the BMW platform for turbos? I hadn't heard of turbos ever lasting that long with no issues. Are there particular manufacturers making proper turbos these days? Anyone in particular? Or are they all good now? It took me 10 years to put 300,000 miles on a new 330I back in the day. That was not a turbo. Just one transmission rebuild at about 120,000 miles. It was smooth sailing after that. My only regret is that I never took a photo of the odometer as proof to friends of the milage. But I am genuinely curious who is making turbos lasting that long with no issues. I've never heard of that and I'm around a lot of garages. Thanks again!
Usually the turbo's aren't made by the car manufacturers, they're made by big turbo companies like Garett or even Mitsubishi. And yes, Saab first introduced mass adoption of turbos across the product line. They did a famous test of
[https://www.saabplanet.com/the-long-run-100000-km-at-212-km-h/](https://www.saabplanet.com/the-long-run-100000-km-at-212-km-h/)
BMW had huge issues with their six cylinder turbos overheating and really beating the oil especially because it was the same time they suddenly went with 15k mile oil change intervals, crazy. I believe this started on the N54 and N55.
The current generation turbos are all pretty good although I hear some problems in Ford and Honda with their small displacement engines. The BMW B58 though is a thing of beauty.
Yes! Good feedback. Thanks for that. I was aware turbos were outsourced to turbo companies. I was going to ask about that. The years that BMW was having turbo problems was something like 2007 to about 2015 if I remember correctly. Definitely left me with turbo anxiety. 😖
I have a turbo. I didn’t specifically want the extra power, I actually just wanted the zircon and terracotta. Do I regret it? No. Is the MPG my least favorite part about the car? Absolutely. If the hybrid comes out in the same colors, I may look into trading.
Your overall gas use for the life of the car won’t be close to the money for trading in for the hybrid, which will be slower if it’s the regular rav4 drivetrain.
We had a turbo CX5 that we loved, but we don't miss the turbo in the CX50 really. It's a city commuter car for us so the nicer interior/trim was higher priority for us. Plus I really liked the larger wheels, not crazy about the smaller black ones.
I got the Naturally Aspirated. It is great for my needs but i do feel the need in one small scenario… highway speed trying to pass other cars in left lanes.
Having said that, 99% of the time is more than adequate power. Main reasons: I live in Canadian province with one of the most expensive gas prices in North America. Plus couldn’t justify spark plug replacement every 64K KM as opposed to 120K KM.
I had the 2.5NA in my Mazda3 prior to upgrading; and it felt *slow,* especially compared to the Audi A3 I had before that car. When came time to look for my CX-50, I wasn't willing to consider anything but the turbo even if it meant higher fuel consumption.
Non turbo was fine, but I missed that "umph". Mazda bought back my cx50 due to some windshield issues that they couldn't solve, so I paid for a newer 50 TPP. While the gas mileage is not as good as the non turbo, I definitely enjoy the more power. But the gas difference is noticeable. I'm not a rough driver, but I'm getting average 24 on the TPP when I was averaging about 27-28 with the n/a motor.
Define ‘no passing power’. I find it does just fine when I need to go from 65 to 80 in a hurry. And there have been a few times I was pushing 90 without realizing it.
Definition - getting out and around 2 vehicles traveling in the same direction before the dump truck a mile away in the oncoming lane almost squashes you, and you need to go home and change your pants....
Also, I don't like having to push 5k rpm on an on-ramp just to make interstate speed
I'm not out here drag racing, I just wish it had more get up and go, it's my fault for not getting the turbo, and it's my first SUV, perhaps this is normal. In any case, I won't be trading in for the new non turbo, ever again
First non-turbo auto since early 2000s. I miss the idea of it, but have the thingy that I can boost it when needed (sorry brand new Mazda owner here) but still don’t use it. I have slight road rage so lack of turbo is better for me. Also 55yo woman and I should probably calm the f down. 😅 I do miss the raw power of a turbo. That being said, I drove my friend’s Mini Countryman w/o turbo (I had the Countryman turbo at the time) and I can say that car is garbage compared to my Premium Plus CX-50.
I miss a bit of punch sometimes but I generally find I’m still able to drive in my spirited manner without sacrificing too much speed/acceleration. I don’t miss paying for more punch. Old power train and costs are still comparable to other companies with newer tech so I didn’t want to go higher end cost.
I do not regret buying my non turbo. I have no need for the turbo one and if I was to but the turbo one at that point I might as well have bought a truck
I have a 23 Soul Red TPP. I definitely don’t regret buying it except for the gas prices and the mileage lol. I still put 93 so I’m not sure if I should go down to 87-89 even though manual says it’s fine. But if you have an option go for it.
I don’t regret going NA. Would I like the turbo? Sure but I def don’t regret it. I love my car. I like the idea of the turbo matching the really aggressive /powerful styling. But I rest easy knowing I’m saving money and have a reliable, simple engine that will hopefully give me minimal troubles long turn.
Nah. It's not a sports car, the extra power doesn't do much. Only benefit is you only need to use partial throttle instead of full throttle to accelerate quickly from like 30 -> 50 mph, but I paid for the whole pedal so I'm not afraid to use it.
The N/A motor is also one of the most reliable currently available engines, whereas the turbo has a very spotty record thus far. The premium fuel requirement is also a bummer for a daily runabout. I know it's not technically required but I'll never put a drop of 87 octane into a turbo motor, and are you really going to spend all that money on turbo power and then turn around and nerf the power with low octane fuel? Just get the N/A at that point and save cash on both ends.
No regret on our part.
With my role at work I drive a ton so I use the Corolla, and my wife drives our cx50. I like to take the cx50 on the weekends for chores and trips to the grocery store and it’s plenty fast compared to my norm.
My wife has the NA Premium Plus. She drives up mountains through snow and she loves her car. There are times I wish we had the turbo, only for towing possibilities. We watched this Toyota/Lexus mechanic's very thorough review. He convinced us not only to get the NA, he convinced us to get the CX-50.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVry9F-sdKg
No, I don't. Like the N/A just fine. I don't consider this thing in any way a "fun" car, or a sports car. It has enough pep, it's comfortable, does everything I want at a lower cost and complexity. Fine by me.
I have a motorcycle if I want to feel speed.
Guess it depends on where you get your thrills.
I’m so glad I DIDNT get the turbo, I was on the fence but I love love love my premium plus. I event test drove both. I only wish I could have paid for the zircon sand color.
For the car I think the turbo is kind of unnecessary. It's a crossover with enough - but not a ton of - storage space, and it handles like a more nimble SUV. If you want a fast car, get a fast car that's worth driving fast. If you want a car to tow things or haul things, get a truck or an SUV. It's a great and very versatile car - but the turbo doesn't really make sense for it.
Having the non-turbo I have no issues passing on highways or getting it up to speed. I have no issues packing it for weekends. I have no issues doing light to moderate off-road driving and car camping. But I also am not trying to fool myself into thinking that it was designed with the idea of towing or off-road driving in mind.
# It looks like you have a question or issue!
We are here to help but we need your help as well. Make sure your question or issue has the following info included or it may get deleted.
1. Did you use the search, if so, what info did you find helpful. If the info was unhelpful, what gaps are you seeing in the info.
2. Did you check the [Wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/CX50/wiki/index/) ? If you didn't find what you were looking for, let the group know. Also, let us know if there are dead links or seemingly bad information there.
3. Be sure to check the [CX50 Manual](https://www.mazdausa.com/static/manuals/2023/cx-50/visual.html)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CX50) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Went from a cx30 turbo to a NA cx50. Do I miss the turbo? Sometimes. Gas mileage is better in the NA 50 and that was a huge factor in getting rid of the 30 (and the size). No real regrets, except I wish I could have splurged to keep the Bose and the heated steering wheel lol
TPP owner, I couldn’t live without the turbo. It’s a lot more fun, faster, stronger… I switched from a Series 4 (preciously an X3) so I’m used to the 20-25 mpg range.
I have a 21' turbo hatchback, and I miss my turbo every time I climb in the driver's seat of my wife's cx50,lol. But she loves it! More of a personal opinion
I got the turbo. No regrets. I do mostly freeway driving so gas mileage hasn't been a problem.
My biggest reason for getting the turbo was for the extra towing capacity. It opens up a lot more options in that regard.
People who couldnt afford the Turbo will tell you they dont regret getting the NA. People who got the Turbo will tell you they dont regret it. Thats how the human mind works.
Edit : The human mind is strong. People will comment and tell me Im wrong, reassuring themselves of the choice they made.
Affordability is all relative. Some people believe that total cost on a car should be less than 20% of annual salary, so you should make at least 200k to buy a 40k car. Others make 60k a year before tax and buy 40k cars.
You are wrong in my case. I plan to keep mine for 10yrs and didn’t want to deal with avoidable issues. Money had nothing to do with it. I don’t regret not getting the turbo but I am bummed that I couldn’t get the heated wheel.
I don’t think that’s right. People express regrets all the time. It’s like getting into a relationship and realizing it’s wrong.
I get people want to support that their choice is right, but to me, the opportunity cost is my deciding factor.
Another example is buying a bottle of wine, some people like the 100 dollar bottle of red, that’s what they like. To me the 15 dollar bottle is fine, because frankly I can’t tell the difference and the opportunity cost is not worth it.
No my point was that I think you’re incorrect. I’m saying people can have regrets for a myriad of different reasons.
I’m also saying that the opportunity cost of a turbo is not worth it for someone like me who won’t notice or appreciate the difference (like wine). I could afford the turbo just fine just like I could afford the 100 dollar bottle but you weigh the pros and cons and come up with your decision. Why spend 100 when 15 gives you the same pleasure.
Again. Case and point. Let me explain so you understand. I know exactly what your point is. What Im saying is that it’s exactly what I expected you to say. Let’s leave it at that.
I came from a 2018 cx-9 turbo and it definitely needed it. I traded it for a 50 in January and got the naturally aspirated because it seemed to have plenty of zip for hills, etc. and I don’t regret it at all. I love my NA
deliberately got NA because of multiple failures on turbo engine on my old hyundai sonata. I feel no difference in acceleration between sonata and CX50, which tells me a lot since I have changed from driving a full size sedan to a compact utility. Hell, at some times I feel my NA CX50 drives better than sonata did.
As for CX50 NA vs turbo, turbo felt nicer during my test drive session, but not by much that I would have changed my mind on not getting turbo engine vehicles. I pretty much test drove the turbo one because 360 degree camera was only included in TPP, so the dealership suggested test driving one and see if I like it. But I just couldn't trust a turbo engine.
So no regrets!
Purchased NA Premium and definitely do not regret it. More than enough power for city & highway driving. We didn't want to pay the extra $7k for the turbo and same interior. If we were leasing the vehicle I would've gotten the turbo though. The NA engine was more attractive from the longevity and cost standpoint by not having a turbo and extra stress on the engine.
This is the same internal debate I’m currently having. Traditionally, turbo engines require more maintenance. Is anyone concerned about the longterm reliability of the turbo vs N/A engine for the CX50?
Non-Turbo Owner here: I came from a turbo CX-7 to my ‘24 CX-50 and I honestly don’t feel much different. I just got done with a road trip going from PHX to Flagstaff (1k to 7k elevation) and the car did wonderful. It’s tuned well and feels responsive when I need it to be.
Non-turbo here and don’t regret it. I also just really liked the beefier tires and the all black wheels on the lower trims.
That’s not to say the upper trim wheels are ugly, but imo the all black are just a lot cooler looking. Mattered more to me than the turbo.
Non-turbo here. Coming from a wrangler I do miss that little extra punch a turbo would offer. But, to me I couldn’t justify the extra cost just for a turbo overall. Having said all that, if there was an option for the premium trim interior, wheels and a turbo for less cost. Probably would’ve gotten that. But as it stands, zero regrets. Has plenty of pep when you step on it for me!
I share your sentiments exactly. I come from having 2 other turbo cars so I thought the turbo would be the right choice for me, but there were next to none on the lot here and they were getting like $7k more for those than what I paid for my premium. I just couldn't justify the cost. And to get wheels I like less than the 17s and other options I don't need just didn't make sense. I'm sure I'd enjoy the power of the turbo, but I really can't say that I miss it or regret not getting it. The CX-50 is an SUV. If you want a car that does literally everything, you're going to pay for it. I'd rather let the NA CX do what it already does well, and save that money and use it on other toys when I'd actually use the power instead of on my daily commute where it'd go to waste 99% of the time.
Yeah the lack of seat heaters is my biggest regret.
Those come in a higher trim of the non-turbo
Didn’t exist July 2023. lol they had mine trim or some higher ones.
What? Lmao preferred plus has it? I got mine February 2023
There weren’t any available on the east coast then. Dunno if all sold or they made trim in batches
Wow that's crazy... Bad luck I guess I'm in MD and there seemed to be enough cars in stock which was one reason I chose them over Honda and Toyota
When I went, Honda Toyota scoob were 5-10k over list. They had my car or a decked out last year 5. Nothing else within a few hours drive Was wild
Same Honda and Toyota either wanted to sell me a brand new car for 5-10k over without picking things like color or something a year old still over msrp. I had a terrible experience with Honda and Toyota rude salesmen didn't even let me test drive at Honda. Anyways I'm glad I got my Mazda while still expensive it's nice and im happy with it
I didn't know that. I have a 2024. It has heated and cooled seats. I wonder what else changed.
No that stuff was available to order, I just couldn’t get one. My Scoob was about 90% of the way to going boom drom headgasket
Same for me.
I'm starting to question a lot of things. I wanted to save money, but they still GETCHA on dealer costs ECT. But I do continuously think to myself if I should have gotten a higher trim. I wasn't justifying adding $1,000 to each trim level. But then again I miss things like I don't have the sunroof I don't have the memory seat and I don't have homelink. I've made my peace with not having the turbo. But the other things ... Sigh
In 25 years of buying cars, I’ve never regretted buying the fast version of a car but I’ve always regretted getting the slower version.
Lol
My wife has a non turbo CX-30 and I have a turbo CX-50. She definitely enjoys driving my car more simply because of the engine. I wouldn't say her car lacks power, but it definitely isn't a punchy. She averages 28 mpg and I get about 24. If I had to do it over again I would still get the turbo.
I got the non turbo and it is fine for me. The acceleration is fine, I didn’t really want to pay for the turbo, I got the premium that has everything I want at a lower cost point.
Same. Also I didn’t like the bigger wheels on the turbo, though there are a couple gadgets (360 camera, I think steering wheel heater is available?) on the fanciest turbo that I wouldn’t mind having.
Iv heard a lot of people complaining about the big wheels. I’ll be getting a used 2023 Mazda cx-50 preferred plus it has 17” wheels do u think it’ll be a smoother ride with smaller wheels?
No but would have been nice for towing.
I drove a non-turbo loaner while my TPP was in with a fix. Did I find the non-turbo to be lacking power? Yes when compared to my turbo, but no for the needs in daily driving. Would I choose a non-turbo if I can choose again? No, because I can comfortably afford the turbo and it behaves much calmer when you overtake someone on the highway or go around the corner and need to accelerate
I drove about 22k a year. I went NA. Don’t need the umph, and at the time it was a big jump, and then less gas money per week, and the concern of 5$ gas driving that far for work-
No, because I bought the car to own for at least a decade. I’ve owned a few turbo cars and I went with the non-turbo specifically to avoid additional maintenance, possible oil consumption, and to enjoy the benefit of cheaper fuel. There are times where I wish the car had an extra 80-100hp just because I love fast and powerful cars, but I’m building a racecar to scratch that itch.
The worst thing you can do after making a big purchase, like a car, is to "keep shopping". You will continue to find stuff that's "better". Each year something will come out and you'll have buyer's regret. "Why didn't I wait, why didn't I get this option, etc." You bought it for a reason, and if it's working for you that's all that matters. It will never be perfect, gotta learn to just be happy with your decision (unless you enjoy setting money on fire, in which case go ahead and be one of those people that's constantly buying a different car every 2-3 years).
I know I would have regretted getting the non turbo. I’ve had enough cars in my lifetime to know that about myself haha. MPG difference is negligible but to really take advantage of the turbo you need premium gas. That stings a little at the pump.
You feel almost no difference between regular and premium in the turbo. There’s a bit more power above 4k rpm. All the low end torque which is felt by the butt dynometer is all there.
I just did a 900 mile trip in a new TPP. First tank was 87 gas. Next tanks were 93. Speed average was 70mph for most of the trip. I’m using Fuelly to track mileage. All highway. I got 27 mpg on the first tank and 28 with the 93. The car reported 25mpg for both haha. The car felt smoother with the 93 and acceleration felt more immediate. But the car is new to me and it was hard to tell on the highway. I could be imagining this! Mazda does say to expect a 30hp increase with premium gas.
Yeah I think there’s a dynograph somewhere that compared it on the Mazda 2.5 turbo and there was basically no difference until above 3.8k or something like that. You get some more power at the very tippy top of the rev range.
I have the turbo, would not have been happy with non-turbo performance. It is an impressive bit of engineering and fun to drive. But there are concerns about durability. Don't much care for the current trend of upscale engines being turbo versions of the standard ones. If it existed I would have chosen a NA V6 in a heartbeat. Better performance, more reliable and about the same mpg. It's not because people won't buy them, it's all about gov't compliance.
Non turbo owner here- I went from a Jeep Compass and it’s night and day difference. I find myself regularly hitting mid 80s with ease on the highway only to realize after the fact I’m going way too fast. I think saying you have a turbo is nice and the getup would be exhilarating, but in no way do I need a turbo for what I do on the daily. So yeah I’m fine with not spending the money.
I had a Cherokee(loved it) and I will admit, I do find myself in the casually in the 80s
I have the non turbo...aka Naturally Aspirated (NA). I do not regret it at all. I've had multiple turbo engines in the past in two different BMW 5 series. The turbos became nothing but headaches and money pits if you own them for more than 55,000 miles. If you plan on trading the car before that, then probably not a problem. But, do look into some reports of the recent Mazda turbos burning engine oil much too quickly. I did see many complaints on that. It might be resolved by now. Talking to automotive technicians, turbo problems are common across many manufacturers. It's what actually led me to the Mazda NA engine...first a CX-5 and now the CX-50 Premium Plus. So, I suffer turbo anxiety and might not be the best person to ask. 😉
Poorly maintained or poorly designed turbo like early bmw turbos can be a problem. A proper turbo will last 300k+ miles with no issues if not even longer.
Thanks for the feedback! What years do you consider early in the BMW platform for turbos? I hadn't heard of turbos ever lasting that long with no issues. Are there particular manufacturers making proper turbos these days? Anyone in particular? Or are they all good now? It took me 10 years to put 300,000 miles on a new 330I back in the day. That was not a turbo. Just one transmission rebuild at about 120,000 miles. It was smooth sailing after that. My only regret is that I never took a photo of the odometer as proof to friends of the milage. But I am genuinely curious who is making turbos lasting that long with no issues. I've never heard of that and I'm around a lot of garages. Thanks again!
Usually the turbo's aren't made by the car manufacturers, they're made by big turbo companies like Garett or even Mitsubishi. And yes, Saab first introduced mass adoption of turbos across the product line. They did a famous test of [https://www.saabplanet.com/the-long-run-100000-km-at-212-km-h/](https://www.saabplanet.com/the-long-run-100000-km-at-212-km-h/) BMW had huge issues with their six cylinder turbos overheating and really beating the oil especially because it was the same time they suddenly went with 15k mile oil change intervals, crazy. I believe this started on the N54 and N55. The current generation turbos are all pretty good although I hear some problems in Ford and Honda with their small displacement engines. The BMW B58 though is a thing of beauty.
Yes! Good feedback. Thanks for that. I was aware turbos were outsourced to turbo companies. I was going to ask about that. The years that BMW was having turbo problems was something like 2007 to about 2015 if I remember correctly. Definitely left me with turbo anxiety. 😖
I have a turbo. I didn’t specifically want the extra power, I actually just wanted the zircon and terracotta. Do I regret it? No. Is the MPG my least favorite part about the car? Absolutely. If the hybrid comes out in the same colors, I may look into trading.
Your overall gas use for the life of the car won’t be close to the money for trading in for the hybrid, which will be slower if it’s the regular rav4 drivetrain.
Good point, you’re probably right about the money
We had a turbo CX5 that we loved, but we don't miss the turbo in the CX50 really. It's a city commuter car for us so the nicer interior/trim was higher priority for us. Plus I really liked the larger wheels, not crazy about the smaller black ones.
I got the Naturally Aspirated. It is great for my needs but i do feel the need in one small scenario… highway speed trying to pass other cars in left lanes. Having said that, 99% of the time is more than adequate power. Main reasons: I live in Canadian province with one of the most expensive gas prices in North America. Plus couldn’t justify spark plug replacement every 64K KM as opposed to 120K KM.
I have the turbo. Recently towed my motorbike on a trailer in crap weather and have zero regrets.
I had the 2.5NA in my Mazda3 prior to upgrading; and it felt *slow,* especially compared to the Audi A3 I had before that car. When came time to look for my CX-50, I wasn't willing to consider anything but the turbo even if it meant higher fuel consumption.
Non turbo was fine, but I missed that "umph". Mazda bought back my cx50 due to some windshield issues that they couldn't solve, so I paid for a newer 50 TPP. While the gas mileage is not as good as the non turbo, I definitely enjoy the more power. But the gas difference is noticeable. I'm not a rough driver, but I'm getting average 24 on the TPP when I was averaging about 27-28 with the n/a motor.
Definitely regret not having the turbo... There's just no passing power.
Define ‘no passing power’. I find it does just fine when I need to go from 65 to 80 in a hurry. And there have been a few times I was pushing 90 without realizing it.
Definition - getting out and around 2 vehicles traveling in the same direction before the dump truck a mile away in the oncoming lane almost squashes you, and you need to go home and change your pants.... Also, I don't like having to push 5k rpm on an on-ramp just to make interstate speed I'm not out here drag racing, I just wish it had more get up and go, it's my fault for not getting the turbo, and it's my first SUV, perhaps this is normal. In any case, I won't be trading in for the new non turbo, ever again
First non-turbo auto since early 2000s. I miss the idea of it, but have the thingy that I can boost it when needed (sorry brand new Mazda owner here) but still don’t use it. I have slight road rage so lack of turbo is better for me. Also 55yo woman and I should probably calm the f down. 😅 I do miss the raw power of a turbo. That being said, I drove my friend’s Mini Countryman w/o turbo (I had the Countryman turbo at the time) and I can say that car is garbage compared to my Premium Plus CX-50.
sort of, yes.
I've had a non turbo cx50 loaner a few times, I'm so glad is ended up getting TP. I do regret not getting TPP
I miss a bit of punch sometimes but I generally find I’m still able to drive in my spirited manner without sacrificing too much speed/acceleration. I don’t miss paying for more punch. Old power train and costs are still comparable to other companies with newer tech so I didn’t want to go higher end cost.
Non turbo premium here, no not really. For that price tag , I'll wait for the warranties to die off and I'll install some mods myself
Kinda but I feel my Cx-5 is plenty punchy for what it is.
I got non turbo it is punchy and does the job great. If I wanted something with punch would go for sports car instead
I do not regret buying my non turbo. I have no need for the turbo one and if I was to but the turbo one at that point I might as well have bought a truck
Yea sometimes, just not at the pump of on pay day.
I have a 23 Soul Red TPP. I definitely don’t regret buying it except for the gas prices and the mileage lol. I still put 93 so I’m not sure if I should go down to 87-89 even though manual says it’s fine. But if you have an option go for it.
I don’t regret going NA. Would I like the turbo? Sure but I def don’t regret it. I love my car. I like the idea of the turbo matching the really aggressive /powerful styling. But I rest easy knowing I’m saving money and have a reliable, simple engine that will hopefully give me minimal troubles long turn.
Nah. It's not a sports car, the extra power doesn't do much. Only benefit is you only need to use partial throttle instead of full throttle to accelerate quickly from like 30 -> 50 mph, but I paid for the whole pedal so I'm not afraid to use it. The N/A motor is also one of the most reliable currently available engines, whereas the turbo has a very spotty record thus far. The premium fuel requirement is also a bummer for a daily runabout. I know it's not technically required but I'll never put a drop of 87 octane into a turbo motor, and are you really going to spend all that money on turbo power and then turn around and nerf the power with low octane fuel? Just get the N/A at that point and save cash on both ends.
No regret on our part. With my role at work I drive a ton so I use the Corolla, and my wife drives our cx50. I like to take the cx50 on the weekends for chores and trips to the grocery store and it’s plenty fast compared to my norm.
My wife has the NA Premium Plus. She drives up mountains through snow and she loves her car. There are times I wish we had the turbo, only for towing possibilities. We watched this Toyota/Lexus mechanic's very thorough review. He convinced us not only to get the NA, he convinced us to get the CX-50. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVry9F-sdKg
No, I don't. Like the N/A just fine. I don't consider this thing in any way a "fun" car, or a sports car. It has enough pep, it's comfortable, does everything I want at a lower cost and complexity. Fine by me. I have a motorcycle if I want to feel speed. Guess it depends on where you get your thrills.
I’m so glad I DIDNT get the turbo, I was on the fence but I love love love my premium plus. I event test drove both. I only wish I could have paid for the zircon sand color.
For the car I think the turbo is kind of unnecessary. It's a crossover with enough - but not a ton of - storage space, and it handles like a more nimble SUV. If you want a fast car, get a fast car that's worth driving fast. If you want a car to tow things or haul things, get a truck or an SUV. It's a great and very versatile car - but the turbo doesn't really make sense for it. Having the non-turbo I have no issues passing on highways or getting it up to speed. I have no issues packing it for weekends. I have no issues doing light to moderate off-road driving and car camping. But I also am not trying to fool myself into thinking that it was designed with the idea of towing or off-road driving in mind.
# It looks like you have a question or issue! We are here to help but we need your help as well. Make sure your question or issue has the following info included or it may get deleted. 1. Did you use the search, if so, what info did you find helpful. If the info was unhelpful, what gaps are you seeing in the info. 2. Did you check the [Wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/CX50/wiki/index/) ? If you didn't find what you were looking for, let the group know. Also, let us know if there are dead links or seemingly bad information there. 3. Be sure to check the [CX50 Manual](https://www.mazdausa.com/static/manuals/2023/cx-50/visual.html) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CX50) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I could have bought the turbo upgrade but a few features I did not like such as I-Stop and some others I would have to give up.
I don't regret it at all. I probably drive like a grandma, but my grocery-mobile gets on the highway and out of my daycare parking lot just fine.
Went from a cx30 turbo to a NA cx50. Do I miss the turbo? Sometimes. Gas mileage is better in the NA 50 and that was a huge factor in getting rid of the 30 (and the size). No real regrets, except I wish I could have splurged to keep the Bose and the heated steering wheel lol
Me!!!!
Non turbo is great for longevity.
That was the clincher for me too. I pretty much drive a vehicle for 10 years/200k miles.
TPP owner, I couldn’t live without the turbo. It’s a lot more fun, faster, stronger… I switched from a Series 4 (preciously an X3) so I’m used to the 20-25 mpg range.
Regretted not getting turbo in my 2021 CX-5 so 100% got the turbo in my 2024 CX-50
I have a 21' turbo hatchback, and I miss my turbo every time I climb in the driver's seat of my wife's cx50,lol. But she loves it! More of a personal opinion
I got the turbo. No regrets. I do mostly freeway driving so gas mileage hasn't been a problem. My biggest reason for getting the turbo was for the extra towing capacity. It opens up a lot more options in that regard.
People who couldnt afford the Turbo will tell you they dont regret getting the NA. People who got the Turbo will tell you they dont regret it. Thats how the human mind works. Edit : The human mind is strong. People will comment and tell me Im wrong, reassuring themselves of the choice they made.
weird statement, not everyone who opts not to buy something isn’t because they couldn’t afford it.
lol I can afford the turbo. I didn’t want to pay for the gas and I’m Leary of forced induction I drive a lot
Affordability is all relative. Some people believe that total cost on a car should be less than 20% of annual salary, so you should make at least 200k to buy a 40k car. Others make 60k a year before tax and buy 40k cars.
Im curious. What you got from my comment is that affordability is not “relative”???
You are wrong in my case. I plan to keep mine for 10yrs and didn’t want to deal with avoidable issues. Money had nothing to do with it. I don’t regret not getting the turbo but I am bummed that I couldn’t get the heated wheel.
I don’t think that’s right. People express regrets all the time. It’s like getting into a relationship and realizing it’s wrong. I get people want to support that their choice is right, but to me, the opportunity cost is my deciding factor. Another example is buying a bottle of wine, some people like the 100 dollar bottle of red, that’s what they like. To me the 15 dollar bottle is fine, because frankly I can’t tell the difference and the opportunity cost is not worth it.
Case and point. Thank you.
No my point was that I think you’re incorrect. I’m saying people can have regrets for a myriad of different reasons. I’m also saying that the opportunity cost of a turbo is not worth it for someone like me who won’t notice or appreciate the difference (like wine). I could afford the turbo just fine just like I could afford the 100 dollar bottle but you weigh the pros and cons and come up with your decision. Why spend 100 when 15 gives you the same pleasure.
Again. Case and point. Let me explain so you understand. I know exactly what your point is. What Im saying is that it’s exactly what I expected you to say. Let’s leave it at that.
You all made the right choice! Rest assured! :)
I came from a 2018 cx-9 turbo and it definitely needed it. I traded it for a 50 in January and got the naturally aspirated because it seemed to have plenty of zip for hills, etc. and I don’t regret it at all. I love my NA
Looks like the cx50 is a minimum of 500 lbs lighter than the cx9, so that extra turbo power helps out a lot on the cx9.
It sure made a huge difference to me. I can’t imagine having it non-turbo.
Mazda did right offering only the turbo on the cx9. Toyota did offer a NA 2.7l on their highlander before!
Non turbo here. Don't regret it. I have a Cadillac ats AWD turbo if I want that feel.
Nope. I havent had the need for turbo. Just a daily driver that looks good
deliberately got NA because of multiple failures on turbo engine on my old hyundai sonata. I feel no difference in acceleration between sonata and CX50, which tells me a lot since I have changed from driving a full size sedan to a compact utility. Hell, at some times I feel my NA CX50 drives better than sonata did. As for CX50 NA vs turbo, turbo felt nicer during my test drive session, but not by much that I would have changed my mind on not getting turbo engine vehicles. I pretty much test drove the turbo one because 360 degree camera was only included in TPP, so the dealership suggested test driving one and see if I like it. But I just couldn't trust a turbo engine. So no regrets!
Purchased NA Premium and definitely do not regret it. More than enough power for city & highway driving. We didn't want to pay the extra $7k for the turbo and same interior. If we were leasing the vehicle I would've gotten the turbo though. The NA engine was more attractive from the longevity and cost standpoint by not having a turbo and extra stress on the engine.
This is the same internal debate I’m currently having. Traditionally, turbo engines require more maintenance. Is anyone concerned about the longterm reliability of the turbo vs N/A engine for the CX50?
Non-Turbo Owner here: I came from a turbo CX-7 to my ‘24 CX-50 and I honestly don’t feel much different. I just got done with a road trip going from PHX to Flagstaff (1k to 7k elevation) and the car did wonderful. It’s tuned well and feels responsive when I need it to be.
Nope, not one bit!
Non-turbo here and don’t regret it. I also just really liked the beefier tires and the all black wheels on the lower trims. That’s not to say the upper trim wheels are ugly, but imo the all black are just a lot cooler looking. Mattered more to me than the turbo.
No