[sky8899]

Do we have a thread going about who's buying one of these and whether or not dealers have deposits on them and official pricing? I just test drove a CX-30 this weekend as the Crosstrek was the initial front runner. What's the experience like for the folks awaiting buying the turbo? The dealer up in New England can't even print a window sticker for me yet to see what they have coming.

 

[Polymetal Gray]

Nope not interested...

 

[Rick]

You might have ADD

 

[dpaCPA]

I am interested but will wait until summer. I anticipate incentives for current owners to upgrade.

I doubt we will see them in dealers for a month or so.

 

[detailcarguy]

My next lease is going to be one 😌 love the CX 30 and love a more of a power punch.

 

[ony]

i love turbo. i hope there will be upgrade option or plug and play turbo for cx30 skyactive-g 2.0

 

[sky8899]

I'm excited for the first dealers to have one. I have a 2010 Mazda 3 GT and with about 11 winters, I'm looking for a change. This platform with the turbo has me very interested.

 

[Patagucci_X]

I would ask why you need a turbo. Turbos are generally known to break "easily", which adds cost; it's an actual reliability issue. Turbos also damage the engine faster, because of how the compressed air reacts inside the combustion chamber. The power of the turbo-less 2.5L engine should be plenty enough for anyone, which is 186 hp at 6k rpm and 186 lb*ft of torque at 4k rpm. I doubt you'd buy a crossover if you really had any heavy thing to hitch/tow. Do yourself a favour and go for the CX30 instead of the Crosstrek! (6AT vs CVT)

 

[dpaCPA]

I would ask why you need a turbo. Turbos are generally known to break "easily", which adds cost; it's an actual reliability issue. Turbos also damage the engine faster, because of how the compressed air reacts inside the combustion chamber. The power of the turbo-less 2.5L engine should be plenty enough for anyone, which is 186 hp at 6k rpm and 186 lb*ft of torque at 4k rpm. I doubt you'd buy a crossover if you really had any heavy thing to hitch/tow. Do yourself a favour and go for the CX30 instead of the Crosstrek! (6AT vs CVT)

The reliability of turbos have improved significantly over the years. It is now the standard way to produce efficient engines for most other manufacturers. Mazda is one of the few that had stuck with non turbos for the base engines and turbos for extra power.

That said. I agree they are more likely to have problems than non turbos. I just don’t think it is as great of a difference as it was in the past.

I want the extra power, not for towing or maximum speed but for occasional quick acceleration. There is one blind up hill curve to the right that I need to make a left on my daily commute and a bunch of extremely short highway on ramps all around my area. The Mazda 2.5 non turbo is more than enough for 95% of my driving. The extra power would be a huge help in the 5%.

 

[detailcarguy]

The reliability of turbos have improved significantly over the years. It is now the standard way to produce efficient engines for most other manufacturers. Mazda is one of the few that had stuck with non turbos for the base engines and turbos for extra power.

That said. I agree they are more likely to have problems than non turbos. I just don’t think it is as great of a difference as it was in the past.

I want the extra power, not for towing or maximum speed but for occasional quick acceleration. There is one blind up hill curve to the right that I need to make a left on my daily commute and a bunch of extremely short highway on ramps all around my area. The Mazda 2.5 non turbo is more than enough for 95% of my driving. The extra power would be a huge help in the 5%.

I agree with you as the last road trip Iv taken mine on .. the highway had allot of steep inclines and one stretch of the highway I needed to pass and or was the only Passing lane going up the hill so I kicked it into sport mode and started to pass the transport and I had to kick it into 3rd gear which was as low as it would allow me to downshift to and the RPM was holding at 4 thousand and I started the climbing and I could actually hear the engine start bogging down some and I had it right to the floor and it slowly started to to gain speed .. now I know for a fact that with a turbo at that rpm it would have given things that extra kick of power and I wouldn't of needed to floor it and down shift in sport mode even to as low of a gear as it would allow me to .. so what's worse flooring it or allowing the a turbo to feed exstra power not having to floor it. I would say the turbo 😝 is better.

 

[sky8899]

I would ask why you need a turbo. Turbos are generally known to break "easily", which adds cost; it's an actual reliability issue. Turbos also damage the engine faster, because of how the compressed air reacts inside the combustion chamber. The power of the turbo-less 2.5L engine should be plenty enough for anyone, which is 186 hp at 6k rpm and 186 lb*ft of torque at 4k rpm. I doubt you'd buy a crossover if you really had any heavy thing to hitch/tow. Do yourself a favour and go for the CX30 instead of the Crosstrek! (6AT vs CVT)

I'd consider myself a car enthusiast and I've been looking at a fun to drive daily car. I'd personally the extra power driving around as a compromise. I do understand that the turbos will for the most part have more issues in the long term. I have several friends who have the original Mazdaspeed3 and they're holding up pretty well after 120k miles and 10-11 winters. The Crosstrek transmission was what I didn't love and why I am swayed towards the Mazda even though it isn't anything fancy.