Jump to content
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Rumorpile: Next Ford Fiesta ST Could Get 3-Cylinder Turbo Power

    Sign in to follow this  

      The next Fiesta ST could drop one-cylinder

    The current Ford Fiesta ST uses a 1.6L EcoBoost four-cylinder. But the next-generation Fiesta ST could be using a turbocharged three-cylinder.

    “We’re seeing more and more of what we can do with the 1.0-litre engine in development and the signs are promising. It’s a great engine – it sounds brilliant and there’s loads of torque when the turbo comes on boost, so we’re looking into things for the next ST,” said Darren Palmer, Ford's head of small cars to Auto Express.

     

    Currently, the most powerful version of the 1.0L EcoBoost three-cylinder produces 138 horsepower. But Ford has been experimenting with the engine to see how much power can be extracted. At the moment, the company has been able to get 202 horsepower.

    “There’s still a huge demand for the ST – we’ve seen that with the current ST200. But we want to offer more, so expect more performance and efficiency,” said Palmer.

    Source: Auto Express

     

    Sign in to follow this  


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    This isn't VW news...

    Anyway, as long as they keep it quite powerful this thing will still be a blast to drive. I'm yet to drive one but I don't think I've read a bad thing about them.

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    5 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

    This isn't VW news...

    Anyway, as long as they keep it quite powerful this thing will still be a blast to drive. I'm yet to drive one but I don't think I've read a bad thing about them.

    Quite tempted buy the current model myself.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    If you note his remarks, he does not state that it would be 1.0L.  

    Fact is, it would be much bigger.  And fewer cylinders is always better, assuming similar displacements.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    44 minutes ago, Wings4Life said:

    If you note his remarks, he does not state that it would be 1.0L.  

    Fact is, it would be much bigger.  And fewer cylinders is always better, assuming similar displacements.

    For fuel economy / internal friction.... sure. Not always on balance and revving. (i.e. a 3.0 liter V8 will be smoother and rev faster than a 3.0 liter 4-cylinder assuming the same valvetrain setup) 

    However, even the 5-cylinder engines I've driven have been fairly disappointing on that front (Volvo excepted). All the fuel economy of a V6 with all the power of a N/A 4-cylinder. 

    That said.... I do think the 1.0 Ecoboost is the superior engine in the Fiesta. It's not a smooth as the 4-cylinder, but it has a fun growl. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Compare a 1.5L I4 and I3,

    I3 packages far smaller and easier

    I3 weighs far less

    I3 has far less friction and better FE

    I3 has much bigger bore, which mostly benefits larger valves and more airflow

    I3 GTDI will rev faster and just as smooth

    I3 Structure is stronger (length of crank, gearbox, etc.)

     

    A 1.0L works harder due to less power, and is a bit more NVH, but that cancels out when you have similar displacements/power

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    47 minutes ago, Wings4Life said:

    Compare a 1.5L I4 and I3,

     

    I3 packages far smaller and easier

     

    I3 weighs far less

     

    I3 has far less friction and better FE

     

    I3 has much bigger bore, which mostly benefits larger valves and more airflow

     

    I3 GTDI will rev faster and just as smooth

     

    I3 Structure is stronger (length of crank, gearbox, etc.)

     

     

     

    A 1.0L works harder due to less power, and is a bit more NVH, but that cancels out when you have similar displacements/power

     

    I don't disagree with most of those.  I took issue with the "always". 

    Assuming all else equal on an I4 and I3, the 3 won't be as smooth, simple mathematical balance dictates that. Revving faster is also only a maybe... with the bigger bores comes more mass moving in each cylinder. Each time one of those three chunks of mass have to slow down, stop, and change direction there is inertia to overcome.  This is an oversimplification, but each piston will weigh 1/3rd more than in an I-4 (again, all else being equal).  While the total number of piston direction changes happens more often in an I4, the mass of each of those pistons is lower. 

    This is born out historically...generally small V8s rev better than big V6es. Small V6es rev better than big I4s. 

    I like the I-3. I think it has a strong future ahead.... I'm just reluctant to attribute things to it that aren't really there. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    4 hours ago, Wings4Life said:

    Fact is, it would be much bigger.

    Where is this "fact" you speak of?

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    4 minutes ago, Wings4Life said:

    Humming along on dyno's at the moment.

    Well you better get over there to manually shift through all 10 speeds on that DCT... :P

    • Upvote 2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    3 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    I don't disagree with most of those.  I took issue with the "always". 

    Assuming all else equal on an I4 and I3, the 3 won't be as smooth, simple mathematical balance dictates that. Revving faster is also only a maybe... with the bigger bores comes more mass moving in each cylinder. Each time one of those three chunks of mass have to slow down, stop, and change direction there is inertia to overcome.  This is an oversimplification, but each piston will weigh 1/3rd more than in an I-4 (again, all else being equal).  While the total number of piston direction changes happens more often in an I4, the mass of each of those pistons is lower. 

    This is born out historically...generally small V8s rev better than big V6es. Small V6es rev better than big I4s. 

    I like the I-3. I think it has a strong future ahead.... I'm just reluctant to attribute things to it that aren't really there. 

    There are balance tricks to mitigate it, without adding weight and extensive engineering. You counter externally, and balance as a system, including the mounts.  That's what they did with the 1.0L.   But I am sure you knew that.  But again, with boosted engines, they are both quieter and smoother due to not need to rev.  In general.  Most reviews of the 1.0L praised it's smoothness, quick revving and growl.  

    So again, on a same displacement comparison, 

    smoothness will be similar, as delivered.

    It will be rev happy, even with the bigger bore, and it is stroke that impacts that more than bore size.

    and the growl will be even better, due to bigger bore and chamber.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    All of those tricks mean that they aren't equal... which was precisely my point.... all else being equal... an I4 will be better balanced and smoother than an I3.  I'm not discouraging the use of those tricks either... Buick used a few of them in the Encore and it's noticeable that they didn't make it into the Trax.

    I'm very precise with my statements.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Tricks?  It’s called balancing a motor.  Something every motor should and does do.  They just approach it different with the I3.  That’s not a ‘trick’ when you tune a system properly, as a system. 

    Precise with your words?

    Not in this case.

    But I think we are both getting a bit mixed up here in our terms. Let’s review:

     An I3 actually vibrates less than an I4, because there is no piston pairing, so some might call it smoother than an I4, especially at higher rpm.  An I4 is actually a bit smoother, but vibrates  more at higher RPM, due to the piston pairing and phasing at 180deg.  An I6 is also paired, but benefits from perfect phase balance of 120.  The I3 has a 240 phase and looks like a Y viewed at the end of the crank. That is closer to an I6 in appearance, than an I4 at 180. And  in total, it’s about counterweight placement and their  phasing.  Or more specifically, the conservation of momentum, or how the piston/rod counterweight is configured to counter the reciprocating and rotating mass.

    And although a powertrain design engineer analyst by trade and certainly know a thing or two about what I speak, I am too humble to state I use precise words. I am human after all, and mistakes happen.

    Edited by Wings4Life

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    2 hours ago, Wings4Life said:

    Humming along on dyno's at the moment.

    It's only a fact if it is provable. Otherwise you sound like the other guy who overused that word. 

    Wanna show us some inside news on the new motor?!? NEVER BEFORE SEEN FOOTAGE?!?(not being a smartass but I realize this cannot be done..so maybe that is being a smartass.. well I'm just jokin around. )

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Yes.. a trick. Active motor mounts are tricks used to hide/tame engine imbalance. So are counter rotating balance shafts. So is active noise cancellation. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    6 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

    It's only a fact if it is provable. Otherwise you sound like the other guy who overused that word. 

    Wanna show us some inside news on the new motor?!? NEVER BEFORE SEEN FOOTAGE?!?(not being a smartass but I realize this cannot be done..so maybe that is being a smartass.. well I'm just jokin around. )

    The forum world was busy discussing the new and larger I3 and I4 family from Ford recently, complete with a code project name.  I assumed everyone heard about it. hence my subtle reference to it.  Perhaps you have not heard it here.  

    And normally I would share what I can, but lately, with all the down-talking and rudeness around here, I would rather not.  Why would I.

    Thanks

    Edited by Wings4Life

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Well, I've heard some of the news from friends at Ford, but I always love to learn more....(and they can only tell me so much)

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Guest Wings on cell phone

    Posted

    3 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    Yes.. a trick. Active motor mounts are tricks used to hide/tame engine imbalance. So are counter rotating balance shafts. So is active noise cancellation. 

    None of which is used with the 1.0l.

    hence no tricks

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Guest Wings on cell phone

    Posted

    3 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    We've been talking engines...was i rude to an engine?

    Did someone suggest you have been rude.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I'm all for mechanical entertainment.  I was high on the 1.0 EB in the Fiesta until I realized Ford would only pair it with a car that has plastic wheel covers and no FOG LIGHTS.  Who does that?

     

    Local dealer has a black Focus hatch with the 1.0L and stick on the lot.  Hmmm...

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    On 10/6/2016 at 0:14 AM, daves87rs said:

    Kids are going to blow the damn things up.....

    ...and then struggle to pay for repairs at their crappy $11 per hour retail job.

    2 hours ago, ocnblu said:

    I'm all for mechanical entertainment.  I was high on the 1.0 EB in the Fiesta until I realized Ford would only pair it with a car that has plastic wheel covers and no FOG LIGHTS.  Who does that?

     

    Local dealer has a black Focus hatch with the 1.0L and stick on the lot.  Hmmm...

    Aftermarket alloys and added fog lights and you would be in business.

    ...and it is not like you don't work in a body shop that could order the parts to convert the darned thing...I am sure tapping into the wiring harness could not be that difficult.

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

    • By Drew Dowdell
      The first product to come from Ford's investment into startup automaker Rivian will likely be a Lincoln SUV due to arrive sometime in 2022.  The vehicle will be all-wheel drive and compete against Rivian's own R1S which is priced at $72,500.  The models will share Rivian's skateboard platform, a design that combines the motors, batteries, controls and suspension into a single unit that the body can be built around.  
      The Rivian R1S is a three-row EV crossover with a range of up to 410 miles and will be built in Normal Illinois at a former Mitsubishi plant. It is expected to go into production sometime in 2021.
      There will also be a compact Lincoln EV crossover coming for 2021 that could be built on the same platform that the Ford Mustang Mach-E rides on. 
      EV sales have been tepid so far in the US, but Lincoln is banking on the EVs to be bigger sellers in the Chinese market. 

      View full article
    • By Drew Dowdell
      The first product to come from Ford's investment into startup automaker Rivian will likely be a Lincoln SUV due to arrive sometime in 2022.  The vehicle will be all-wheel drive and compete against Rivian's own R1S which is priced at $72,500.  The models will share Rivian's skateboard platform, a design that combines the motors, batteries, controls and suspension into a single unit that the body can be built around.  
      The Rivian R1S is a three-row EV crossover with a range of up to 410 miles and will be built in Normal Illinois at a former Mitsubishi plant. It is expected to go into production sometime in 2021.
      There will also be a compact Lincoln EV crossover coming for 2021 that could be built on the same platform that the Ford Mustang Mach-E rides on. 
      EV sales have been tepid so far in the US, but Lincoln is banking on the EVs to be bigger sellers in the Chinese market. 
    • By Drew Dowdell
      2019 Mazda CX-5 Signature
      Mazda is on a mission lately to make their products feel more premium. They have been tuning their vehicles to be quieter and more refined in order to give them an air that they are above their class. This second generation of the Mazda CX-5 debuted for the 2017 model year with a 2.5-liter naturally aspirated 4-cylinder producing 187 horsepower and 186 lb.-ft of torque.  For 2019, Mazda added the 2.5-liter turbocharged engine from the CX-9. On regular gas, the engine produces 227 horsepower and 310 lb.-ft of torque, but if you fill it up with 93 octane, the horsepower figure bumps up to 250.  Available only on the Grand Touring and Signature trims, the 2.5-T makes the CX-5 the compact crossover with the most available torque.  Mazda sent a CX-5 Signature for me to try for a week to see what I thought.
      There’s no replacement for displacement… maybe
      The biggest CX-5 news for 2019 is the engine options. There is the 2.5-T mentioned above and a 2.2-liter turbo diesel. Both are exciting entries into a relatively conservative segment.  The 2.5-T is the second-largest displacement engine available in the segment, behind the 3.2 liter V6 in the Jeep Cherokee.  This 4-cylinder puts out quite a bit more torque than the bigger V6, though the Jeep produces more horsepower (271 @ 6,500 rpm). Even among 4-cylinders, this is the largest displacement you can get, but none of those others offering 2.5 liters also offers a turbocharger. This engine is rated by the EPA to get 22 city / 27 highway.  I got about 24 mpg in mostly city driving. Zero to 60 is a claimed 6.2 seconds.
      Under normal driving, the engine is quiet and composed, with torque coming on quickly when called for. When the pedal is mashed at speed, the CX-5 leaps forward with minimal turbo lag and gives off a strong growl from under the hood. The only time you can really feel any lag in the turbo is if you are starting from a dead stop. Overall, you never feel without power at the tip of your toes and the sounds, and lack of sounds, from the engine room is quiet and refined.
      One area the CX-5 falls behind on is in the transmission department. Although the transmission offers smooth shift and is willing to downshift when called upon, a 6-speed automatic almost feels anachronistic in a time when all of its direct competition is sporting 8 or 9 speeds. I never thought there would come a day when 6-forward gears aren’t enough, but here we are. Adding 2 or 3 more gears to the CX-5 would further liven up the already sporty crossover and help keep the turbocharged engine firmly in the good places of its torque band.
      Ride: Al dente – Firm but tender
      If there is a brand that Mazda is looking to emulate here by being premium without the premium badge, it would likely be BMW.  The ride is firm, but not so harsh as to spill your latte. Steering is on the heavy side with precise control and great on-center feel.  Body roll is minimal. Pushing the CX-5 into corners is fun and the standard G-Vectoring Control Plus makes sure you stay planted where you intended to be.  The i-ACTIV all-wheel-drive mostly runs in front-wheel-drive mode until microscopic amounts of wheel slip are detected and then some torque is instantly transferred to the rear wheels.  Mazda programs the AWD system to always have at least a little bit of torque going to the rear in order for the transfer of torque to happen faster. 
      It’s what’s inside that matter most
      Inside the CX-5, the premium story continues. There is a distinct lack of cheap plastic even in places where they could probably get away with it. The dash and door panels are made of soft-touch material and there is a tasteful amount of chrome trim. Though the seats look black in pictures, they are actually a very dark brown that Mazda calls Caturra Brown Nappa leather. This leather is a feature of the Signature trim level and they are both heated and ventilated.  Rear passengers get heated outboard seats as well, controlled from inside the fold-down center armrest. Also, a feature of the Signature trim is the real wood dash inlay and ambient cabin lighting. The seats in the CX-5 are very comfortable with just the right combination of support and cushion. They would be most welcome companions on a long road trip. The rear seats are fairly flat and do not offer a lot of legroom.  There is no adjustment fore and aft.  Wind and tire noise has been kept to a minimum.
      There are 4 USB ports, two in the up front armrest and two in the rear armrest. Only one of them allows a connection to the infotainment system.  Oddly, the USB ports don’t seem to put out much juice as my phones were very slow to charge from them.
      The infotainment system is another area similar to BMW.  The unit is controlled by a large dial in the center console or touch screen controls. I found the touch aspect to be laggy and a long reach, so I found myself using the dial. Using the dial to navigate is simple enough, but the menus and layout of the screen could probably use a re-think.  Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are both here, for some reason only Apple CarPlay can be activated by touch. Operating either system is frustrating with the dial however, this is especially true for Android Auto which I found frustrating to use without touch screen functionality. At least, unlike BMW, Mazda doesn’t charge you an extra subscription fee to use them. Sound from the Bose speakers was clear, but not especially great.
      There was a time when people mostly bought crossovers for the utility of hauling lots of bulky stuff home from the store, however, these days are different. Now, crossovers are a fashion statement.  Still, the CX-5 has 59.6 cubic feet of space with the rear seats folded and 30.9 cubic feet with the seats up.  That is at the high end of mid-pack in the segment with the Honda CR-V being the leader, while the Toyota RAV-4, Chevy Equinox, and Ford Escape all have less. 
      Do you need a safe space? This may be it.
      The Mazda CX-5 Signature comes with a whole host of safety equipment and the center of it all is the heads-up display that keeps the driver informed.  Blind Spot Monitoring, Lane-Keep Assist, and Radar Cruise Control, all have status lights in the heads-up display.  I found the blind spot monitoring system to be especially helpful when I was backing out onto a busy street with limited visibility.  Radar Cruise control is one of my favorite systems of all and I feel it should be standard equipment on all cars. The CX-5 can even read speed limit and stop signs as you approach, changing and updating the local regulations in the heads up display.
      The Signature also comes with active headlights that turn when you turn to help see around corners. They helped me spot a deer on the side of the road I normally would not have seen.
      The Verdict
      The CX-5 Signature is the top of the CX-5 line, so naturally, the price is reflected in that. With an MSRP of $36,890 before any options, the CX-5 may seem pricey, but it comes with everything you could possibly want.  However, when you compare it to other small crossovers with similar equipment it actually ends up comparing favorably to others in its class. I priced out Jeep Cherokee Overland with the 2.0T and technology group and the MSRP is $41,685. A GMC Terrain Denali with all the same option boxes checked? $41,430.  A Honda CR-V can’t even be equipped like the CX-5 because there is no up-level engine option, yet it still rings up to $38,147.
      Overall, Mazda has produced a handsome, sporty, fun to drive crossover with enough utility to remain competitive. They’ve loaded it with safety equipment and kept the price in check. It is definitely worth a look.
       

      View full article
    • By Drew Dowdell
      2019 Mazda CX-5 Signature
      Mazda is on a mission lately to make their products feel more premium. They have been tuning their vehicles to be quieter and more refined in order to give them an air that they are above their class. This second generation of the Mazda CX-5 debuted for the 2017 model year with a 2.5-liter naturally aspirated 4-cylinder producing 187 horsepower and 186 lb.-ft of torque.  For 2019, Mazda added the 2.5-liter turbocharged engine from the CX-9. On regular gas, the engine produces 227 horsepower and 310 lb.-ft of torque, but if you fill it up with 93 octane, the horsepower figure bumps up to 250.  Available only on the Grand Touring and Signature trims, the 2.5-T makes the CX-5 the compact crossover with the most available torque.  Mazda sent a CX-5 Signature for me to try for a week to see what I thought.
      There’s no replacement for displacement… maybe
      The biggest CX-5 news for 2019 is the engine options. There is the 2.5-T mentioned above and a 2.2-liter turbo diesel. Both are exciting entries into a relatively conservative segment.  The 2.5-T is the second-largest displacement engine available in the segment, behind the 3.2 liter V6 in the Jeep Cherokee.  This 4-cylinder puts out quite a bit more torque than the bigger V6, though the Jeep produces more horsepower (271 @ 6,500 rpm). Even among 4-cylinders, this is the largest displacement you can get, but none of those others offering 2.5 liters also offers a turbocharger. This engine is rated by the EPA to get 22 city / 27 highway.  I got about 24 mpg in mostly city driving. Zero to 60 is a claimed 6.2 seconds.
      Under normal driving, the engine is quiet and composed, with torque coming on quickly when called for. When the pedal is mashed at speed, the CX-5 leaps forward with minimal turbo lag and gives off a strong growl from under the hood. The only time you can really feel any lag in the turbo is if you are starting from a dead stop. Overall, you never feel without power at the tip of your toes and the sounds, and lack of sounds, from the engine room is quiet and refined.
      One area the CX-5 falls behind on is in the transmission department. Although the transmission offers smooth shift and is willing to downshift when called upon, a 6-speed automatic almost feels anachronistic in a time when all of its direct competition is sporting 8 or 9 speeds. I never thought there would come a day when 6-forward gears aren’t enough, but here we are. Adding 2 or 3 more gears to the CX-5 would further liven up the already sporty crossover and help keep the turbocharged engine firmly in the good places of its torque band.
      Ride: Al dente – Firm but tender
      If there is a brand that Mazda is looking to emulate here by being premium without the premium badge, it would likely be BMW.  The ride is firm, but not so harsh as to spill your latte. Steering is on the heavy side with precise control and great on-center feel.  Body roll is minimal. Pushing the CX-5 into corners is fun and the standard G-Vectoring Control Plus makes sure you stay planted where you intended to be.  The i-ACTIV all-wheel-drive mostly runs in front-wheel-drive mode until microscopic amounts of wheel slip are detected and then some torque is instantly transferred to the rear wheels.  Mazda programs the AWD system to always have at least a little bit of torque going to the rear in order for the transfer of torque to happen faster. 
      It’s what’s inside that matter most
      Inside the CX-5, the premium story continues. There is a distinct lack of cheap plastic even in places where they could probably get away with it. The dash and door panels are made of soft-touch material and there is a tasteful amount of chrome trim. Though the seats look black in pictures, they are actually a very dark brown that Mazda calls Caturra Brown Nappa leather. This leather is a feature of the Signature trim level and they are both heated and ventilated.  Rear passengers get heated outboard seats as well, controlled from inside the fold-down center armrest. Also, a feature of the Signature trim is the real wood dash inlay and ambient cabin lighting. The seats in the CX-5 are very comfortable with just the right combination of support and cushion. They would be most welcome companions on a long road trip. The rear seats are fairly flat and do not offer a lot of legroom.  There is no adjustment fore and aft.  Wind and tire noise has been kept to a minimum.
      There are 4 USB ports, two in the up front armrest and two in the rear armrest. Only one of them allows a connection to the infotainment system.  Oddly, the USB ports don’t seem to put out much juice as my phones were very slow to charge from them.
      The infotainment system is another area similar to BMW.  The unit is controlled by a large dial in the center console or touch screen controls. I found the touch aspect to be laggy and a long reach, so I found myself using the dial. Using the dial to navigate is simple enough, but the menus and layout of the screen could probably use a re-think.  Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are both here, for some reason only Apple CarPlay can be activated by touch. Operating either system is frustrating with the dial however, this is especially true for Android Auto which I found frustrating to use without touch screen functionality. At least, unlike BMW, Mazda doesn’t charge you an extra subscription fee to use them. Sound from the Bose speakers was clear, but not especially great.
      There was a time when people mostly bought crossovers for the utility of hauling lots of bulky stuff home from the store, however, these days are different. Now, crossovers are a fashion statement.  Still, the CX-5 has 59.6 cubic feet of space with the rear seats folded and 30.9 cubic feet with the seats up.  That is at the high end of mid-pack in the segment with the Honda CR-V being the leader, while the Toyota RAV-4, Chevy Equinox, and Ford Escape all have less. 
      Do you need a safe space? This may be it.
      The Mazda CX-5 Signature comes with a whole host of safety equipment and the center of it all is the heads-up display that keeps the driver informed.  Blind Spot Monitoring, Lane-Keep Assist, and Radar Cruise Control, all have status lights in the heads-up display.  I found the blind spot monitoring system to be especially helpful when I was backing out onto a busy street with limited visibility.  Radar Cruise control is one of my favorite systems of all and I feel it should be standard equipment on all cars. The CX-5 can even read speed limit and stop signs as you approach, changing and updating the local regulations in the heads up display.
      The Signature also comes with active headlights that turn when you turn to help see around corners. They helped me spot a deer on the side of the road I normally would not have seen.
      The Verdict
      The CX-5 Signature is the top of the CX-5 line, so naturally, the price is reflected in that. With an MSRP of $36,890 before any options, the CX-5 may seem pricey, but it comes with everything you could possibly want.  However, when you compare it to other small crossovers with similar equipment it actually ends up comparing favorably to others in its class. I priced out Jeep Cherokee Overland with the 2.0T and technology group and the MSRP is $41,685. A GMC Terrain Denali with all the same option boxes checked? $41,430.  A Honda CR-V can’t even be equipped like the CX-5 because there is no up-level engine option, yet it still rings up to $38,147.
      Overall, Mazda has produced a handsome, sporty, fun to drive crossover with enough utility to remain competitive. They’ve loaded it with safety equipment and kept the price in check. It is definitely worth a look.
       
  • Posts

  • Social Stream

  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...