Any experiences with the current generation CX-9?
We're considering a new family hauler.
We're considering a new family hauler.
Mazda CX-9
- Thread starter Stewart Fan
- Start date
- Status
I picked up a 2016 Signature Machine Gray 3 weeks ago. 2500kms on it now and love it.
I cross shopped the Pilot, Pathfinder, Highlander and even the MDX and XC90
In terms of how I rate the CX9 Signature... Above the Pilot, Pathfinder, Highlander and MDX...even the XC90(I could not justify the extra $30K over the CX9).
Why? the CX9 drives better than all of them IMO.... the dynamics is tuned making it feel like a mid sized sports sedan. It drives smaller than it actually is. The 2.5T has more than enough get up and go..the torque is really nice and highway passing, no problems.
Looks (subjective of course).... Exterior is stunning from all angles, the LED lights and grille are a nice touch. The interior is at the top of the pack. I give a slight edge to the XC90 for a better "feeling" interior...but the CX9 signature with the Napa leather and rosewood trim has a nicer richer looking interior.
The only thing I wish the CX9 had was second row captains chairs.... I traded in a 2014 Odyssey and miss this feature, for the kids to easily access the third row.
Go test drive one... you will be impressed!
Fuel Economy wise
Im impressed with the fuel economy on this thing. My morning drive consists of 25kms of highway drive (steady 100-110km/h) and then 25kms of stop and go (60-80km/h)...therefore 50/50 mixed.
I find the 2.5T very easy to gently accelerate to speed with very little (maybe no) turbo boost. And then when I am maintaining a constant speed of 60 or 80km/h on level road, it will do so in the 5L/100km area, which is very impressive.
7.5L/100km (31MPG)
I cross shopped the Pilot, Pathfinder, Highlander and even the MDX and XC90
In terms of how I rate the CX9 Signature... Above the Pilot, Pathfinder, Highlander and MDX...even the XC90(I could not justify the extra $30K over the CX9).
Why? the CX9 drives better than all of them IMO.... the dynamics is tuned making it feel like a mid sized sports sedan. It drives smaller than it actually is. The 2.5T has more than enough get up and go..the torque is really nice and highway passing, no problems.
Looks (subjective of course).... Exterior is stunning from all angles, the LED lights and grille are a nice touch. The interior is at the top of the pack. I give a slight edge to the XC90 for a better "feeling" interior...but the CX9 signature with the Napa leather and rosewood trim has a nicer richer looking interior.
The only thing I wish the CX9 had was second row captains chairs.... I traded in a 2014 Odyssey and miss this feature, for the kids to easily access the third row.
Go test drive one... you will be impressed!
Fuel Economy wise
Im impressed with the fuel economy on this thing. My morning drive consists of 25kms of highway drive (steady 100-110km/h) and then 25kms of stop and go (60-80km/h)...therefore 50/50 mixed.
I find the 2.5T very easy to gently accelerate to speed with very little (maybe no) turbo boost. And then when I am maintaining a constant speed of 60 or 80km/h on level road, it will do so in the 5L/100km area, which is very impressive.
7.5L/100km (31MPG)
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Vikas
Of all the competitors you have listed, this one probably has the lowest HP (but most likely highest torque). My colleague has one for few months and he is happy with it.
227hp on 87
250hp on 93
310ft-lbs regardless
you are correct. From what I experience(between 87,91&93)... 87 is all you need.
Torque from idle to 4500rpms is strong regardless of octane level.
on 87, you do feel the torque fall off after 4500rpms
on 91/93...the torque feels strong up to redline...(but how often does someone rev the [censored] out of an SUV?)
It is a nice option for the end user though.... the only time I would ever use 93 in this thing, is if I have a full load of cargo or towing for long distances on a freeway over 100km/h.
Of all the competitors you have listed, this one probably has the lowest HP (but most likely highest torque). My colleague has one for few months and he is happy with it.
227hp on 87
250hp on 93
310ft-lbs regardless
you are correct. From what I experience(between 87,91&93)... 87 is all you need.
Torque from idle to 4500rpms is strong regardless of octane level.
on 87, you do feel the torque fall off after 4500rpms
on 91/93...the torque feels strong up to redline...(but how often does someone rev the [censored] out of an SUV?)
It is a nice option for the end user though.... the only time I would ever use 93 in this thing, is if I have a full load of cargo or towing for long distances on a freeway over 100km/h.
A co-worker of mine has one. She loves it. The only downside for her is the price of tires. Size on hers is odd. Very expensive.
Personally, I am waiting another decade before I will purchase a new Mazda. Mazda needs to prove that they have fixed their premature body rust problem. I will only buy a decade old Mazda at this stage verifying that it has zero rust. I presume that means I will have to buy it from Arizona or some other southern state.
Originally Posted By: Vikas
Personally, I am waiting another decade before I will purchase a new Mazda. Mazda needs to prove that they have fixed their premature body rust problem. I will only buy a decade old Mazda at this stage verifying that it has zero rust. I presume that means I will have to buy it from Arizona or some other southern state.
We live at sea level near Seattle. Its a very mild climate. Not much salt or de-icer gets used around here. Body rust is no concern to me.
Personally, I am waiting another decade before I will purchase a new Mazda. Mazda needs to prove that they have fixed their premature body rust problem. I will only buy a decade old Mazda at this stage verifying that it has zero rust. I presume that means I will have to buy it from Arizona or some other southern state.
We live at sea level near Seattle. Its a very mild climate. Not much salt or de-icer gets used around here. Body rust is no concern to me.
Originally Posted By: Thugzy
Originally Posted By: Vikas
Of all the competitors you have listed, this one probably has the lowest HP (but most likely highest torque). My colleague has one for few months and he is happy with it.
227hp on 87
250hp on 93
310ft-lbs regardless
you are correct. From what I experience(between 87,91&93)... 87 is all you need.
Torque from idle to 4500rpms is strong regardless of octane level.
on 87, you do feel the torque fall off after 4500rpms
on 91/93...the torque feels strong up to redline...(but how often does someone rev the [censored] out of an SUV?)
It is a nice option for the end user though.... the only time I would ever use 93 in this thing, is if I have a full load of cargo or towing for long distances on a freeway over 100km/h.
I don't remember the last time I saw 93 octane for sale. Most premium around here is 91.
Originally Posted By: Vikas
Of all the competitors you have listed, this one probably has the lowest HP (but most likely highest torque). My colleague has one for few months and he is happy with it.
227hp on 87
250hp on 93
310ft-lbs regardless
you are correct. From what I experience(between 87,91&93)... 87 is all you need.
Torque from idle to 4500rpms is strong regardless of octane level.
on 87, you do feel the torque fall off after 4500rpms
on 91/93...the torque feels strong up to redline...(but how often does someone rev the [censored] out of an SUV?)
It is a nice option for the end user though.... the only time I would ever use 93 in this thing, is if I have a full load of cargo or towing for long distances on a freeway over 100km/h.
I don't remember the last time I saw 93 octane for sale. Most premium around here is 91.
Originally Posted By: Thugzy
I picked up a 2016 Signature Machine Gray 3 weeks ago. 2500kms on it now and love it.
I cross shopped the Pilot, Pathfinder, Highlander and even the MDX and XC90
In terms of how I rate the CX9 Signature... Above the Pilot, Pathfinder, Highlander and MDX...even the XC90(I could not justify the extra $30K over the CX9).
Why? the CX9 drives better than all of them IMO.... the dynamics is tuned making it feel like a mid sized sports sedan. It drives smaller than it actually is. The 2.5T has more than enough get up and go..the torque is really nice and highway passing, no problems.
Looks (subjective of course).... Exterior is stunning from all angles, the LED lights and grille are a nice touch. The interior is at the top of the pack. I give a slight edge to the XC90 for a better "feeling" interior...but the CX9 signature with the Napa leather and rosewood trim has a nicer richer looking interior.
The only thing I wish the CX9 had was second row captains chairs.... I traded in a 2014 Odyssey and miss this feature, for the kids to easily access the third row.
Go test drive one... you will be impressed!
Fuel Economy wise
Im impressed with the fuel economy on this thing. My morning drive consists of 25kms of highway drive (steady 100-110km/h) and then 25kms of stop and go (60-80km/h)...therefore 50/50 mixed.
I find the 2.5T very easy to gently accelerate to speed with very little (maybe no) turbo boost. And then when I am maintaining a constant speed of 60 or 80km/h on level road, it will do so in the 5L/100km area, which is very impressive.
7.5L/100km (31MPG)
The Machine Gray is a classy color. It fits the CX-9 very well IMO. It would easily be my first choice.
My wife prefers Deep Crystal Blue Mica.
Didn't have time to drive today. We'll have to wait for Saturday
I picked up a 2016 Signature Machine Gray 3 weeks ago. 2500kms on it now and love it.
I cross shopped the Pilot, Pathfinder, Highlander and even the MDX and XC90
In terms of how I rate the CX9 Signature... Above the Pilot, Pathfinder, Highlander and MDX...even the XC90(I could not justify the extra $30K over the CX9).
Why? the CX9 drives better than all of them IMO.... the dynamics is tuned making it feel like a mid sized sports sedan. It drives smaller than it actually is. The 2.5T has more than enough get up and go..the torque is really nice and highway passing, no problems.
Looks (subjective of course).... Exterior is stunning from all angles, the LED lights and grille are a nice touch. The interior is at the top of the pack. I give a slight edge to the XC90 for a better "feeling" interior...but the CX9 signature with the Napa leather and rosewood trim has a nicer richer looking interior.
The only thing I wish the CX9 had was second row captains chairs.... I traded in a 2014 Odyssey and miss this feature, for the kids to easily access the third row.
Go test drive one... you will be impressed!
Fuel Economy wise
Im impressed with the fuel economy on this thing. My morning drive consists of 25kms of highway drive (steady 100-110km/h) and then 25kms of stop and go (60-80km/h)...therefore 50/50 mixed.
I find the 2.5T very easy to gently accelerate to speed with very little (maybe no) turbo boost. And then when I am maintaining a constant speed of 60 or 80km/h on level road, it will do so in the 5L/100km area, which is very impressive.
7.5L/100km (31MPG)
The Machine Gray is a classy color. It fits the CX-9 very well IMO. It would easily be my first choice.
My wife prefers Deep Crystal Blue Mica.
Didn't have time to drive today. We'll have to wait for Saturday
My coworker has one. I'm surprised though, how loud the engine is. I was expecting more engine noise isolation. Maybe it's the zoom-zoom.
the rear sunshades, I don't like that gap in the door, I can see a bored kid shoving stuff down there.
the rear sunshades, I don't like that gap in the door, I can see a bored kid shoving stuff down there.
Originally Posted By: UG_Passat
My coworker has one. I'm surprised though, how loud the engine is. I was expecting more engine noise isolation. Maybe it's the zoom-zoom.
the rear sunshades, I don't like that gap in the door, I can see a bored kid shoving stuff down there.
The engine is very quiet IMO. Plus the overall cabin is exceptionally quiet... because the cabin is quiet, it makes the engine noise more pronounced.... I find the engine in my CX-9 quieter than my MB GLK350
My coworker has one. I'm surprised though, how loud the engine is. I was expecting more engine noise isolation. Maybe it's the zoom-zoom.
the rear sunshades, I don't like that gap in the door, I can see a bored kid shoving stuff down there.
The engine is very quiet IMO. Plus the overall cabin is exceptionally quiet... because the cabin is quiet, it makes the engine noise more pronounced.... I find the engine in my CX-9 quieter than my MB GLK350
- Status
