Spied: 2017 Mazda CX-9

[deepfriedsushi]

https://youtu.be/wT-A8RyBUyA

Quick tech review from motomantv.

Driving impressions are embargoed till May 23rd, so keep an eye out for those.

I get a feeling we're going to get a deep tech review with him and Dave Coleman in his 3rd video. That should be fun to watch.

 

[crikey]

Yep, We're on our 3rd CX-9 and I'm getting the first GT w/tow package at my dealership, although he's also put my name on the signature edition that's on the same shipment. I'm not sure its worth $2500 more. Its supposed to be here weekend of Memorial Day. We've used ours for travel softball for the girl and vacations. The hump is not an issue with us either as most SUVs have humps, including my VW Touareg. Most people just put their legs on either side of the hump when there's three in the back. Kids will grow and will not want to sit in the middle so that is a short term problem for folks with kids that sit in the middle. Cargo box is a fixture on ours when traveling with family.

One of the best investments that I've made in owning a crossover is the 16 cu. ft. Thule Evolution cargo box that I bought in 2003 when I owned and Infiniti FX35. Not only does it add more cargo room, it's also a space for items that you may not want in the interior (provided it fits, of course). To this day, I use that thing even for a trip to the beach so that I can put wet and sandy items in the cargo box, instead of getting sand all over the interior.

 

[jrtouareg]

One of the best investments that I've made in owning a crossover is the 16 cu. ft. Thule Evolution cargo box that I bought in 2003 when I owned and Infiniti FX35. Not only does it add more cargo room, it's also a space for items that you may not want in the interior (provided it fits, of course). To this day, I use that thing even for a trip to the beach so that I can put wet and sandy items in the cargo box, instead of getting sand all over the interior.

That's the exact same cargo box I have. Bought it in 2004 on sale. Dealer threw in the 4 suitcase bags that's made for the cargo box. Mine has the smooth metalflake dark grey finish that they don't make any more.

 

[crikey]

That's the exact same cargo box I have. Bought it in 2004 on sale. Dealer threw in the 4 suitcase bags that's made for the cargo box. Mine has the smooth metalflake dark grey finish that they don't make any more.

Does Thule still make the Evolution? That cargo box is so easy to install. Aside from needing another person to lift it up to the roof (I've managed to lift it up myself a few times, it's not easy and really stupid so don't bother trying it), the mounting hardware makes mounting it to the roof rack a breeze to install. And for the amount of use that I've gotten out it, the investment has paid off in spades.

I do think everyone that has a 3-row crossover needs a proper cargo box for those times that all 3 rows are in use and need more room for cargo.

 

[RaptorOO7]

https://youtu.be/wT-A8RyBUyA

Quick tech review from motomantv.

Driving impressions are embargoed till May 23rd, so keep an eye out for those.

I get a feeling we're going to get a deep tech review with him and Dave Coleman in his 3rd video. That should be fun to watch.

I ran across that video last night as well, looking forward to part 2 & 3 with more info. One of the local Mazda dealers in my area has 4 CX-9's two are Signature edition, I might go check them out in person just to get a feel for it.

 

[Bryced15]

Been lurking on here for a while and absolutely love the new CX-9 as we will be needing a larger vehicle soon. One suprise I have about the Signiture trim is the lack of ventilated/cooled front seats. Every top trim level vehicle out there has them now. I'm shock that the CX-9 doesn't even offer them. My wife has them on her must list, so I'm highly bummed about these. Also, I noticed the heated steering wheel button seems to be gone. I know I saw it on pre production models... Another item I'm surprised about is the lack of heated rear seats. Definitely not a deal breaker or a need, but I'm once again surprised that the top trim doesn't offer them like most vehicles these days do.

 

[MrPerception]

The lack of heated steering wheel is surprising since it shows as being on all but the lowest trim in Canada. Then again, the AWD is standard on all but the lowest trim as well. You would think they would keep things relatively similar between Canada and the US, but there are differences. Good example is the safety features. The full suite of safety items is part of a package on the 2nd highest model (GT model here) but is standard in the Signature, while it shows as standard on the 2nd highest model in the US (Grand Touring). The Grand Touring model also has roof rails as standard where it is listed as an added on accessory in Canada.

 

[tex2670]

The lack of heated steering wheel is surprising since it shows as being on all but the lowest trim in Canada. Then again, the AWD is standard on all but the lowest trim as well. You would think they would keep things relatively similar between Canada and the US, but there are differences. Good example is the safety features. The full suite of safety items is part of a package on the 2nd highest model (GT model here) but is standard in the Signature, while it shows as standard on the 2nd highest model in the US (Grand Touring). The Grand Touring model also has roof rails as standard where it is listed as an added on accessory in Canada.

It's not Canada I'd think they'd keep up with--it's Honda, Toyota, Hyundai and Kia.

 

[jlanger]

The lack of heated steering wheel is surprising since it shows as being on all but the lowest trim in Canada. Then again, the AWD is standard on all but the lowest trim as well. You would think they would keep things relatively similar between Canada and the US, but there are differences. Good example is the safety features. The full suite of safety items is part of a package on the 2nd highest model (GT model here) but is standard in the Signature, while it shows as standard on the 2nd highest model in the US (Grand Touring). The Grand Touring model also has roof rails as standard where it is listed as an added on accessory in Canada.

With that I might have to consider driving to Canada and purchasing one up there if that's possible. I do see a lot of Canadian imports in MN, especially the Chevy Captiva.

 

[crikey]

Embargo on driving impressions has been lifted. Here's Alex on Autos. Initial impressions are that the low-horsepower engine is the downside.

 

[sjg]

Embargo on driving impressions has been lifted. Here's Alex on Autos. Initial impressions are that the low-horsepower engine is the downside.

Same initial impression from Autoblog. Concerns about getting up to speed, merging or passing with a full load. To me, it's a reasonable trade-off if the real world fuel economy is fantastic. I don't know if it is. Time will tell. It would be even more reasonable if they had a V6 option. If they can't develop one themselves they work with Toyota to get their V6 that works so nicely in the RX and Highlander.

 

[crikey]

Dave Coleman's technical explanation on how the CX-9's 2.5T engine works. This is Motoman TV's first drive review and his initial impressions on the engine are similar to other reviewers. Torque comes in like an on/off switch but tails off pretty quickly at engine speeds where most drivers are used to a linear increase in power. It takes getting used to, is the feedback.

 

[crikey]

Same initial impression from Autoblog. Concerns about getting up to speed, merging or passing with a full load. To me, it's a reasonable trade-off if the real world fuel economy is fantastic. I don't know if it is. Time will tell. It would be even more reasonable if they had a V6 option. If they can't develop one themselves they work with Toyota to get their V6 that works so nicely in the RX and Highlander.

Agree that time will tell. I think more feedback on real-world driving would provide a better perspective. As Alex Dykes pointed out, if Mazda tuned the engine to around 300hp like Volvo did, it might be a different experience. However, that may go against the SkyActiv mantra.

 

[Drogos]

Simple software tune will bring the tq at very min. 60 tq up and probably 20 or so hp...with weight savings that alone will put it above current model...with 93 fuel, you will get close to 400tq and 300 hp IMHO on a simple software tune.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[crikey]

Simple software tune will bring the tq at very min. 60 tq up and probably 20 or so hp...with weight savings that alone will put it above current model...with 93 fuel, you will get close to 400tq and 300 hp IMHO on a simple software tune.

I don't doubt it. But I'll wait until the tuners come out with a reliable tune on this exact engine. Good thing I'm in no hurry to get one.

 

[deepfriedsushi]

After reading several first drive reviews, I think the impression of this engine really comes down to your driving style. If you're a lead foot driver and are used to revving the engine out, the engine might disappoint. If you're more of a cruiser, more easy going, then this engine might be in tune with you. The low end torque would be very nice to have puttering around. Makes for a more calm driving experience.

In my cx5, I love the (relative) low end torque, which allows the transmission to hold a higher gear than normal and reduces the need to downshift more often. However, The powerband doesn't fall off much at higher rpms, which helps accelerating onto the freeway quickly to better match freeway traffic. I'm curious if the cx9 will feel adequate enough because some reviewers say it's enough, others don't. I think a test drive will answer this. The main question is whether sufficient freeway acceleration can be achieved without having to rev the engine out of the meat of it's torque curve, which reviewers say falls off over 4500rpm.

 

[Drogos]

I don't recall any highway ramp in my area that would require race car mode. Passing on a 2 lane rural road would be of bigger concern. When I had turbocharged subaru I could easily walk away from all 4 cylinders cars and many v6 not even getting past 4.5k rpm. I have usable high torque from 2k -5k rpms...more than enough to get up to 70mph on the ramp without any issues what so ever

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[Looking@MZD]

I had a call from our local dealer and, as it turned out, became the first person to test-drive their newly arrived AWD CX-9 this afternoon. I also had an opportunity to drive the new 2016 Honda Pilot Elite just before the Mazda.

The Pilot wins on interior spaciousness (shoulder-room, headroom--especially in the 3rd row) and general utility--bigger storage bins, multiple cupholders, and more easily accessible 3rd row seating. The Pilot's panoramic sunroof is also a plus (except for what it does to the vehicle's driving dynamics).

The CX-9 wins on virtually everything else. Interior material quality and fit even in the low-end CX-9 Touring model matched the top-end Pilot Elite or exceeded it. It is also easily the best driving SUV in its class. I was only able to get the vehicle upto 70 mph on the freeway because of heavy traffic but it accelerated to that speed with minimal downshifting and virtually no turbo lag--with 3 large men on board. On two-lane roads the CX-9 handles like a much smaller vehicle--not terribly far off from my wife's VW GTI (at least subjectively). One of the early reviews says that the only better-handling SUV is an RWD Durango (because of its ideal weight distribution)--I'd say that's possible and high praise indeed having driven a 4WD Durango recently and come away quite impressed with its quality in that department.

I will return to the dealer in a few days when they receive a shipment of CX-9 Signature models and hope to take a longer test drive at higher speeds to evaluate whether the car runs out of breath as has been reported. Under real world conditions I'd tend to doubt it.

 

[sjg]

One of the early reviews says that the only better-handling SUV is an RWD Durango (because of its ideal weight distribution)--I'd say that's possible and high praise indeed having driven a 4WD Durango recently and come away quite impressed with its quality in that department..

I had a 2009 CX-9 Touring AWD and have replaced it with a 2015 Durango Limited AWD. I like the Durango a lot and it handles well. But the drive is nowhere near as engaging as the CX-9 was. The Durango has a better weight distribution for sure so the ride is balanced. It is also very quiet. But the Durango achieves it's performance by stiffening the suspension to the detriment of ride quality. The Mazda provided great handling through a better suspension setup. Around curves, bumps in the road that the Mazda would absorb end up upsetting the Durango. Also, the steering feel on the Mazda was much better than the Durango. I haven't driven the new CX-9 but from what I've read, ride and handling have improved. I'm curious about the steering and, of course, the powertrain.

 

[RedHotFuzz]

I couldn't wait for the new CX-9 any longer and leased a Durango R/T in February. The Pilot and Highlander just didn't do it for me. I love the Durango, especially that V8 rumble. It's a great looking vehicle as well. Long-term reliability is an unknown - I haven't owned a "domestic" brand since my first car in high school. If the Durango proves reliable, I'll buy it at lease end. If not, or if gas prices take a bad turn, I'll be looking CX-9. I assume all the kinks will be worked out by then and we'll see how that turbo 4 holds up in that large vehicle. Also they better have some sort of "sport" trim by then - all that chromed plastic is not working for me.