i-ACTIVE AWD not so Active

Two words: fuel efficiency. If the AWD system were "always on", the mileage would be worse. Tuning the car to make the AWD "always on" just isn't necessary for most buyers, but fuel efficiency is. I think that's why Mazda marketed the whole "predictive AWD" with 900 sensors or whatever, they wanted to make it sound like it would be similar to an "always on" AWD system for marketing purposes, but in reality the predictive AWD is probably quite limited.

I can get like or better fuel efficiency from Subaru and other manufacturers with a system which is always on. Buyers arent going to prefer a Mazda over a competitor for an extra 1-2mpg; it is more likely that Mazda is attempting to boost numbers for reasons of regulatory compliance. From what Ive seen, most of the segment has slightly worse fuel economy numbers, but that doesnt stop them from outselling the CX-9.

Lets be honest, it is fuel economy regulation and not market demand which is the reason for the Turbo 4 rather than a V6 in the CX-9. A smoother, quieter V6 would be a much better match and may not even produce appreciably worse fuel economy, but we get forced induction small engines because manufacturers dont want to bet on relaxed fuel economy regulations over the long term.


Blaming a FWD-biased AWD system for poor performance only applies if everything else is ideal (ie. good tires, good conditions). Take a look at (and listen to) the video I posted earlier of my own CX-9 with better all-season tires. No wheel spin, and traction control didn't engage. The AWD system isn't perfect, but it's not the reason for the OP's concerns. It's the tires that come with the car.

My point is that if the AWD system shifted power to the rear in dry conditions when stopped, it is unlikely that the quality or condition of the tires would be so relevantand that should be a benefit of AWD. In the perhaps dozen test drives that Ive done with the CX-9, torque steer is evident, and noticeable to me because its something Im not used to noticing even on FWD-only vehicles. I will say that Ive never turned TCS off, and perhaps if I had there would have been a difference, I dont know.

As a prospective buyer, Im drawn to the CX-9 because of the driving dynamics and the attention to detail that Mazda has put into the vehiclethings like the control layout and infotainment I actually see as a plus over the competition. However, since I live in snow country, I am spooked by reports of a marginal AWD system. Ive seen the part-time systems from Honda and Toyota in action, and theyre not impressive. If Mazdas system is similarly unimpressive, and theres no way to control it, that might be enough for me to consider another brand. I dont want a system which solely reacts to slipping, I want one which works to prevent me from slipping in the first place.
 
Last edited:
I can get like or better fuel efficiency from Subaru and other manufacturers with a system which is always on. Buyers aren*t going to prefer a Mazda over a competitor for an extra 1-2mpg; it is more likely that Mazda is attempting to boost numbers for reasons of regulatory compliance. From what I*ve seen, most of the segment has slightly worse fuel economy numbers, but that doesn*t stop them from outselling the CX-9.

Let*s be honest, it is fuel economy regulation and not market demand which is the reason for the Turbo 4 rather than a V6 in the CX-9. A smoother, quieter V6 would be a much better match and may not even produce appreciably worse fuel economy, but we get forced induction small engines because manufacturers don*t want to bet on relaxed fuel economy regulations over the long term.

We're going to have to agree to disagree. You're looking at this through a very narrow lens. The segment is full of cars with lower mileage that outsell the CX-9, but that's not the only reason the CX-9 gets outsold. The CX-9 gets outsold by others for a whole slew of reasons - dealer network, brand perception, lack of a V6, cargo space, no pano roof. Note that the AWD system/traction is rarely even mentioned when reviewers compare the CX-9 to other cars. It's because they're all pretty much the same. Subaru has an advantage because their AWD system is unique, so it should be better. BMW, Audi, Mercedes, their cars cost a lot more by comparison (and probably come with better tires), so again, they should be better.

Bottom line, the better mileage gets people in the door. If I can publish an EPA mileage figure that is better than the competition while using marketing to make it sound like my AWD system is better than the competition, that's what I'm going to do. Because even if the AWD system is proven to be just like the rest, I still have the EPA mileage to fall back on. I think that's why Mazda doesn't utilize an "always on" AWD system.


My point is that if the AWD system shifted power to the rear in dry conditions when stopped, it is unlikely that the quality or condition of the tires would be so relevant*and that should be a benefit of AWD. In the perhaps dozen test drives that I*ve done with the CX-9, torque steer is evident, and noticeable to me because it*s something I*m not used to noticing even on FWD-only vehicles. I will say that I*ve never turned TCS off, and perhaps if I had there would have been a difference, I don*t know.

As a prospective buyer, I*m drawn to the CX-9 because of the driving dynamics and the attention to detail that Mazda has put into the vehicle*things like the control layout and infotainment I actually see as a plus over the competition. However, since I live in snow country, I am spooked by reports of a marginal AWD system. I*ve seen the part-time systems from Honda and Toyota in action, and they*re not impressive. If Mazda*s system is similarly unimpressive, and there*s no way to control it, that might be enough for me to consider another brand. I don*t want a system which solely reacts to slipping, I want one which works to prevent me from slipping in the first place.

Tires the most relevant factor when it comes to traction. In my experience, a FWD Civic with winter tires can be driven better than an AWD CR-V with all-seasons. Then again, I've been fine driving in harsh, snowy winters with my FWD V6 Accord on all-season tires, so the driver is also a factor.

In any event, if you want a better AWD system, buy a car that has one. Everyone makes compromises, so if AWD is your priority then you should be considering BMW, Audi, etc. If price is also a priority then Subaru should also be considered, but then you're compromising on things like driving dynamics, ergonomics, material fit and finish, etc.

Personally, no other car I test drove fit better than the CX-9 for me, and if the one thing I wanted to improve was the traction, I'd rather spend $1000 for better tires and be done with it. Especially if the next best thing was a BMW or Audi that would have cost me maybe $10k more.
 
Last edited:
Too much stock and too high of an expectation on the CX9*s AWD is being put on while it*s never known to have a great performing AWD system. As someone here said that if AWD capability and perf is the main priority then go for vehicles like Acura with SH-AWD, Audi Quattro, Subaru as examples (that have Torsen system).

Not that Mazda*s I-activ AWD system is a dud but it just performs simply like most AWD systems out there (front-biased like Haldex)...not the best but gets the job done...most manufacturers don*t develop their own AWD systems and just put on available systems that they think is the best and/or cost effective system and program them to their specs. There are some that likely build their own systems in-house.

I have had experience in the past with Volvo (used Haldex 4th gen) and while that was capable the diff I noticed with CX9*s I-activ AWD system is that it does not wait for front wheel slip to engage vs the Haldex. There are differences bet systems but it all depends on your needs and primary use.

I live in a snowy/cold/icy/sleety winter area that uses lots of sand and salt and the CX9*s AWD is sufficient for my needs and I do not drive crazy nor toss the vehicle into corners esp during winter (I also do not go off roading)...btw I also use all-weather tires (winter rated) all year round which perform better than stock OEM all-seasons.

Is CX9 AWD the best? No. Could Mazda program it better? Of course yes..could they have put on a locking differential button like other manufacturers? Yes...but is it sufficient and capable for daily use? To me yes...majority of vehicles out there use similar systems anyway so only diff would be on the programming...if AWD is def a priority then you are limited to a handful of brand choices. Also consider the tires on the vehicle as it plays a factor. I would say do extensive test drives (incl off roads) before purchasing.
 
Last edited:
Subaru advertises Symmetrical AWD, but I dont think that means a 50/50 split. If you look at their marketing materials, it appears that symmetrical to them means something about symmetry of the whole driveline. We used to have an Outback wagon, which was great in the bad weather, but I seem to recall at that time the manual transmission models were 50/50 and the automatics (like ours) were quite FWD biasedperhaps as much as a 90/10 splitbut still, I dont recall a slip or torque steer event in that car (though its 4 cylinder engine was somewhat underpowered).

Yeah, good points. I meant to say that real-time AWD systems are basically FWD only until the front wheels slip and then the tears are engaged. I dont know the default power split in Subarus drivetrains, but I assumed it was 50/50. That said, they might have changed it at some point or I never realized it mightve been different for certain vehicles or transmissions.

That aside, I agree that the expectations around Mazdas AWD may be a bit high for what it is. Mazdas marketing hyping up the system play a role in setting peoples expectations so high though too. The system is more than enough for the vast majority of drivers on the road. Im confident it wouldve performed much better in the horrible winter we had this past season in the upper Midwest if I had better tires on it. Any competent driver on decently-paved roads theoretically shouldnt need AWD as long as they have good enough tires.

Most people simply wont be in situations very often where the technical limitations of the system will be tested and exceeded. As far as the front wheel slipping first before the rear wheels engage, thats simply the system working as intended, its not actually a fault with it.
 
I have to agree with the OP, 100%.

I like my CX-9 Signature and it gets the job done well for our family of 5. The handling is pretty nice for an SUV, gas mileage is fine, and the car looks good -in and out. We got a great deal on it ($10k under invoice), so it is a lot of car for the money.
However, comparing the AWD system in the CX-9 to any other AWD car i have driven is a sad experience. :( The AWD in the Mazda is barely adequate. The car drives like a FWD car even when i need it to give me AWD traction. Specifically - flooring it in a turn i get wheel spin like a FWD, dealing with excessive torque steer - just like a FWD car, driving in rain - front wheel spin from a stop light, driving in snow/ice - pretty pathetic with the stock All season Falkens and *decent* with brand new Nokian Hakkapelittas.

Some people say "it is the tires". Well, i don't fully agree. I hated the Falkens so i invested in some very high quality Michelin Defender LTX M/S tires. These tires are very sticky and perform amazing in dry, rain and even snow. How do i know? I have them on our Lexus GX470 in the summer and my brother also has them on his MDX. These Michelins are amazing tires, in almost every category. I was really hoping that they will cure the torque steer and the wheel spin issue with my CX-9. Guess what - they did not. :( Maybe i get a bit less wheel spin now but the torque steer is equally bad. The CX-9 simply does NOT send enough power to the rear axle...and it usually does it with a long delay. I tested this in the winter too, on a pretty steep hill, where my front tires lost all traction and the rear had some traction, almost touching bare, wet concrete. When the rear tires finally stopped spinning and grabbed to the pavement... they could not move the car forward - at all !! It literally felt like the rear was getting only 25% of the engine power. I even got some weird smell from under the car! No warning lights, but Scary!!! :( I had to back down the hill, until my front tires gained traction again. Yes, i was able to get up the hill, but i blame it on the amazing sticky Nokian winter tires and my driving skills. I feel i could have done almost equally well if i had a FWD car with the same winter tires.

I do agree that tires make a HUGE difference on any car, but in the case of my CX-9, the AWD is still primitive, even with some of the best all-season or winter tires. During the summer/fall/spring seasons it does not bother me too much (except the damn torque steer), but in the Winter, driving the CX-9, need to be fully prepared, as if i have a FWD car. Sure, I won't get stuck with the CX-9, i can cross the snow covered mountain roads fine, but i need to be *extra* careful and make sure i have solid snow tires (and chains in the trunk, just in case).

Just for reference...

When i drive our Lexus GX470 the feeling is completely different. Even on good all-season tires, the GX470 is unstoppable in snow, ice, rain, you name it. It is extremely sure footed. There is NEVER wheel spin, there is never torque steer - and it has a big, powerful V8. You never wait and hope that the power will be send to the rear axle when you need it - it just works. When i put snow tires on it - it's a real tank.

My last car before the CX-9 was a nicely tuned 2012 Audi S4 that was putting 400hp on the wheels. With all this power, i NEVER felt any torque steer, never lost traction in rain or snow and never had to worry if i had the best winter tires installed on it. The quattro system is extremely seamless and effective when it comes to delivering power in ANY condition, with zero drama.

Before the S4, i had a 2007 Acura RL SH-awd. Very similar experience to the Audi, except the Acura had a lot less power and torque. Snow traction was amazing. Driving on dry roads, especially curvy roads, was superb for such large, heavy sedan. Torque vectoring is a real thing when properly implemented. My brother's MDX also has the SH-AWD system is he is very happy with it in the snow and on dry/wet roads, and he only drives on all-season tires.

I know some of you here (big Mazda fans :) ), will jump and say...."not fair, you're comparing the CX-9 to different types of cars/SUV, etc. Everyone in the CX-9 class has the same basic AWD system, etc, etc".
Sure, fair enough, they all do have basic AWD systems, but this is not a good excuse for me. It does NOT make me feel any better that my CX-9 has this AWD weakness because Honda or Toyota or Kia also have the same problem. I still wish that Mazda did the right thing and put a better AWD system in our cars. They sure like to charge for it and their marketing message around the AWD system is very bold ....but it is very misleading to say the least. ;)
 
I know some of you here (big Mazda fans :) ), will jump and say...."not fair, you're comparing the CX-9 to different types of cars/SUV, etc. Everyone in the CX-9 class has the same basic AWD system, etc, etc".
Sure, fair enough, they all do have basic AWD systems, but this is not a good excuse for me. It does NOT make me feel any better that my CX-9 has this AWD weakness because Honda or Toyota or Kia also have the same problem. I still wish that Mazda did the right thing and put a better AWD system in our cars. They sure like to charge for it and their marketing message around the AWD system is very bold ....but it is very misleading to say the least. ;)

You're not comparing apples to apples, so your argument doesn't hold water. It's blatantly obvious that a GX470 is a better vehicle for off-roading. Audi's Quattro system is of course going to be better than Mazda's system. If it doesn't make you feel better that most, if not all, FWD-biased AWD systems are the same, then you should ditch the CX-9 and get yourself in something with a RWD-biased AWD system. Good news is, with Mazda developing their own I6, we may get a CX-9 with an I6, perfect for a RWD-biased AWD system. The bad news is that it is either going to be quite expensive, or Mazda is going to have to cut some serious corners.

Like tekbis said, you can only demand so much from a FWD-biased AWD system. I think I understand what you're trying to say, that Mazda should have used a better AWD system for the CX-9, but if they had used a RWD-based system from the get-go, the car would cost way too much and they wouldn't sell. It's the same reason Honda/Toyota/KIA's offerings in this segment don't use the better systems.

Also, I wouldn't consider myself a "Mazda fan". The CX-9 is my first Mazda. I know what I paid for, and I know what to expect from it.
 
Last edited:
sm1ke, i don't disagree with you. I am not comparing apples to apples, correct. Just like i said in my post earlier, i know that "everyone else in this class does it too". .... however, personally, this does not make me feel any happier with the AWD in the CX-9, especially when i compare it to everything else AWD i have driven in the past, ... and when i read Mazda's bold (BS) marketing claims around the "capabilities" of their i-Active AWD.
All i wish is that Mazda actually did it better than "everyone else" in their class. And btw, it is not just about money. A Subaru Ascent is in the same budget bracket...but they somehow, magically, were able to create a very decent SUV with superior AWD system. It CAN be done, but it comes down to profits, priorities, and expertise. Putting the same AWD system that you put in the tiny CX-3 in the top of the line, much heavier & more powerful ($46k) CX-9 is easy and CHEAP. I get it - huge saving for Mazda.

Bottom line for me is simple - I take the car for what it is and i like to keep it and drive it (for now). I see all the pros and cons with it, BUT i will certainly not force myself to ignore a weakness in it that bothers me. I experience the torque steer behavior almost daily. Blame it on my style of driving, but the fact is - it's there, and it should not be in a modern AWD car.
 
Last edited:
sm1ke, i don't disagree with you. I am not comparing apples to apples, correct. Just like i said in my post earlier, i know that "everyone else in this class does it too". .... however, personally, this does not make me feel any happier with the AWD in the CX-9, especially when i compare it to everything else AWD i have driven in the past, ... and when i read Mazda's bold (BS) marketing claims around the "capabilities" of their i-Active AWD.
All i wish is that Mazda actually did it better than "everyone else" in their class. And btw, it is not just about money. A Subaru Ascent is in the same budget bracket...but they somehow, magically, were able to create a very decent SUV with superior AWD system. It CAN be done, but it comes down to profits, priorities, and expertise. Putting the same AWD system that you put in the tiny CX-3 in the top of the line, much heavier & more powerful ($46k) CX-9 is easy and CHEAP. I get it - huge saving for Mazda.

The Ascent does have a better AWD system and more cargo space, as well as a decent interior. The CX-9 has a decent AWD system, but has better driving dynamics and interior/exterior design. Both cars are in the same price bracket, but they cater to different priorities. In my mind, it doesn't make sense to buy the CX-9 knowing the pros and cons of it, and then complain that the AWD system should be just as good as the Ascent. It can be, but then it wouldn't be in the same price bracket anymore.


Bottom line for me is simple - I take the car for what it is and i like to keep it and drive it (for now). I see all the pros and cons with it, BUT i will certainly not force myself to ignore a weakness in it that bothers me. I experience the torque steer behavior almost daily. Blame it on my style of driving, but the fact is - it's there, and it should not be in a modern AWD car.

I understand the point you're trying to make (modern AWD systems should be good enough to handle what the engine puts out). The CX-9 has quite a bit more torque than the competition, and they should have accounted for that (maybe spend more money on R&D, spend more money on more capable parts, spend more money on software development/tweaking, etc.). But again, that would have cost more money, and the extra cost would have resulted in an increase in the base price or a loss in profits. I'm not trying to make excuses, I'm just trying to keep an open mind about what they could have done as an independent automaker with limited resources.
 
It also comes down to simple cost - a $2K charge for AWD is less than 5% of the vehicle price vs say others like Audi Quattro where the system cost more and represent more than 5% of the price. Mazda could have gotten a better AWD system but then that would drive the cost and retail price higher. Most manufacturers do this anyway (Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Mazda, etc) basically most mainstream brands except a few brands like Subaru that wanted to use and capitalize on their AWD for marketing purposes and have invested a bit more - same with vehicles intended for off-roading and 4x4. You can*t expect a $2K system to perform the same or outperform say a $5-10K AWD system right? Like I said earlier too much has been expected from the CX9 when AWD has never been its strength...now from a Lexus GX or Audi Quattro or Subaru symmetrical AWD system? Different story...the only way Mazda and other mainstream brands to listen to consumers about installing a better and much more capable system would be to complain and ask from dealers. Then maybe the manufacturers will listen.
 
We've only had out CX-9 GT AWD for a few months and today I took it out on a very wet day and threw it around on some back roads, did some full throttle stop and starts, accelerating mid turn at higher speeds and I find the AWD system to be adequate. Even with the Falkens it's hard to get the front wheels slipping and the rear wheels seems to be there when needed. I have not had it in the snow yet but it's the same system as the old CX-5 so I expect similiar satisfactory results. My issue with these tires is at speed on a very wet road they feel a bit floaty and disconnected. They will be getting replaced with the Defender LTX's when the time comes.

Yes there are better systems out there and not all of them are on premium vehicles. The Honda SH-AWD ( as found in the Pilot and Ridgeline) is a much better system and yes the CX-9 would be even better with that set up.
 
When the car is at a stop, the start is very front wheel biased. Once moving, I find the reaction to be much better and have not had any issues in poor conditions. It performs well for its application. It is not same application as other AWD sport sedans.
 
My wife an I are enjoying our 2018 Signature, with kid #3 on the way, her Pontiac G8 GT sadly had to go (we bought a CPO with 6000 miles back in Feb).

Having have several 4WD vehicles over the years (Landcruiser, Vehicross, Montero, XC90), currently a Cayenne turbo, and a AWD car (3000GT VR-4) I am very disappointed with the i-ACTIVE awd system on the CX9.

With a hard launch, especially if the wheel is turned (pulling out and making a right turn for example),there is a lot of slip (hear the tires spinning), torque steer, and the traction control even kicks in zapping power, which to me indicates the AWD system is not transferring nearly enough power to the rear wheels. And this is on a dry surface Im talking about. Issues are only compounded on wet surfaces.

All of my other 4WD vehicles where true 4WD with transfer cases, so yes different animals. My XC90 was front wheel drive biased, with a haldex awd system, now it didn't have the 310 ftlbs of torque the CX9 has, but it never spun the front tires nor did the traction control ever come on, and no torque steer.
Even my 3000GT with 400+ hp doesnt spin the tires (unless the clutch is dumped), and its FWD based system, although a true viscous coupling diff and 40/60 torque split (so that might explain it).

So, its either the AWD system, or perhaps its the tires. I have the stock BS Ecopias, so we will see if things change when I go to replace them. These things are design for noise, rolling resistance, so dry traction is obviously a trade-off.

Are you all experiencing the same?
Im wondering if there is an update to the awd system software?

It would be awesome if we could control the bias, I did a hack back in the day on the Vehicross, so you could dial in the torque split as it was an On Demand system too. But I have heard others talk about small fluide capacity and possible overheating.

I think Mazda missed the mark with i-ACTIVE. I know the CX9 isnt an off road vehicle, but I am having sub-optimal performance in even its target use, on road and on dry pavement!

Seems like there is also a trend towards more off road capable systems recently,coming full circle on SUV's from the early ones with true 4WD systems (Honda, KIA, all have some kind of dirt, gravel, snow settings), so MAzda needs to catch up.

There is a video on YouTube (here) that was posted a while ago. The first comment on the video includes Dave Coleman's (from Mazda USA) explanation of the CX-9's AWD system behavior.

I don't know for certain if all of his assertions are true, particularly the claim that Mazda's AWD hardware is very similar to what Subaru uses in some of their AWD systems (open differentials front and rear with a multi-plate clutch torque coupling controlling the connection between the front and rear). However, if this is the case, it would appear that Mazda's software is the Achilles heel of the system. Their tuning is not able to extract the same level of performance from the hardware that other manufacturers have achieved. Some of this is down to priorities - Coleman talks about the decision to not cut power abruptly and also not apply heavy amounts of braking to reduce wheelspin, but those priorities make the AWD system behave very differently than other manufacturers.

Coleman alluded to updated software that could improve the behavior of the system, but I am not aware of any recalibrations being made available.
 
Last edited:
I am not a super expert on how the Mazda AWD system works, but i can tell that the "fix" for it would be to somehow send more power to the rear axle, quicker.
If the hardware can handle it (i have some real doubts there), the rest is software calibration.
 
I am not a super expert on how the Mazda AWD system works, but i can tell that the "fix" for it would be to somehow send more power to the rear axle, quicker.
If the hardware can handle it (i have some real doubts there), the rest is software calibration.

This is the easy fix. Let the rear engage earlier.
The problem is peak torque arrives early (2k rpm) thus the it may cycle too much and affect its reliability.
 
I'm pretty sure Mazda considers it a way to get you over a pile of snow in your driveway and when its not doing that to siphon off as little MPG as possible so they hit their CAFE numbers.

It's not some launch control or off-roading beast system.
 
I'm pretty sure Mazda considers it a way to get you over a pile of snow in your driveway and when its not doing that to siphon off as little MPG as possible so they hit their CAFE numbers.

It's not some launch control or off-roading beast system.
Just saw a video of the Mazda 3 AWD system....if both front wheels have no traction the car has a very tough time getting going...if both front wheels and 1 rear wheel lose traction you are effectively stuck.

Video was produced by TFL. Needless to say it was eye opening. Makes me wonder how much of a difference there truely is between FWD and AWD "if" propper tires are fitted. The AWD system on the 3 seems very basic.

https://youtu.be/glWDH29Zp0A
 
Just saw a video of the Mazda 3 AWD system....if both front wheels have no traction the car has a very tough time getting going...if both front wheels and 1 rear wheel lose traction you are effectively stuck.

Video was produced by TFL. Needless to say it was eye opening. Makes me wonder how much of a difference there truely is between FWD and AWD "if" propper tires are fitted. The AWD system on the 3 seems very basic.

https://youtu.be/glWDH29Zp0A

I'd like to see how the Audi A3 AWD handles the same test. Keep in mind that nothing else in Mazda's price bracket offers an AWD option, to my limited knowledge.
 
Subaru has AWD vehicals in the same price range.

I agree, would love to see a bunch more cars/SUV tested similarly. This test pretty much negates the type or brand of tire used and focuses the test on how power is directed to the wheels in no traction situation.
 
Subaru has AWD vehicals in the same price range.

I agree, would love to see a bunch more cars/SUV tested similarly. This test pretty much negates the type or brand of tire used and focuses the test on how power is directed to the wheels in no traction situation.

But they are not "real" world test. In those tests, three wheels are on rollers with only one free wheel - the back. In real life conditions, it is safe to say that you will most likely have some degree of traction on one of the other wheels.
 
Back