Is the CX-9 4 cylinder engine enough?

I was amazed at how far 4-cyclinder engines had come after buying the CX-9. Surpassing the power that V-8's used to do. In speeds which are legal, this is the least sluggish crossover in this class you'll find. Above 90 mph, it might start to loose steam if you're still accelerating compared to V-6's. Even with 7 people on board, it does well unless for some reason you're still trying to drag race.
 
Agree the whole point here is whether the 4 banger in the CX-9 is sufficient or not, I brought up the MDX example since I saw the YouTube video earlier and was amazed on how the CX-9 did compared to a brand new MDX! The CX-9 was introduced in 2016, the the MDX in 2021, V6 and about $10k more for similarly equipped vehicle and the performance, acceleration is very close especially in day to day driving not drag racing. Same thing with the Toyota Highlander which is also a V6, 0-60 is very close/almost the same as the CX-9. Actually the highlander will no longer have a V6 next year. Toyota is doing like Mazda and introducing a turbo 4 cylinder!!.. all of this proves that the 4 cylinder in the CX-9 is more than adequate. I had a car accident 2 months ago and got 2 loaners since it took long time to get the parts from Mazda due to COVID, I got Toyota 4 Runner 2022(6 Cylinder Engine) for 2 weeks then a 2022 Nissan Armada which is a V8, I can swear that I did not feel much of a difference in acceleration on any of them on day to day driving (if I floor it in a drag race then maybe yes), highway, overpassing, etc. Its nothing like the old days where the difference was a day and night. After returning those cars and getting my CX-9 back it felt like I am driving a German car, big difference in fit, finish, smoothness and they way low end torque move the car from stop.

Agreed on all points. Before I bought my CX-9, I did test drive a 2018 4Runner Limited after taking the CX-9 for a test drive. In 0-60, the 4Runner is slower on paper by about 0.5s, but it actually felt more like 3 or 4s. Initial acceleration just made everything feel heavy. The high torque of the 2.5T really makes the CX-9 feel smaller and more spirited than the 4Runner.
 
Agreed on all points. Before I bought my CX-9, I did test drive a 2018 4Runner Limited after taking the CX-9 for a test drive. In 0-60, the 4Runner is slower on paper by about 0.5s, but it actually felt more like 3 or 4s. Initial acceleration just made everything feel heavy. The high torque of the 2.5T really makes the CX-9 feel smaller and more spirited than the 4Runner.
Agree. Have a CX5. It felt faster than all other vehicles i tested to include all 4 pots (tucson, rav4, rogue, etc) and some 6 cylinder like Forerinner, Murano, Jeep,etc.
 
I have a 2018 CX9 GT from new. I test it drive several three row SUVs and narrowed it down to the Atlas or the CX9. The Atlas felt bigger and way more sluggish, not nearly as fast. The CX9 felt nimble around corners and just responded better where it just felt faster on the butt dyno. The low torque is really something, especially with premium.

With regular fuel I'm at 8 seconds flat 0-60. With 91-93 octane fuel I'm at 6.9 seconds 0-60. That's a big difference but it's a turbo so meh. With the JB4, that's down another half second. I'm more than happy with the thing-- though it has other gripes.

Keep an eye on excessive vibrations on the seat. It turned out to be both rear CV shafts for several of us. After the dealer replaced mine under warranty, the car is so freaking smooth. Seems like they know about it but isn't handing it flyers yet.

If you can wait for the second year if the cx90 go for it... Otherwise, if you get your hands on a cx9 I don't think you'll be disappointed!
 
I also compared the Atlas with a 6 cylinder to the CX-9 when I bought my first CX-9. Big difference. The CX-9 outperformed the Atlas when it comes to acceleration, and handling.
 
I find the CX-9 to be a refined and “acceleration worthy” vehicle for the money. Suspension is fantastic, good handling, smooth highway cruiser and plenty of torque on the get go. The only car I liked better (on a test drive) was a Porsche Cayenne. (I test drove darn near everything) NO WAY I can afford the maintenance much less the cost of a decent Certified Porsche. 😉
 
The low RPM torque curve is what pushed me to Mazda, over other Japanese brands. I too drove other SUV's with more horsepower and I like the daily drivability of the 2.5T better. It's nice to be able to get full torque at 2000 RPM. My 6 with turbo is definitely more fun to drive than my CX-9. The CX-9 still handles very well and in my opinion is the best sub $50k 3 row SUV.

320 pound-feet of torque with Premium fuel.
1671636066830.png
 
It's not a sports car... But the 4 banger does have the power to haul some weight:

 
My 08 cx9 with a v6 has felt sluggish since day one. I can't imagine a 4
Have you read the above comments? Totally different vehicle/engine than the 08, including probably a few upgrades to the transmission.....see below. Your six only has 270 lbs torque vs 320 in the new four banger. The 2018-2021 does 0-60 in 7.1 sec vs 7.6 for the 08. Take a test drive at your dealer and you'll probably be quite surprised.

What transmission is in a 2008 Mazda CX-9? | WapCar

The Mazda CX-9 is known to have issues with hard shifts and transmission slippage on models equipped with the six speed automatic transmission. When the transmission gets warm, the issues is most noticeable as a hesitation to shift, followed by jerking or jolting into the next gear.
 
I've got the '23 CX-9 and I think it's fine. I had it loaded up with 7 people and didn't feel sluggish at all. Granted, it's not a Porsche and I don't need it to be.
 
The 300+ lbs of torque is not bad. Around town it's more than enough. On the highway, it's fine.

Check out the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times and compare it to some of its competitors. In my opinion, 0-60 at 7.0 seconds is not too shabby for a $40K 3-row.

The 2.5T may not feel like enough if you're towing >1500 LBS at higher speeds for extended periods of time or if you're traveling at autobahn speeds with a full load of passengers.
 
Last edited:
Back