CX-90 (when to buy) after the Hype

[2024CX90PPS]

I am a five time CX-9 owner 2017, 2019, 2020, 2021 & 2022 (current). Last three were Signature model.

So I am the 1% of Mazda previous owners who should be looking Into buying a CX-90 upper end model (Premium Plus S or Hybrid). After visiting three deals in CT and NY, I may be moving back to Mercedes or Audi.

I spoke to my main salesperson last week and he stated sales has dried up after the first three weeks of media euphoria. His past high end buyers CX-9 Signature or GT models are forced into the Premium Plus models due to options which are must have for an $50k car. Other comments: Price point for existing CX-9 owners was way too high, CX-5 owners don’t even consider the $20k more premium to pay for the CX-90, no existing BMW Mercedes owners have come in inquiring about the CX-90 (Mazda this is bad). So his summary is CX-9 owners have sticker shock, people are not cross shopping from other luxury brand and the owner of the dealership is not giving a big enough discount to great customers like me. The 2022 and 2023 CX-9 fire sale a few months ago allowed customers to walk away with up to $6000 off sticker price, soMazda drained to swamp for Mazda high end customers.

At a NY dealership, I met a spokeswoman from Mazda visiting many local CT and NY dealers. We spoke for 1 hour on what She has observed and what I feel about the Rollout.

Here are some of the highlights not in a particular order:

• Seating arrangements lose 50% of the customers. Second row bucket seat are required in most of the models. This eliminates any larger family’s immediately. Only the entry level have bench in middle. She said this is being reviewed by Mazda.
• Acceleration from stop is horrible due to the delay of no torque converter and using the mini battery as the assist. I do have to say the delay reminds me of the the first turbos in 1980 and 1990. Press the accelerator and nothing happens. This really sucks and Mazda better address this with a software update. In general test drivers wanted more acceleration performance. 340 Hp and 280 hp is a joke from 3.3 liter turbo in 2024. I drove a 2024 BMW X5 only $10 more and the BMW shames the Mazda performance feel. Recent reviews show the Kia and Hyundai faster from stop.
• Options which are required by high end luxury buyers are only in the Premium Plus. She said ventilated seats should be offered in more models. As I have experienced no ventilation in seats means I am limited by my choices. Once you go “ventilated” you can never go back.
• She mentioned pricing has not brought in past CX-9 owners. Sticker shock is magnified by the deals holding to list price. First sales were due well planned hype by Mazda.
• She mentioned interior space was a negative when compared to Kia or Hyundai. Mazda set this car up for four people in 75% of the configurations. No one wants to sit in the third row.

At the NY dealer I took a shot at trading in my 9000 Mile red 2022 CX-9 Signature for a 2024 Premium Plus S. I needed diapers after the quote. The dealer wanted $33,600 plus my paid off 2022 CX-9 Signature for the 2024 Mazda CX-90 Premium Plus S. As a person who is a high end Mazda buyer it sent me directly to the local BMW dealer who quoted $36 more for a 2024 X5 with my trade. So $3 k difference from a Mazda to the BMW X5 is insane!

My predictions. By Sept 2023 Mazda will have $3000 incentives plus dealer discounts of $3 to 5 k. So $8 k off of list. The product is good, great dynamic drive, unique interior but too expensive for the current client base which must be converted from CX-9 to CX-90. Mazda must fix the acceleration delay (shifting roughness) and seating configuration. Sorry for raining on the party.

 

[sm1ke]

US pricing is pretty out of line. Canadian pricing has a more reasonable overlap with the current CX-9 pricing, with the CX-90 equipped with the regular engine topping out at around $55k. The base CX-9 starts a few thousand lower at $42k, compared to the CX-90 base at $45k. Moving up from the regular engine, there is a $5-9k bump if you want the more powerful engine and some extra features.

The seating arrangements are a definite miss. 2nd row bench should be available in all trims - not everyone wants captain's chairs.

 

[dougal]

The pricing in Canada is really good and I personally wish the CX-90 topped out a 55K in the USA - not 62K.

With that said, the X-5 comparison is silly. That is a smaller car and no human- adult or child - should be sitting for any period in the third row! That is an emergency use case and that is it. The comparisons to the CX-90 is the MDX, Q7 XC-90 - but honestly, the Q7 and XC-90 offer a much more luxurious experience. Mazda is not in the league.

The performance of the vehicle is fine and honestly, much deeper than a CX-9. Like you, I have owened two CX-9 - a 2018 and a 2021. The battery is designed to reduce fuel consumption and it does. People are averaging 26-27 MPG overall with this and that is amazing. I will take that any day and think Mazda did a great job balancing performance with fuel economy. Once you are moving, the pedal is deeper and there is much more room to play.

The seating is, as you say, crazy. The 2nd row bench should be standard on all models. A basic 2+3+2 configuration. If you want 2nd row captains, you can get it but otherwise, bench. I was at the dealer today and everyone was looking at the CX-90 and they sold the one I looked at - a silver PHEV with white interior.

The trade in value for the CX-9 is really puzzling. The dealer had a 2020 CX-3 - the small one - base model that they were selling for $20K. For my 2021 CX-9 with 60K miles and 100% dealer serviced by them, they were offering me $30K.

I do agree, buying now is tempting, because I really like the CX-90 but it is better to wait. Let stock build up and deal occur.

 

[11E20]

Thanks for posting your detailed impressions of the CX-90 and what dealers are doing here in the US. I plan to trade my 2019 CX-9 GT in 2025 and my short list of replacements are the CX-90, Honda Pilot, or Toyota Highlander.

I reside in a rural area where there are no high end dealerships such as Mercedes, BMW, Audi, etc., even Subaru is too exotic for this part of Texas and after my last domestic brand experience I'm not looking at and American vehicles.

Hopefully in a couple of years the pricing situation becomes more realistic and problem areas like the blind spot monitoring system have been rectified. Of course, the cylinder head issue in the Gen 2 CX-9's didn't become known until much later so waiting doesn't always mean anything.

 

[MichalP]

The main post is basically addressing all my concerns regarding the CX-90. I know people might have different preferences and priorities but usually it's is a combination of things - at least it is for me and although I am not in the market for a 3 row SUV I just don't like particularly the direction Mazda went with CX-90. I am curious if they going to learn their lesson before CX-70 comes out.

1. Seating arrangement in the 3 row SUV is a big no for me and I am glad not to be the only one noticing it. I need features but I want to have flexibility too. It was stupid move to limit bench availability in higher trims. Maybe they thought that If Kia can go away with it they can as well but Telluride for whatever reason is super popular and Mazda is not.

2. Engine - I like the tech and implementation but it is not a deal breaker for me and it is not going to be a turning point for me, especially if the car is missing some vital features for me.

3. Price, features and options - this is the biggest problem - just one example - what Mazda was thinking offering here in Canada only heated seats in the front for $50K (GS-L trim). This is like going back 10 years, my CX-5 from 2014 had this option as a GS trim ($28K). How I suppose to justify paying that much more. Even CX-9 (GS-L trim) already had heated seats in the 2nd row. You need to pay a few thousand more to get a package and you are losing bench seating in the process. Ughhh.

4. Interior space - finally had a chance last weekend to seat in one - even my 12 years old son mentioned that seats feel narrower comparing to our current CX-9. The same leg room - front and back, no room for you feet in the 3rd row - slightly better headroom and overall leg room but this is it. Slightly and I mean really slightly bigger trunk. Again it is all about preferences but expect me to pay more - give me something in return and this is not the case.

I am not going to fall for premium look if usability is going to suffer and don't let me even start with Mazda premium brand aspirations. Bottom line. Even in Canada the pricing for me is insane. Don't care for high output engine but I want features and If I want to buy similarly equipped car to my CX-9 GT it's going to cost me $10K difference in MSPR and that's not it - additional 3% in taxes (premium tax of 15% instead of 12%) so approx $12-13K more. Sorry but this is big no go. I understand that other brands have similar pricing but they also offer in many aspects better utilities so to speak.

 

[sm1ke]

Sorry for raining on the party.

Sorry but this is big no go.

I'm not sure why you guys are saying sorry, lol. There's no reason to apologize if the car doesn't make sense for your needs or wants.

 

[MichalP]

I'm not sure why you guys are saying sorry, lol. There's no reason to apologize if the car doesn't make sense for your needs or wants.

I just feel like it is a missed opportunity for Mazda. All this teasing with biggest Mazda ever and more space because of the rear wheel drive and ultimately as the whole package it does not feel like they delivered. I am still in love with my CX-9 and previously it was Mazda 3 and then CX-5. The choice was always pretty obvious - better features and driving capabilities than the other Japanese competition, better reliability than Germans. Some shortcomings like interior space but overall package was spot on. I just hope that either CX-70 or the next CX-5 will be more appealing to me.

 

[GTA-CX9]

I am a five time CX-9 owner 2017, 2019, 2020, 2021 & 2022 (current). Last three were Signature model.

So I am the 1% of Mazda previous owners who should be looking Into buying a CX-90 upper end model (Premium Plus S or Hybrid). After visiting three deals in CT and NY, I may be moving back to Mercedes or Audi.

I spoke to my main salesperson last week and he stated sales has dried up after the first three weeks of media euphoria. His past high end buyers CX-9 Signature or GT models are forced into the Premium Plus models due to options which are must have for an $50k car. Other comments: Price point for existing CX-9 owners was way too high, CX-5 owners don’t even consider the $20k more premium to pay for the CX-90, no existing BMW Mercedes owners have come in inquiring about the CX-90 (Mazda this is bad). So his summary is CX-9 owners have sticker shock, people are not cross shopping from other luxury brand and the owner of the dealership is not giving a big enough discount to great customers like me. The 2022 and 2023 CX-9 fire sale a few months ago allowed customers to walk away with up to $6000 off sticker price, soMazda drained to swamp for Mazda high end customers.

At a NY dealership, I met a spokeswoman from Mazda visiting many local CT and NY dealers. We spoke for 1 hour on what She has observed and what I feel about the Rollout.

Here are some of the highlights not in a particular order:

• Seating arrangements lose 50% of the customers. Second row bucket seat are required in most of the models. This eliminates any larger family’s immediately. Only the entry level have bench in middle. She said this is being reviewed by Mazda.
• Acceleration from stop is horrible due to the delay of no torque converter and using the mini battery as the assist. I do have to say the delay reminds me of the the first turbos in 1980 and 1990. Press the accelerator and nothing happens. This really sucks and Mazda better address this with a software update. In general test drivers wanted more acceleration performance. 340 Hp and 280 hp is a joke from 3.3 liter turbo in 2024. I drove a 2024 BMW X5 only $10 more and the BMW shames the Mazda performance feel. Recent reviews show the Kia and Hyundai faster from stop.
• Options which are required by high end luxury buyers are only in the Premium Plus. She said ventilated seats should be offered in more models. As I have experienced no ventilation in seats means I am limited by my choices. Once you go “ventilated” you can never go back.
• She mentioned pricing has not brought in past CX-9 owners. Sticker shock is magnified by the deals holding to list price. First sales were due well planned hype by Mazda.
• She mentioned interior space was a negative when compared to Kia or Hyundai. Mazda set this car up for four people in 75% of the configurations. No one wants to sit in the third row.

At the NY dealer I took a shot at trading in my 9000 Mile red 2022 CX-9 Signature for a 2024 Premium Plus S. I needed diapers after the quote. The dealer wanted $33,600 plus my paid off 2022 CX-9 Signature for the 2024 Mazda CX-90 Premium Plus S. As a person who is a high end Mazda buyer it sent me directly to the local BMW dealer who quoted $36 more for a 2024 X5 with my trade. So $3 k difference from a Mazda to the BMW X5 is insane!

My predictions. By Sept 2023 Mazda will have $3000 incentives plus dealer discounts of $3 to 5 k. So $8 k off of list. The product is good, great dynamic drive, unique interior but too expensive for the current client base which must be converted from CX-9 to CX-90. Mazda must fix the acceleration delay (shifting roughness) and seating configuration. Sorry for raining on the party.

Not about raining, I appreciate the insights. It's a lot of food for thought you've shared. I love my CX9 but I'm not married to mazda's 7 seaters or any mazda for that matter. Car needs to make sense. For me, I'm not sure this does.

For me the most noteworthy concern is the power delivery. Something is indeed up, there should be more real world wow factor. Forget even 0-60, I don't really see the wow factor overall with the engine. Most driving praise seems to be the handling, which we all expected and is great. But I was looking for more. Maybe they can fix it, this engine should be the meat and potatoes of this car, not a point of almost apology.

 

[Brennor]

I've been lurking around the forum for the past few months. I was originally looking into going from a 2016 Kia Sedona to a newer CX-9, and recently started looking at the 90 GS as an option. I still need to sit in one, but waiting for the GS mainly due to leather seats (a no go for me) and higher trims also have the Moon/sunroof, which is just an extra I don't really need.

Seating on the GS is good for me (I have 3 boys that need to be separated) so 8 seat config is good, I could live with 7 seat.

Engine - Sounds nice, looks good on paper, but this is a brand new engine and I'm just waiting for the recall or complaints to rain down, time will tell. 280 hp seems ok I'd have to drive it, and I have heard about the delay in initial acceleration and comparison to Dual clutch delay/jump. This is a bit concerning as that is what took the Kia Sorento out of the running when I first started looking/test driving different vehicles.

Being in Canada (Eh?) the price point seems good. On the GS (as mentioned above) MSRP is only 2k more than the Base model CX 9. So not bad, though I've seen dealers online with their prices way out of whack on the other trim levels compared to MSRP depending on location. Features seem ok, I would have liked to see power seats, but meh, a minor thing as I'm the only one in my family who drives (my oldest wont be driving it for at least 7 years)

Space - Seems minor upgrade an inch of leg room here, a few mm of trunk space there, no big different from the cx 9

Look - At first, I was looking at cx 9 and still am, cx 90 at first glance looked like it was going to be less zoom and more oooh look at me!

I havnt test driven it, but if sounds like the biggest differences are gonna be its junk in the trunk look (dat Azz) and some basic features missing that I can live with. If the CX 90 drives like a CX 9 (I test drove a cx 9) I'll likely be sold, though still a bit weary about a brand new engine.

 

[sm1ke]

The junk in the trunk look of the CX-90 should actually result in a slightly more usable cargo area for taller items that would not otherwise fit due to the sloping roof of the CX-9.

Personally I feel like the base model MSRP difference would be made up in the engine performance, fuel economy and RWD architecture of the CX-90 easily.

 

[markfm]

I'm a potential crossover buyer, coming from Lexus, but Mazda needs to up its game. To pull in existing buyers from other, luxury, brands, the CX-90 sounds like a weak intro to the new large platform. It appears that the interior was done fairly well, though cramped given the vehicle size, a few things (BSM, infotainment system random black screens) are hopefully addressable by software updates, but the engine performance is a real miss.

The RWD is a "high performance" sales pitch item. To then kill it with lag from a stop, mediocre HP in the base 3.3 liter turbo engine package (the base 2023 RX350 2.4l turbo engine from Lexus is within 5hp of the Mazda, while earlier years had higher HP), and a really high weight makes me wonder what they were thinking.

I'd hope they could tweak their base implementation to 300hp minimum, still on regular gas, and get rid of that lag, with a similar bump in the high output variant.

(My current car is a 2017 rx350, 3.5l non-turbo, 295 HP. That engine is very smooth, responsive. Why Lexus decided to switch to a 2.4l turbo as of 2023 beats me; only 2mpg improvement, lower HP, definitely less snappy performance, mandatory premium fuel, is driving me away from Lexus after 25 years.)

 

[dougal]

(My current car is a 2017 rx350, 3.5l non-turbo, 295 HP. That engine is very smooth, responsive. Why Lexus decided to switch to a 2.4l turbo as of 2023 beats me; only 2mpg improvement, lower HP, definitely less snappy performance, mandatory premium fuel, is driving me away from Lexus after 25 years.)

The CX-90 is bigger, faster and more fuel efficient - by substantial margins - than your 2017 rx350. And the 2017 rx350 is, honestly a terrible driving car that nobody who likes driving should buy.

If you don't like the Mazda, the base Acura Type S is a great deal - $68K, with great handling and great overall performance. Gas mileage is terrible but if one is OK with 18MPG, it is a great deal.

 

[markfm]

The base CX-90 weighs > 300 lb more, has 15 less HP, and the very-well-documented joys of how the mild hybrid works (higher torque on the CX-90 is good, for sure, but the mild hybrid seems to screw things up when you're starting out).

I've had 5 of the Rx 3xx, since the original RX 300 release in 1998. It's not a street racer, 0 - 60 time is certainly not great but those V6 engines have always been smooth, responsive (lag free), rock solid (reliable). The nominal 25mpg combined for the CX-90 is what I have experienced with my 2017 RX350 across 6 years of use. The RX transmissions have all been fine for me, too, clean shifting across the board.

I'm hoping Mazda ups their game a bit for the 2025 models, tweaks the engine/responsiveness and loses a noticeable chunk of pounds, fixes some of those (hopefully software) glitches that seem to be pretty commonly reported, has decent cargo space, for the CX-70 release.

(The 70 is my aim, I'm hoping that the first year 90 comments are taken to heart by Mazda, they can nudge things a bit before the 70 comes out.)

I had a '23 RX 350 as a loaner last time I got my 2017 serviced. IMO the 2.4l turbo in it was a slug, a true step backward, consistent with reports I'd read about it. I chatted with the service manager when I went back to the shop and he agreed.

 

[dougal]

The base CX-90 weighs > 300 lb more, has 15 less HP, and the very-well-documented joys of how the mild hybrid works (higher torque on the CX-90 is good, for sure, but the mild hybrid seems to screw things up when you're starting out).

I've had 5 of the Rx 3xx, since the original RX 300 release in 1998. It's not a street racer, 0 - 60 time is certainly not great but those V6 engines have always been smooth, responsive (lag free), rock solid (reliable). The nominal 25mpg combined for the CX-90 is what I have experienced with my 2017 RX350 across 6 years of use. The RX transmissions have all been fine for me, too, clean shifting across the board.

I'm hoping Mazda ups their game a bit for the 2025 models, tweaks the engine/responsiveness and loses a noticeable chunk of pounds, fixes some of those (hopefully software) glitches that seem to be pretty commonly reported, has decent cargo space, for the CX-70 release.

(The 70 is my aim, I'm hoping that the first year 90 comments are taken to heart by Mazda, they can nudge things a bit before the 70 comes out.)

I had a '23 RX 350 as a loaner last time I got my 2017 serviced. IMO the 2.4l turbo in it was a slug, a true step backward, consistent with reports I'd read about it. I chatted with the service manager when I went back to the shop and he agreed.

Honestly, if you like the drive of the RX300, Mazda is not your company. Polar opposites.

 

[sm1ke]

The base CX-90 weighs > 300 lb more, has 15 less HP, and the very-well-documented joys of how the mild hybrid works (higher torque on the CX-90 is good, for sure, but the mild hybrid seems to screw things up when you're starting out).

I've had 5 of the Rx 3xx, since the original RX 300 release in 1998. It's not a street racer, 0 - 60 time is certainly not great but those V6 engines have always been smooth, responsive (lag free), rock solid (reliable). The nominal 25mpg combined for the CX-90 is what I have experienced with my 2017 RX350 across 6 years of use. The RX transmissions have all been fine for me, too, clean shifting across the board.

I'm hoping Mazda ups their game a bit for the 2025 models, tweaks the engine/responsiveness and loses a noticeable chunk of pounds, fixes some of those (hopefully software) glitches that seem to be pretty commonly reported, has decent cargo space, for the CX-70 release.

(The 70 is my aim, I'm hoping that the first year 90 comments are taken to heart by Mazda, they can nudge things a bit before the 70 comes out.)

I had a '23 RX 350 as a loaner last time I got my 2017 serviced. IMO the 2.4l turbo in it was a slug, a true step backward, consistent with reports I'd read about it. I chatted with the service manager when I went back to the shop and he agreed.

You should probably test drive a CX-90 or two, rather than just rehash the personal opinions of auto journalists. Its great to get their perspectives, but nobody's opinion and experience matters more than your own.

The PHEV is apparently more responsive off the line than the I6, if you're ok with giving up some grunt in the upper end. But if you're not even considering a CX-90, your comments would apply more to the CX-70, and should be posted in the CX-70 subforum instead. Here's a link to an existing thread that discusses the expectations of the CX-70.

What are your expectations for the CX-70?

What does everyone expect the CX-70 to be? The realistic side of me is expecting a CX-60 with the width of the CX-90. What I’m hoping for is something longer than the 60 with a raked Cayenne Coupe-esque roofline. I think we all know what the front end and interior will look like.

mazdas247.com