Spied: 2017 Mazda CX-9

And why would Mazda care for v6 if they have much more advanced turbo charged engine producing 300+ tq at very low rpm?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
 
And why would Mazda care for v6 if they have much more advanced turbo charged engine producing 300+ tq at very low rpm?

Because not everyone in the target demographic wants a 4-cylinder turbocharged engine on a 2-ton CUV?
 
What difference does it make if it produces more torque than V6...does it at much lower rpm and will burn less fuel at hwy speeds? Did u ever had turbocharged vehivle...I guess not? So mazda should yet again...get v6 engine from another manufacturer to satisfy your lust for V6 in the specs...even if it's inferior in any and every way? I am cheering for mazda, they finally went all mazda tech on 2nd gen.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
 
Because not everyone in the target demographic wants a 4-cylinder turbocharged engine on a 2-ton CUV?

offering a version with Toyota's V6 doesnt sound like it would be worth the R&D to match everything else in the skyactive platform. Maybe before the turbo 2.5 was announced, but we now know what direction Mazda went.
 
What difference does it make if it produces more torque than V6...does it at much lower rpm and will burn less fuel at hwy speeds? Did u ever had turbocharged vehivle...I guess not? So mazda should yet again...get v6 engine from another manufacturer to satisfy your lust for V6 in the specs...even if it's inferior in any and every way? I am cheering for mazda, they finally went all mazda tech on 2nd gen.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

There must be a reason why Volvo is the only other car maker putting a turbo 4 in a vehicle like this. I hope, for Mazda's sake, that they are the pioneer, on the forefront, and will help blaze a trail for this down sizing. Maybe all other makers are just too nervous that customers won't go for it. Only time will tell.
 
What difference does it make if it produces more torque than V6...does it at much lower rpm and will burn less fuel at hwy speeds? Did u ever had turbocharged vehivle...I guess not? So mazda should yet again...get v6 engine from another manufacturer to satisfy your lust for V6 in the specs...even if it's inferior in any and every way? I am cheering for mazda, they finally went all mazda tech on 2nd gen.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

I have a 2007 VW GLI, which has a 2-liter turbocharged engine. It has gobs of torque and is probably underrated in terms of horsepower. However, I don't tow anything with it, which is what some people might want to use the CX-9 for? Have you towed something using a fully occupied 2-ton vehicle? I'm also not sure how you would consider an engine in a 2016 Lexus RX350 to be inferior in any way to a yet-to-be-released 2.5L turbocharged engine. Have you done the comparison tests on it? I would think that a V6 would be more refined than a 4-cylinder turbocharged engine. That's actually a complaint on the new 2016 Volvo XC90 which also went with a 4-cylinder turbo.

It is admirable that Mazda went all Mazda technology and I also commend Mazda for doing that. However, I would think that Mazda chose to turbocharge the existing 2.5L Skyactiv engine because it didn't have the finances to develop a Skyactiv V6 given it's current financial state.
 
offering a version with Toyota's V6 doesnt sound like it would be worth the R&D to match everything else in the skyactive platform. Maybe before the turbo 2.5 was announced, but we now know what direction Mazda went.

This might be the viable explanation. Getting the engine to match the Skyactiv platform would probably cost too much.
 
What difference does it make if it produces more torque than V6...does it at much lower rpm and will burn less fuel at hwy speeds? Did u ever had turbocharged vehivle...I guess not? So mazda should yet again...get v6 engine from another manufacturer to satisfy your lust for V6 in the specs...even if it's inferior in any and every way? I am cheering for mazda, they finally went all mazda tech on 2nd gen.

I've owned plenty of turbo 4s, but none of them pushing anything as big as a CX-9. The ultimate question will be longevity. Sure, it may work great out of the gate and provide a great driving experience combined with good MPG. But will they start self-destructing at 100k miles? Do you want to be one of the first customers to find out? With gasoline under 2 bucks a gallon, why take the gamble?

The old mantra of there being no substitute for displacement still holds true. You're adding a **lot** of complexity to get that little 4-cylinder to push that big SUV down the road. The V8 in my Durango R/T only gets 22 MPG freeway (which frankly is quite extraordinary for a V8 and a vehicle that size) but I know I won't have to replace a blown turbo anytime soon. Say goodbye to all your fuel savings the moment you have to repair that complex turbo-4.
 
Small displacement, direct injected turbo 4's are the new normal for the auto industry. It is not really possible to hit the fuel economy requirements with a normally aspirated engine anymore. Even Porsche, BMW, etc. have all made the switch. Personally, I am not thrilled by this. Barring a relaxation of CAFE standards, the industry is not going to move back to normally aspirated, 3+ liter engines in anything but lower volume, higher priced applications.

I am guessing that at the volumes that Mazda expects to sell the CX-9, there isn't a business case for a "premium" engine option. I doubt they can justify the monetary investment (or take the CAFE hit) a larger, normally aspirated V6 would require.
 
Small displacement, direct injected turbo 4's are the new normal for the auto industry. It is not really possible to hit the fuel economy requirements with a normally aspirated engine anymore. Even Porsche, BMW, etc. have all made the switch. Personally, I am not thrilled by this. Barring a relaxation of CAFE standards, the industry is not going to move back to normally aspirated, 3+ liter engines in anything but lower volume, higher priced applications.

I am guessing that at the volumes that Mazda expects to sell the CX-9, there isn't a business case for a "premium" engine option. I doubt they can justify the monetary investment (or take the CAFE hit) a larger, normally aspirated V6 would require.

You are right. CAFE standards do hinder small automakers (like Mazda, Subaru and Volvo) from venturing into larger displacement engines. Between CAFE standards and the cost of retrofitting another automaker's engine into the well-accepted Skyactiv platform, it is likely that the CX-9 will only have the 2.5T. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it would be better for potential buyers to have engine choices. I do hope that the 2.5T has the longevity, but that would not be known until a few years from now. Like tex2670 says, Only time will tell.
 
2016 Mazda CX-9 Priced from $31,520 MSRP[1], Elevates Midsize, Three-Row Crossover Ex

2016 Mazda CX-9 Priced from $31,520 MSRP[1], Elevates Midsize, Three-Row Crossover Experience

IRVINE, Calif., March 17, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- Mazda North American Operations (MNAO) has today released pricing and packaging information for its all-new 2016 Mazda CX-9 midsize, three-row crossover SUV. Offering a premium experience, fun-to-drive handling dynamics and bold KODOSoul of Motion design, CX-9 represents a compelling offering in its class with a starting MSRP from $31,520.

"With the 2016 CX-9, we have lofty expectations, raising the bar with a quieter, smoother ride; a quicker, more responsive powertrain; and numerous other improvements," said Robert Davis, senior vice president, U.S. Operations, MNAO. "CX-9 is our flagship and portends a future of innovative technologies and amenities that we believe will further elevate our vehicles in their respective classes."

In Sport trim, CX-9 comes standard with LED headlights and taillightssimilar to Mazda's 2016 MX-5 Miata roadsteras well as fabric seating surfaces, an electronic parking brake, 18-inch wheels, rear backup camera, trailer stability assist, MAZDA CONNECTTM infotainment with Commander control and a seven-inch color display. Optionally available is the Sport Package, which adds a power driver's seat, heated front seats and heated door mirrors.

CX-9 Touring adds an auto-dimming rearview mirror, Blind Spot Monitoring with Rear Cross-Traffic Alert, HomeLink garage door openers, black- or sand-colored leather seating surfaces, Mazda Advanced Keyless Entry System, a power liftgate, power front seats, and an eight-inch MAZDA CONNECTTM touchscreen display. Additionally, customers can opt for the Touring Premium Package, which further includes automatic on/off headlights, LED fog lights, navigation, a premium 12-speaker BOSE audio system, rain-sensing wipers, rear backup sensors, second-row retractable sunshades, SiriusXM satellite radio, automatic Smart City Brake Support and a sunroof.

Further heightening the CX-9 lineup is the Grand Touring model, which builds upon the Sport and Touring trim levels with Adaptive Front-lighting System, 20-inch wheels, aluminum interior trim, Mazda's first Active Driving Display that projects instrument and navigation information onto the windshield, high-beam control, lane-departure warning, lane-keep assist, Mazda Radar Cruise Control with Smart Brake Support, roof rails and memory settings on the driver's seat.

Finally, CX-9 Signature helms the top of the lineup, coming standard with Mazda's predictive i-ACTIV all-wheel drivea system that uses 27 sensors, measuring conditions more than 200 times per second to determine how to allocate power to each wheel as to minimize ever feeling the wheels slip.

CX-9 Signature adorns its interior with Auburn-colored Nappa leather, rosewood supplied by Japanese guitar-maker Fujigen, LED signature accent grille lighting and LED accent lighting around the automatic shifter.

All models come powered by Mazda's new turbocharged SKYACTIV-G 2.5T engine, which generates a punchy 310 lb-ft of torque from just 2,000 rpm on either 87- or 93-octane gasoline. It also produces 250 horsepower on 93-octane gasoline (227 horsepower on 87-octane) and nets class-leading2 EPA-estimated fuel-economy ratings on either gasoline grade22 mpg city/28 mpg highway/25 mpg combined in front-wheel-drive configuration.

That engine is paired with a standard SKYACTIV-DRIVE six-speed automatic and is available in front-wheel drive or i-ACTIV all-wheel drive.

"Part of our focus during development the new CX-9 was on 'effortless transition'the idea of juggling being a parent with an on-the-go lifestyle and then having a vehicle that can accommodate enjoying a weekend getaway with your significant other," said Davis. "Whether you need the space or just prefer its design and elegance, we believe CX-9 is an exceptional vehicle that will delight many new and returning customers to the Mazda brand."

Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Prices3 for each model and its options are as follows (add $1,800 for all-wheel drive):

CX-9 Sport

$31,520

Sport Package

$950

CX-9 Touring

$35,970

Touring Premium Package

$1,745

CX-9 Grand Touring

$40,170

CX-9 Signature (AWD Standard)

$44,015

Premium Paint Colors:

Snowflake White Pearl Mica

$200

Soul Red Metallic

$300

Machine Gray Metallic

$300

The 2016 Mazda CX-9 is expected to go on sale in the U.S. in late-spring 2016. Final packaging and specifications to be released closer to on-sale date.

Mazda North American Operations is headquartered in Irvine, Calif., and oversees the sales, marketing, parts and customer service support of Mazda vehicles in the United States and Mexico through nearly 700 dealers. Operations in Mexico are managed by Mazda Motor de Mexico in Mexico City. For more information on Mazda vehicles, including photography and B-roll, please visit the online Mazda media center at www.mazdausamedia.com
 
Last edited:
Thanks! This was the information I've been waiting for a while to see. The loaded Signature trim seems pretty tempting and would have anything I could hope to want in a vehicle. I can't wait to finally test drive it.

No problem.

I'm torn between the Grand Touring with i-ACTIV AWD and the Signature. The GT will cost $40,170 + $1,800.00 (AWD) = $41,970, a savings of $2,045 against the Signature (since AWD is standard) which is about 4.8%. Is the addition of Auburn-colored Nappa leather, rosewood supplied by Japanese guitar-maker Fujigen, LED signature accent grille lighting and LED accent lighting around the automatic shifter worth the 4.8% premium to me? I'm not sure at this point, but it is a somewhat minimal cost so I will likely go for the Signature. It would have been different if the i-ACTIVSENSE suite of active safety features were available in the Touring since I can do without the 20-inch wheels, aluminum interior trim, Mazda's first Active Driving Display that projects instrument and navigation information onto the windshield on the GT, but not the i-ACTIVSENSE.
 
Also, note that Android Auto or Apple Car Play is not mentioned in the PR. That's likely a reason to skip the 1st model year.
 
Also, note that Android Auto or Apple Car Play is not mentioned in the PR. That's likely a reason to skip the 1st model year.

That's a good point. I hadn't really picked up on the fact that they didn't mention those specifically.

I'm also a little curious if the upgraded nappa leather is only available in auburn, or if it can come in the colors they mentioned for a lower trim level (black and sand). Auburn could look nice coupled with certain exterior colors, but not necessarily all of them.
 
There must be a reason why Volvo is the only other car maker putting a turbo 4 in a vehicle like this.

Volvo isn't the only other car maker putting a turbo 4 in a vehicle like this. Ford has been doing it for some time. The first Ecoboost Explorer had a 2.0L turbo and it only came in FWD. It was terrible. It didn't deliver anything close to the promised fuel economy and it wasn't very satisfying to drive. They have since moved to a 2.3L turbo engine that probably improves things a bit.

There's a reason car makers are going this route. These configurations do great in EPA testing which helps boost the number on the window sticker and helps the company's CAFE number. The problem is that the efficiency gains are not as apparent in the real world. Smaller engines are lighter which should help but the weight savings as a percentage of a 3 Row CUV's total weight isn't nearly as significant as in smaller cars. The other benefit is that they consume less fuel WHEN THE TURBO ISN'T SPOOLED UP. And that's the big flaw in the whole thing. To move a large 3 row CUV at anything faster than a crawl, drivers will be spooling up the turbos all the time. When this is happening, the engine ends up consuming fuel just like a larger one and the fuel savings virtually disappear.

Reviews of the Volvo XC90 have been fantastic. It seems that they drive very nicely. I don't know about real world fuel economy but the numbers I see on Fuelly aren't terribly impressive.

So the question is, will Mazda be able to pull this off where others have failed? Will the new CX-9 provide a satisfactory driving experience while meeting the EPA mpg? I have a hunch that they will do better than Ford and even Volvo because they're starting with a larger engine (2.5L). But I also agree with some of the earlier posts suggesting that they figure out a way to get Toyota's 3.5L V6 into the car as an option. That engine is smooth, powerful and efficient. I wouldn't be surprised if it matches the 2.5L turbo in real world fuel economy.
 
The other benefit is that they consume less fuel WHEN THE TURBO ISN'T SPOOLED UP. And that's the big flaw in the whole thing. To move a large 3 row CUV at anything faster than a crawl, drivers will be spooling up the turbos all the time. When this is happening, the engine ends up consuming fuel just like a larger one and the fuel savings virtually disappear.

I think Mazda was aware of this and is why the CX-9's trick EGR (exhaust-gas recirculation) comes into play. From Car and Driver's Per the EPA, 2016 Mazda CX-9 Three-Row Is Most Efficient Non-Hybrid in Its Class:

The new engine’s turbocharger also uses a clever, cooled exhaust-gas recirculation (EGR) system to keep engine temperatures low, thus reducing the need to add extra fuel to the combustion chamber to cool things off; without wasting fuel on cooling, fuel economy improves. Go figure. Mazda adds that the EGR setup may not affect the CX-9’s EPA fuel-economy estimates, but the automaker thinks it will pay off in real-world use.

Of course, we'll have to wait on what real-world fuel economy numbers are to see if this actually works.

So the question is, will Mazda be able to pull this off where others have failed? Will the new CX-9 provide a satisfactory driving experience while meeting the EPA mpg? I have a hunch that they will do better than Ford and even Volvo because they're starting with a larger engine (2.5L). But I also agree with some of the earlier posts suggesting that they figure out a way to get Toyota's 3.5L V6 into the car as an option. That engine is smooth, powerful and efficient. I wouldn't be surprised if it matches the 2.5L turbo in real world fuel economy.

I'm in the camp that wants that 3.5L DI Toyota V6 (2GR-FKS) to be ported over, and I'm still hoping it happens sometime in this upcoming generation.
 
Last edited:
I'm also a little curious if the upgraded nappa leather is only available in auburn, or if it can come in the colors they mentioned for a lower trim level (black and sand). Auburn could look nice coupled with certain exterior colors, but not necessarily all of them.

See, that Auburn colored leather is the only item I really want in the Signature. But, I could live with Black leather, so it's really not a must-have. It's gonna be a toss-up for me.
 
See, that Auburn colored leather is the only item I really want in the Signature. But, I could live with Black leather, so it's really not a must-have. It's gonna be a toss-up for me.

I need to see it in person. Some of the pics people shared from the car shows has it looking "orange-ish", while the professional pics from Mazda look like a more elegant auburn/deep red. We'll see.
 
I need to see it in person. Some of the pics people shared from the car shows has it looking "orange-ish", while the professional pics from Mazda look like a more elegant auburn/deep red. We'll see.
It's called bad white balance. Judging fine color variance from non pro pictures is waste of time

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
 
Back