Why the CX 9 leads it's class

[CX9 SportOwner]

Good write up of why the CX 9 is best in class, and how Mazda beat Ford with some of their own FoMoCo parts:

http://www.japanesesportcars.com/2009-mazda-cx-9-overview_3555.html

 

[Asia]

Consumer Reports

I just got my April car issue of Consumer Reports magazine and the CX-9 is their third recommended pick for 3 row mid size SUV's behind the Highlander and Santa Fe. I think it rated lower due to its modest cargo capacity, but it holds plenty for most families.

 

[nuhuskyfan]

I just got my April car issue of Consumer Reports magazine and the CX-9 is their third recommended pick for 3 row mid size SUV's behind the Highlander and Santa Fe. I think it rated lower due to its modest cargo capacity, but it holds plenty for most families.

Cargo capacity is its weakness however there is SO MUCH more room in a CX9 compared to a Highlander. I am 6'3" and I couldn't get comfortable in a Highlander. The front seats just didn't go back far enough. Not to mention Highlanders are a dime a dozen in the Boston area.

 

[CX9 SportOwner]

That can't be right. The CX9 has a LOT more room than the Highlander and Santa Fe. Even the Veracruz is a lot smaller then the CX9. I know because I have sat in all of the seating positions of all models.

The only 3 row car based SUV with more room, both total, and behind the third row is the GM Lambdas (Enclave, Traverse, etc). All others, including the luxury makes have less room.

The Santa Fe isn't even close to competing with the CX9, in any category. And the Highlander is a joke. Yes, it has decent horsepower, but the 9 will still out perform it. Plus, the Highlander will only seat 4 adults and 2 children because of the ridiculous seating system.

 

[vikefan7]

Not to mention Highlanders are a dime a dozen in the Boston area.

This is one reason I chose the CX-9 out here. There aren't too many rolling around and there are so many highlanders out there it's crazy.

 

[CX9 SportOwner]

People are cattle. That's why the highlander sells.

 

[nuhuskyfan]

People are cattle. That's why the highlander sells.

That and they get killer reviews, are nice cars and are Toyotas. I drove a colleague to lunch the other day and he asked me if we were in a Lexus

 

[CX9 SportOwner]

Even Consumer Reports is influenced by the power of Toyota and GM, no matter what they claim.

 

[Force-1]

My wife has an '08 Santa Fe--there's definitely more cargo room in my CX-9. However, she does not have the 3rd row seats in her Santa Fe.

She loves her Santa Fe, but does like the CX-9 better.

 

[Asia]

Consumer Reports gives the highs and lows of each vehicle and for the CX-9 the lows were "fuel economy and modest cargo space". So I guessed the reason why the CX-9 was rated lower than the highlander was the cargo space. Maybe it was due to the fuel economy being 2 miles per gallon less in their tests or better reliabilty ratings since the Toyota model has been around longer. I drove the Highlander and much preferred the CX-9. The Mazda is much prettier too!

 

[CX9 SportOwner]

How does the Highlander rate higher in cargo space when it has LESS, and a less versatile seat system? (The third row isn't split, so you have to fold the entire thing down to make room for anything) So, if you have 5 adults with gear, you're screwed with the highlander. CX9? 7 Adults and gear.

The CX9 offers more for less money. Period.

 

[Force-1]

Edmunds.Com:

CX-9
Maximum Cargo Capacity: 101 cu. ft.
Luggage Capacity: 17.2 cu. ft.

Highlander
Maximum Cargo Capacity: 95 cu. ft.
Luggage Capacity: 10.3 cu. ft.

Santa Fe
Maximum Cargo Capacity: 78 cu. ft.
Luggage Capacity: 34.2 cu. ft.

I would guess luggage capacity for Toyota and Mazda is 3rd row up; down for Santa Fe

 

[CX9 SportOwner]

Santa Fe is higher because there is no third row. That's a useless option on the Santa Fe, just like on the Rav4.

 

[vikefan7]

How the heck do they get dinged for cargo space when they have more than the other two?

 

[DashingMax]

Most drivers (cattle) are about point A to point B. Hence the high sales of Slowyota. Mazda's are for enthusiast drivers which are comparably fewer in number.

CX-9 = Zoom Zoom with Room for Seven!

 

[jdoering]

Disclaimer - I've never looked at Consumer Reports car reviews. But having looked at their reviews for various appliances and electronics and then having investigated the same models extensively in various online forums, specialized publications, etc that factor in long-term real world feedback from enthusiast users, pros, etc I generally consider the quality of Consumer Reports advice junk.

I think they can be useful in identifying crap from acceptable (if CR thinks they're pretty bad - be worried). But their rating of middle to high and their value judgement is pretty useless IMO if you like making informed decisions. If you don't really care which model you buy and just want some feel good reassurance from a "reliable" source then just go with their picks.

In one nice example; they gave two washing machines with different branding very different ratings for roughness on clothes - the two machines were identical OEM parts. Now maybe the two test samples they got varied that much; but I suspect that their evaluation procedure for that category was completely subjective.

Again, my experience isn't directed a CR car reviews but I wouldn't be shocked if their reviews were just as superficial.

-Jeff

 

[CX9 SportOwner]

They are definitely skewed, just like all other publications, towards the larger makers. Unless something really stands out, good or bad, (like the CX9 on the good side), they always fudge their results in favor of GM, Toyota, etc, and away from Mazda, etc. with Toyota's foot on their neck, they just couldn't bring themselves to admit the CX9 is a better choice than the Highlander.

That's why I don't read reviews, but go out and look at everything before deciding. Too bad so many buyers don't. Most buy the first one they see.
Dashing Max's comment is also very accurate. Compare any Mazda to it's competitors and there is a distinct difference in the ATTITUDE of their cars.

Zoom zoom

 

[ericw2000]

I stopped reading CR a few years ago when it became obvious to me that their results were skewed. They complained that the "sport" version of an american car rode hard to their usually favored Toyota or Honda. When they tested Windows, which is my industry, I was done. The criteria they used was not what we use as industry standards, and they rated a window a "best buy" when the fine print listed some pretty major defects.

My wife drives a Honda Odyssey, and when we were buying it I looked at the Pilot, and it really didn't do anything for me, not to mention that year you had to remove the headrests to fold up the 3rd row seat. I don't find either of the Honda or Toyota SUVs attractive (which is subjective). Once I settled on the CX-9 and took one for a test drive I was hooked.

I don't think the CX-9 gets the higher ratings from the mainstream consumer magazines because it's not one of the top brands as far as sales volume. I had several friends say "why a Mazda?" and when they rode or drove mine, they understood. As someone else said, It's attitude.

 

[CX9 SportOwner]

The Pilot and Highlander are UGLY, but that isn't why I dislike them so much. It's the fact that both makers traded function and practicality in favor of useless gimmicks and poor design.

First, they are both too small to claim to compete with CX9 and Enclave.
Lousy gimmicky seating.
Conversation mirror to distract the driver instead of a convenient eyeglass holder.
Etc etc

That's really why I don't like them, and bought the CX9

 

[ceric]

The only thing CX9 does not do well is MPG.
Once Mazda trims 200lb (as they claim to do for all vehicles in coming years) and throw in the DI (direct injection - Mazda/Ford is working on the V6), CX9 will be even better.