Great review as always, Brian! Thanks! I recently got a 2019 CX-9 Signature, which I took on a 500-mile road trip. I averaged close to 28 mpg driving at 74 mph most of the way. It’s a great cruiser. It has a very comfortable ride and is very quiet.
I think the intangibles are what makes the Mazda lineup so compelling. I have a new Mazda 6 Carbon Edition…the switches, surfaces, metal and plastic pieces are all way above the Japanese competition, and honestly, feel more like German luxury to me.
Way late to this party, but just picked up a 2022 Carbon this weekend! A perfect blend of everything you want in the Touring, but none of the unnecessary fluff of the Grand Touring. And the added bonus of paddle shifters! Not that it's even remotely close to a sports car, but like most things in life...I can pretend. Coming from a 2014 CX-9, that was previously on an extended Ford Edge platform, the newer CX-9 is a hair smaller dimensionally. That took me by surprise. I can no longer fit my bigger water bottles in the door holder, and the sun shade that was barely big enough for the 2014 CX-9 windshield, now barely fits the 2022. And there seems to be about an inch less rear leg room in the 3rd row, which is perhaps the most disappointing. Now my ever growing son is all but relegated to the middle row. Not much has changed functionally between model years. I'm sure we have COVID to thank for that. Thankfully the Carbon still comes with the Bose system, which many Mazda models are now getting a "Feature Credit" for, a claimed casualty of the chip shortage, or a clever upsell tactic for higher trim levels, I will let you decide. Only real noticable change is a shift from the Yokohama Geolander tire, to the Bridgestone Ecopia. There isn't much in between these tires grip wise. I think the Yokohama has better braking performance, and doesn't hunt ruts as much as the Ecopia does. But functionally, day to day, all but the same tire. Otherwise, can't help but agree with everything in the review. I think the 2014 was the last of the truly analog driving experiences out there in the segment. But I do appreciate the wife and kids are significantly safer with the radar and adaptive systems of the newer vehicle. Overall, very happy with our purchase, and couldn't see myself buying anything else other than another Mazda. And maybe in another 8-10 years, we will take a look at the latest and greatest CX-90.
brian...i have always wished i could opt out of the 3rd row for this car. i simply love the car, but seriously, it has no business putting that third row in. it consumes precious cargo space that i could use. so...for this, i never considered buying
Undeniably attractive both inside and out. So why has it consistently been by far the worst selling mainstream 3 row crossover in the North America since it was introduced. (To be fair, so far in 2021 the CX-9 has lost that distinction to the Subaru Ascent by a whisker. Now the CX-9 is only the second worst selling vehicle out of 16 or so rivals.) For an answer look first at the CX-9's 199" length. It's longer than all competitors except the Dodge Durango, Chevy Traverse, and the recently introduced Grand Cherokee L. But what about its interior space. Overall passenger space is less than a KIA Sorento, a vehicle that's almost a foot (10") shorter. And it has less overall cargo space than any other midsize SUV. Less total cargo space than a Honda CR-V (71.2 cubic ft vs 75.8 cf) ! How is this possible? The answer is the extreme version of Mazda's "Koda" design language with an extremely long distance from the front bumper to the A pillar (about a foot great distance than competitors) that entails sacrificing interior space. It's a design that sports car designers have used for nearly a century to suggest potency and performance and is obviously attractive. (Freud can explain why.) But in a vehicle where the "U" in SUV supposedly stands for "Utility," it's a major competitive weakness. Other Mazdas that employ the Koda design language suffer from the same issue but none so severely as the CX-9. Some Mazda fans claim the massive engine compartment is ideal for a rumored forthcoming inline 6. (Hell, it's sufficient for an inline 12 cylinder engine.) But as the smallest independent mass market automaker on the planet, Mazda is forced to make do with a single engine/drivetrain for almost all of their models. And Mazda isn't exactly known for delivering their rumored new engines and technology on anything resembling a promised schedule (if at all). The long-in-the-tooth four cylinder turbo engine mated to a similarly aging 6 speed transmission may be adequate to the mission of the CX-9 but it is hardly a strong selling point, especially compared to rivals with more modern engines and transmissions and hybrid options.
Great review as always, Brian! Thanks! I recently got a 2019 CX-9 Signature, which I took on a 500-mile road trip. I averaged close to 28 mpg driving at 74 mph most of the way. It’s a great cruiser. It has a very comfortable ride and is very quiet.
Right on!
I think the intangibles are what makes the Mazda lineup so compelling. I have a new Mazda 6 Carbon Edition…the switches, surfaces, metal and plastic pieces are all way above the Japanese competition, and honestly, feel more like German luxury to me.
You know I totally agree! Lovely car.
Would be a #1 pick if I needed a 3 row crossover. Thx for the review
Heck, yeah. As I’ve discovered, people don’t always follow my recommendations, but when they do, it’s always a win for them.
Great review Brian you really nailed it. If I was in the market for a 3 row cross over I would park a CX9 in our garage.
Thanks, Con!
Way late to this party, but just picked up a 2022 Carbon this weekend!
A perfect blend of everything you want in the Touring, but none of the unnecessary fluff of the Grand Touring. And the added bonus of paddle shifters! Not that it's even remotely close to a sports car, but like most things in life...I can pretend.
Coming from a 2014 CX-9, that was previously on an extended Ford Edge platform, the newer CX-9 is a hair smaller dimensionally. That took me by surprise. I can no longer fit my bigger water bottles in the door holder, and the sun shade that was barely big enough for the 2014 CX-9 windshield, now barely fits the 2022. And there seems to be about an inch less rear leg room in the 3rd row, which is perhaps the most disappointing. Now my ever growing son is all but relegated to the middle row.
Not much has changed functionally between model years. I'm sure we have COVID to thank for that. Thankfully the Carbon still comes with the Bose system, which many Mazda models are now getting a "Feature Credit" for, a claimed casualty of the chip shortage, or a clever upsell tactic for higher trim levels, I will let you decide. Only real noticable change is a shift from the Yokohama Geolander tire, to the Bridgestone Ecopia. There isn't much in between these tires grip wise. I think the Yokohama has better braking performance, and doesn't hunt ruts as much as the Ecopia does. But functionally, day to day, all but the same tire.
Otherwise, can't help but agree with everything in the review. I think the 2014 was the last of the truly analog driving experiences out there in the segment. But I do appreciate the wife and kids are significantly safer with the radar and adaptive systems of the newer vehicle.
Overall, very happy with our purchase, and couldn't see myself buying anything else other than another Mazda. And maybe in another 8-10 years, we will take a look at the latest and greatest CX-90.
Meeting at the dealership tomorrow to see about getting a CPO of one of these bad boys. Hopefully I can work out a good deal 😬
Great review. Problem with cx9 is anemic engine and small kids only 3rd row
That 4130 t-shirt though!
BMX4LIFE!
Hello. I have a question. What if I fill up on 97 Octane? How much hp and torque we looking at?
Great question. Exactly the same as stated. It won’t make any more power.
brian...i have always wished i could opt out of the 3rd row for this car.
i simply love the car, but seriously, it has no business putting that third row in.
it consumes precious cargo space that i could use.
so...for this, i never considered buying
I kept the third row folded the entire time. Worked great for me!
Throw the seats down problem solved …
Your screen is different than mine.
The turbo in the CX-9 you don't really hear it it's really quiet
You’re right, it’s not bad at all.
@@BrianMakse no sir
Undeniably attractive both inside and out. So why has it consistently been by far the worst selling mainstream 3 row crossover in the North America since it was introduced. (To be fair, so far in 2021 the CX-9 has lost that distinction to the Subaru Ascent by a whisker. Now the CX-9 is only the second worst selling vehicle out of 16 or so rivals.)
For an answer look first at the CX-9's 199" length. It's longer than all competitors except the Dodge Durango, Chevy Traverse, and the recently introduced Grand Cherokee L. But what about its interior space. Overall passenger space is less than a KIA Sorento, a vehicle that's almost a foot (10") shorter. And it has less overall cargo space than any other midsize SUV. Less total cargo space than a Honda CR-V (71.2 cubic ft vs 75.8 cf) !
How is this possible? The answer is the extreme version of Mazda's "Koda" design language with an extremely long distance from the front bumper to the A pillar (about a foot great distance than competitors) that entails sacrificing interior space. It's a design that sports car designers have used for nearly a century to suggest potency and performance and is obviously attractive. (Freud can explain why.) But in a vehicle where the "U" in SUV supposedly stands for "Utility," it's a major competitive weakness. Other Mazdas that employ the Koda design language suffer from the same issue but none so severely as the CX-9.
Some Mazda fans claim the massive engine compartment is ideal for a rumored forthcoming inline 6. (Hell, it's sufficient for an inline 12 cylinder engine.) But as the smallest independent mass market automaker on the planet, Mazda is forced to make do with a single engine/drivetrain for almost all of their models. And Mazda isn't exactly known for delivering their rumored new engines and technology on anything resembling a promised schedule (if at all).
The long-in-the-tooth four cylinder turbo engine mated to a similarly aging 6 speed transmission may be adequate to the mission of the CX-9 but it is hardly a strong selling point, especially compared to rivals with more modern engines and transmissions and hybrid options.
Always enjoy your take, Stephen!