Answering your question, MotorMan: I have CX-9 Signature. And as you said correctly it is all about Rugrats. I like small, dynamic cars and if not little diaper poopers, I would be driving Miata or maybe RX-8 or even Model S. However, I have them... kids... Before I got CX-9 I had minivan and was spending a fortune on Prozac... Well, almost. At some point I said "Hell, No!" and started having testdrives. Money was not necessarily a significant issue, so I test drove the whole series of cars: starting from Santa Fe to Q7. CX-9 clicked immediately. It is not the fastest car I test drove, but it is definitely the most fun car to drive. At least for me it is. That said, I want to share my phylosophy that luxury cars have outlived their sex appeal. Yes, when people at work ask me: "So, what car did you end up buying? " and I say "I got Mazda!" no kodak moment is being generated as opposed to if I would casually say "Audi" or "BMW". However, I do not give rats ass about it. I do beleive that luxury brands became nowdays similar to paintings of modern artists: critics like yourself would definitely find something to be excited about them, however very likely would hang this piece of art upside down if label accidentally fall off. My point is that when you are talking say about Lexus, the weight of the brand dominates your perception and even if you'd like to critisize it, you are afraid that other art lovers would call your incompetence. Therefore, people rarely choose to swim against current. Just to add that I often visit Germany and rent cars there. Usually it happens to be either BMW 7 series or Mercedes. I do not see anything special about these cars. Nothing. And since having Rugrats I lost need in having a chick magnet, I choose what I like and in this case it happened to be CX-9.
I also bought 2017 CX-9 Grand Touring Package last week. I would have to agree totally with Baba Yaga, I previously owned a X3 3.0i fully loaded and the charm was def just hype that it's a BMW- everyone asks me, how does it feel to go from BMW to Mazda and I proudly say, it was all just hype. I sit in my Mazda and completely forget where I came from- this car is super fun to drive and the usability of it is spot on. The drive is just so much fun given its size that you really never have a second of buyer's remorse. There are some more basic luxury car features that I think Mazda should pay attention to and if they did I think they would pull more market share from BMW, Merc, Lexus... such as Heated rear seats, cooled front seats, heated steering wheel, auto pull in side mirrors (don't really miss the pano sunroof, I bought beige interior which brightens up the interior plenty). Aside from this one small thought I really have no complaints. Everyone at the office asked the same question as Baba Yaga accurately described and my response was the same and their lack of a kodak moment was the same... but I got the kodak moment the second they check out the front grill of this car. It is literally the most attractive and affordable care in its class- literally you have to see it in person to understand it. The fit and finish is just amazing and I love where Mazda is going- cant wait to see this level of quality trickle down to the 6 so I can upgrade my second car which is a TSX. It all really comes down to what you are looking for, I wanted a car that is fun to drive, luxurious driving i.e. quiet on the road, reliable and affordable when comes to repairs (which Mazda is sooo much more affordable than any other luxury brand), and most importantly fits my family comfortably. This has checked all the boxes and more. Btw my X3 was a 6 cylinder and I am not a gear head- I feel right at home with the torque this baby puts out (I put super 93 octane to get the extra horse power). Hope this helps someone.
BMW X5 is $54K Merc GLE is $52K XC-90 is $44K Those are all barebones, no AWD, no 3rd row, no leather, smaller wheels, the interior is nicer in the CX-9. The exterior for sure is nicer!! I think at $44K fully loaded, thats a really good price!!
I could listen to Dave Coleman for hours, Technobabble was my favorite part of SCC. Really gave my 14 year old self a solid foundation to build my understanding of cars.
Yeeeeh, thats the fun part. They kind of did it (copy the quality but not the design) and its soooo much cheaper. You can now imagine how much money you are wasting for just a badge.
Exterior is WAY different than an Audi/BMW. Interior, yes slightly, as far as infotainment and looks. Then again, most car designers borrow aspects of other designs, teak it and turn it into their own. I see it as Mazda up-scaling the interior quality (not copying). The only similarity with 'older' Audi designs is the infotainment panel and the center nob. That's pretty much it. Besides, Audi lost the resemblance as they've changed their Q line interior designs, and now looks very different than this CX-9.
I love when he has the engineers on to talk about what makes their car special and not a clone of anything else and you just know Mazda isn't content to take the best tech and implement it, they have to engineer something better and unexpected
I have a CX-3. I love it. I would definitely take this fully loaded model over the competition. Number 1 reason is that unlike BMW or Mercedes, you can drive it over 100k miles and it won't cost you an arm and a leg with maintenance and repairs. It's more value in the end.
This is probably the best interior design (layout) I have ever seen. And it can be one of main considerations when purchasing a car because we spent most of the time in the vehicle.
To answer your question..... tough choice... currently own a '07 CX-9 in the bay area.... at $44K for a 7 adult seater, it's a kind of hard to beat ..... I would suspect that the closest 7 seater in the premium range would run well north of $55K ..... .that said, not sure I would go for the top end model, but rather a mid level trim.
Thanks for the video. I currently drive a Pacifica and am in the Portland, OR area. I am actively looking for a replacement vehicle. The CX-9 has blown me away. I think your observation that the $45k version of the CX-9 places it into BMW, Volvo, Mercedes range misses the point that such vehicles don't include the laundry list of features found in the CX-9. You have to option those up and you're looking at spending at least $20k more... A similarly equipped Cadillac XT-5 is $58k. The Mazda is within 1/2 a second of the Caddy with slightly better fuel economy and the bonus of a 3rd row seat. Mazda looks to have one of the better head's up displays... real rosewood, and napa leather. Mazda has, in my opinion, raised the bar in value. As for the torque issue, I would say Mazda understands that I need to go zero to 60 in a reasonable amount of time... not trying to win a drag race... Oh... and I personally am not a huge fan of the panoramic roofs... so I am happy Mazda saved the weight and applied it to sound deadening material instead. Good choice! Thanks again for the review.
I purchased a competitve vehicle in February , and live in the Northeast. I use it as my primary vehicle (commuting, home Depot runs and road trips!) so these CUVs are not just for soccer moms! It's a loaded mainstream model with a $45k+ MSRP. These vehicles provide to ton of value versus a stripper luxury model. If I were in the market now, I'd check out the CX-9. The lack of a panoramic roof was a misstep though (my daughter LOVES ours) and the need for premium to get max performance isn't a great idea either. The interior is nice but the gauges are a little basic. I'll definitely check it out at a dealership soon when I go in for my next oil change.
It seems like you own a Sorento which I ordered instead. Omitting panaromic roof, around view monitor, auto liftgate are big omissions for me in a large crossover.
Yes, I have the turbo Limited model since I didn't need a 3rd row. I doubt most drivers of crossovers need them to feel sporty. I think Mazda misses out on sales by making their cars ride so firm (and loud) I had two Mazda 3s over the last 10 years. Fun but a bit crude for family use. I see they've added sound deadening in this new 9 so hopefully it's more hospitable inside.
I was shopping for a 7 seater a few weeks ago and some of the cars that I did research on was a Highlander, Pilot, Sorento, Explorer,. Basically all cars in the mid price class. The Pilot was my number one choice and the runner up was the Highlander. However, I was still not convince of the cars that was available at the time because it either lack the looks department or features. At the time I didn't know about the CX-9, still thought it had the old style and didn't bother to look it up. The only good looking cars are in the luxury brands but out of my price reach. Luckily for me one of the youtube vid I was watching showed the new CX-9 and I was completely blown away by how good it look even compare to the luxury brands. And the rest was history, two days later, after going out for a test drive and drooling over how good the outside and inside looks plus the technology it offers. It now sits in my drive way and I still can't believed how good it looks lol.
Coleman parts were the best. Motoman reviews are losing their edge. Review the vehicle as intended for the target market! It matters not if you are a sports car guy.
(David Coleman, I'm a huge fan, you've taken Mazda to a class of it's own, Japanese reliability/easy maintenance, with Japanese low speed agility, while having German highspeed stability... all the while, giving it a touch of German luxury, at a reasonable price, my hats off to you sir!) This response is to Motoman's question about people who are in the market for a larger SUV and have the expenditures for it, what I'm looking for, etc. I took the time to reply, it's doozy... Function over Form ( Function > Form), all day, every day! I can do without the Panoramic Moon Roof... good job Mazda, good job David Coleman, I'm with ya buddy!! When considering a "larger" SUV (something in say the BMW X5 , Audi Q7 ~ range). I want something that "has it all", or as much as possible if you're going to pay about $50k for it. I think the new Mazda CX-9 has a lot of things right... but not everything of course, when I think about an X5 or Q7, I think of an "ultimate" SUV....it can tow, it can haul people/luggage/volume, it can handle, it can cruise for long distances comfortably, it looks nice/not ugly....if I had to just have ONE vehicle, it would be a large SUV, and with what's out on the market, I'd even demand reasonable gas mileage... little compromise in all areas... the new CX-9 seems very promising, a good balance... but let me list a few things that I think that the CX-9 are lacking/lagging behind...that would prevent a buyer of a $50k+ SUV like me(I don't care much about brand snobbery either... that holds little value to me..say if a Toyota at half the price can do almost everything a Mercedes can do.. .I'd be happy with the Toyota, etc.) : Severely lacking: -Towing Capacity (at a meager 3500lbs, this SUV, "can't do it all".... I wish it was at least 5,000! That way it would at least make it competitive with the Toyota Highlander... if it did anything over 5,000lbs, it's a good compromise in my opinion, I'm not asking for 9,000 lbs, but say if it was even 6500lbs, that would give it a lot more utility for guys who like to tow a fully loaded Airstream or a decent Yacht...take note Mazda, this is almost a deal breaker for some who are in the price range of sub $50k larger SUV's!!!) Moderately lacking: -Power (I understand that they were aiming for a good blend, so that's why I say "moderate"), like everyone else, wish they could achieve similar mileage with more power... even if it was with Premium fuel( would be cool if the ECU could change MAPS to accomodate, or if there was a "Power mode" you could hit that would give it an instant Software tune, of course I'm expecting a slight hit on Gas Mileage, but just saying... would be nice to have). -Cruising range... 19.5 Gallons X 27 MPG = 526.5 Miles... of course, practice vs theory... we have to see what it really does, but I admit, for a "Premium" SUV, I expect, desire a longer cruising range (at least 600 miles), it's slightly below the BMW X5... but I'd say this Mazda CX-9 would win me over an X5 with this added extra value of a longer cruising range! I'd love it! Wish it had a 22.5+(I know it's just a tad more, but makes it that much more appealing!, heck give us 24.5 Gallons in the tank!) Concerned about: -Rust Protection... I really like Mazda's, they drive great, they're comfortable, they do it right for the most part... and I know Mazda wants to build equity as a "higher" brand... but in order to achieve this, on top of their value and "quality", I'd have to say, to really earn "longevity", they need to monitor what their cars look like after 10+ years... that's what, in my opinion has made Toyota and BMW, noticeably have that brand equity.... I can afford nicer cars... but I've driven Mazda, and this is my biggest complaint.... after 7+ years or so roughly.. you see the body and underpinnings rusting severely... enough to render the once fine vehicle... utter garbage and junkyard worthy years after that... Mazda's Drivetrain and Electronics will outlast the Unibody due to rusting.. which is sad, because if the Unibody would hold up, then Mazda has a car that legends are made of... one that will last the test of time.... my family has had a Toyota for over 20 years! The drive train, electronics, and even the body are still holding up... BMW may have electrical problems, and some drivetrain problems, but the body will at least hold up.... that's the thing with modern Unibody's... once it starts to erode and corrode, you can't "fix" it, it's done for... and with my 11+ years Mazda 3... which I took uber care of... still has severe rust that I'm looking out for... all the while my brother's 16+ years old Honda civic has less under body/structural rust than my car (paint is a different story, lol, Honda's thick clear coat is infamous for bubbling/oxidizing, you see it everywhere, but that can be fixed).... I say this as a guy who hold's on to cars... I also have a 2015 Highlander XLE AWD and see how nice they protected the under body...) So... I hope Mazda corrected this... but I'm not sure... I urge the company to buy back or inspect their vehicles that have been on the wild after 10 years, and take note on the body's rust and integrity of structure... this is what prevents Mazda as a brand from growing into say... something of a Volvo (luxury'esque, while not bearing the snobbery for the sake of showing off labels)....
YOU ALWAYS CRACK ME UP. AND YES, (oops sry about the caps) I saw the wing span of that bird then I looked back WOW! I was glad to see a different type of review from a Mazda vehicle. Glad to see they are thinking all the way around the box :)
I was looking at the BMW X5 until I watched this video (I went down the TH-cam rabbit hole) I'm looking at the signature for 45k versus 74k with about the same technology. I haven't driven it yet, but right now I'm thinking zoom zoom versus the ultimate driving machine that only seats 5. Thanks for the honest video.
Haven;t driven the Mazda yet, may try over the weekend, but did a month at the port where the Mercedes come in and...they aren't that great and I've seen every feature and price combination Mercedes has. I was thinking of a GLC or GLE before hand, but after that...they seem over priced for what you're getting, and I've tested the X3 and X5, they're good, but plain and somewhat cheap looking on the inside, especially for the price.
Same boat here. I was waiting for Q7 and God... it turned out ugly. Mazda will be an intriguing option. I personally don't care about the badge if you can get an almost-as-good SUV for 45k instead of 70k.
Great review MotoMan of a SUV that I have on order, confirms my assumptions that Mazda's CX9 is a highly efficient great handling large SUV that has a compliant and quiet ride. Would of liked more HP but being a Turbo there should be Turbo ECU remapping available to mildly tweak torque/HP to my driving needs but I'm jumping ahead of myself and need to drive it first. Love the looks interior and exterior, all LEDs, HUD, Smart AWD, smooth fast lock up trans, high tech engine, big tires for a good price made this my choice. As for the panoramic sunroofs, I HATE THEM, had it a Kia Sorento, have it now on Hyundai Santa Fe now and NEVER USE IT, its a heavy glass covered hole that raises the center of gravity, reduces rigidity, increases body flex and the probability of failure, from glass shattering, mechanical/electrical issues, water leaks and reduces headroom, no thank you, don't want or need a massive hole in the roof. I wish mfg would have them as a sole option and not group it in with other options that I do like then I would never buy one. My metal gray CX9 should be arriving in a week or two here in at my southern Wisconsin dealer, until then I will be looking for a buyer for my 2013 white with saddle brown Santa Fe Limited that only has 14500 miles on, its in excellent condition but the new CX9 fits my needs better.
Drove the CX9, bought the CX9, had it for a week now, love the CX9, surpasses all my expectations, very well thought out and constructed, body panels perfect, very quiet/smooth at speed, no turbo lag, tons of torque, great handling for its size, steering was very tight and commutative no slop, hit 90mph while not paying attention felt like 70, its a fun to drive family hauler. I'm a happy Mazda man now.
Enthusiast from Colorado. I daily drive a BMW 128i manual (even in the winter) and our family hauler is a 2010 CX9 that we picked up for the way it drives. Looking at replacing it next year with either this CX9 or a Jaguar F-Pace. It needs to be practical (kids, long road trips) but equally important fun to drive, especially in the mountains here. I hope the sunroof is better than the old version, which is buffeting like crazy when open. If it is as good as the sunroof of my 128i that can be driven at 70mph without discomfort, I would not mind the lack of panoramic sunroof. Looking at the signature trim, comparison with luxury segment does not apply as they would be $20k pricier equipped the same way.
A loaded CX 9 makes a convincing case against luxury SUV's. Seems to compete nicely with the XC90, and make the MDX seem pointless to consider. I also have full confidence in Mazdas long term reliability and durability, unlike Volvo.
As current owners of a 2012 CX-9, I would love to test drive this one and see how it compares. I love our 2012. I drives like a car and handles very well. My only issue with the car is that the braking sucks but that is why I upgrade it to Stainless Steel lines, cryot slotted rotors, and hawk pads which have helped the braking bias. From an aesthetic and interior point of view it has the 2012 beat hands down but I based on your review, I think the pep I have from the V6 just makes it more fun to drive. Will have to test drive and provide input. Great vid!!
Thanks for the shout out to San Jose and the lovely Bay Area where I live! With the modest powerplant available, I'd take the base CX-9 at the low-to-mid $30K price point. Forget all the bells and whistles. Its a Mazda, for God's sakes! Go buy a Volvo XC or Audi Q if you want a luxo/status SUV. Love the Kodo design language though-- Mazda makes some of the prettiest SUVs on the market. I live SJ and am actually anti-SUV/minivan. Our family hauler is a Audi A6 Avant(C6)! It drives like a sedan with the extra storage space and we love it!
There's very good reasoning on getting a top spec mainstream model rather than choosing a luxury brand. Which the luxury brand, you'd have to get a base model to be about $45K. No AWD and missing a lot of the features present in the loaded Mazda, Toyota, Honda, Ford, etc... Plus, many people don't want to drive the pretentious badge. You simply get more car for the money.
I drive a Lotus Evora and Cadillac CTS VSport. My wife drives a Cadillac ATS. She had a BMW X3 previously. We plan to have our first child in the next year or two. Being the car guy I am, we are interested in this redesign but I think we'll go with either a slightly used Cadillac XT5 or Jaguar F Pace (depending on how they depreciate). My wife said hands down, #1 she wants a huge sunroof, she doesn't understand driving dynamics but being in a fully-loaded ATS, I think she will get use to that feel so we'll need something somewhat sporty but also full of luxury/tech. She wants a smaller SUV for when the baby comes. We are here in the mid-atlantic.
I have a 2010 Mazda CX 9 and love the car. Reliability was the selling poing for me. And Mazda amazes me in that department. Will wait for more CX 9 reliability reports before trading my old Mazda.
I am in the market for this, and you hit it on the head, it's all about the rugrats. I personally love the driving dynamics, coming from a Mazda 6 and a Mazda 3, it's sort of a natural progression. I did manage to drive one, and I agree that it's definitely got a different "feel" than a traditional V6. It felt a little subdued it is on the highway, but overall, a really nice car. I'd love to take it out on turns sometime.
The question is would I buy this vehicle. Absolutely yes. I was hoping Mazda would build a full size CX 5 and they did! They went beyond my expectations by improving the interior layout and finish materials. They have done an awesome job. Perhaps in future models they'll up the horsepower and torque, add power tilt and telescoping steering wheel, a greater range of motion with the power seats in the front and add an efficient panoramic sunroof that minimizes the risk for head crush in the event of a rollover. For now, I'm cool with this vehicle.
Love the vid. In my immediate family we have about 5 different Mazdas. All but one are 2013+ (kodo design). As a family we have really been fans of Mazda, love most things about them but if I could get a panoramic roof in a Mazda6 or cx5 I'd trade up in a heartbeat. That's the one area they need to get on it.
This is definitely on my next to but car list. Current car is 2014 X5 and I am cross hopping the cx9 and Jeep Grand Cherokee. Main purpose is a daily driver, main family vehicle with 90% city driving. Fuel economy is not a concern but comfort creatures are, I just wished this thing had a panoramic sunroof which kids love and it makes the car less claustrophobic. It seems like a money saving move to not put one in instead of the weight saving, if it's only 45 pounds more it wouldn't make a difference in a car like this one, it's not a track car. Regardless, I will definitely check this one out when it's available. Thanks for the review motoman, I've been waiting for this one for some time now.
Currently my wife drove a 15 Sorrento SX. It was roughly 39k sticker. I know that sounds like a lot but this car delivers all that we want with a lot of bells and whistles. That along with the warranty sold us and let me tell you it has been the most reliable car I've ever known. I feel as though after watching this review it seems as though Mazda wasn't sure on which target they were making the car for. It's looks amazing but I feel as though it's gonna miss the mark by certain things they left out like the pano roof.
+Thomas Andrew why are you so butt hurt about my opinion??? I've had a pano for the last 6 years on two different cars and I've never had an issue. Yes okay you're raising the weight and center of gravity but it's a family SUV. When all of your competition is doing it then you should too.
I tested a CX9 last week. Loved it. However, the other cars are more expensive. Along with expense come the dealership experience. My dealership was an old 70s building that in NO would give any nice experience while waiting on my vehicle being serviced. I personally look at the price and vehicle and looking to purchase the HOT red CX9 before our beach Trip. However, most of the market doesn't think like I do. They pay a lot more for the latte bar while servicing their cars. I understand
For me, I;m planning on cross shopping the CX-9 with the new Chrysler Pacifica. I need a people hauler with style and efficiency. I'd love to get the Mazda but I guess we'll see what happens at test drive time.
I would take this over the other two. For the high in Signature price point, You are just stepping into the Volvo and the BMW. The signature gives you every bell and whistle and that luxuriously soft Nappa Leather. I'm from Shreveport, LA and I drive back and forth to work and take road trips with my vehicle. I currently drive a Lincoln MKX, and I took this for a drive to compare. My kids immediately jumped in the 3rd row, my wife behind me in the 2nd and the salesman next to me and we drove the vehicle no problems. The knee room for me, a big guy, was a little tight in the front if I was going to change vehicles, but everyone in the car was comfortable and I can definitely see this working on long trips. My only hesitance is the name. Will Mazda command a "luxury" respect as Lincoln. Lincoln isn't BMW, Mercedes, or Lexus... but it isn't a "Mazda" either. I know that is superficial, but I suffer from 1st world problems.
Standard sunroof would suit me fine. I have a Kia Sorrento (Australia) Platinum which has a panoramic sunroof and to be honest, I hardly ever open it because of sun hitting you in the eyes and washing out the instrument panel. The times I do like it is on a warm evening when it is nice to see the stars and feel the fresh air. I really like the look of the interior of the new CX9 and waiting to see the pricing when it is released over here.
Good evening Richard. Before buying the Sorrento I looked at all of the internet reports I could find about different SUVs and specifically the Sorrento. You may be aware that the USA doesn't go into diesels very much so most of their reviews were on their 3.7 litre (I think it was). I spoke to some people who had Sorrentos and was happy with their reports. Forums and Australian drive reports showed it to be a very good vehicle. As far as coarse chip bitumen goes, it is a little loud although not as bad as the Mazda SP23 I had before sending that back (wheel barrow spare and after 4 punctures gave it up) The Sorrento followed a T31 Nissan X Trail which wasn't bad at all. Not now with a CVT. Once driving along, it is hard to tell you have a diesel and on a smoother road, there is next to no noise at all. Economy is excellent on a decent drive and I have had a s low as 6.8 litres per hundred kays. I think personally that people who buy a 'badge' vehicle do it to enhance their ego. Mine is cheaper to purchase, run, cheaper to service, and it has things that are extras on the elite class vehicles. The only down side if you want to tow is the low taw weight of 2 tonnes and the ridiculous TBW of 100 kgs. Fine for a trailer but caravans are basically out. When it is time to change the tyres (mine only has 38k on it after three years) I will be making enquiries to see if there is a quieter coarse chip road. I was going to change up to the new model but couldn't justify it at the higher price and the fact that tow weights are the same, the engine is the same (no complaint with that) and the extra equipment (although nice to have) does;t offer a good enough reason to upgrade. Tyre noise seems to be the bugbear of most cars here so it is something that has to be accepted instead of a deal breaker. I know I have rambled on a bit in relation to your actual question but I thought a bit more could help in any decision you may be on the way to making. If the price of the CX9 is too high, then I will happily keep my Sorrento.
drove a Sport FWD and all I heard was the tire noise. A slight growl under acceleration. No wind, no engine, no transmission noise. Driving into the sun there was a glare on dash screen. Turned putting the sun to our side, no glare. No apparent culprit.
We live in Tulsa, we currently have an X3 28i M Sport (2014) and it drives fantastic. Hard for me to see the Mazda competing overall...but we've owned a couple of Mazda's and when its time to replace or get something bigger we'll look at the CX-9. The X3 drives fantastic, I also have a 335i M sport (2015) and the steering in the X3 is actually better, it has more feedback. The suspension is also firmer which I like. Really really fond of the X3 and in my opinion nothing else in the class drives as well...I haven't driven this new CX-9 though, the potential is certainly there.
Keep in mind that only the top trims on the competition actually have the panoramic roof. So the majority of all sold don't have it. So it's interesting that the public writes the CX-9 off in large part for this omission and then goes and buys, for example, a Highlander XLE or even Limited that doesn't have one (need to go to Limited Platinum for $47K). Same situation for ventilated seats, you have to buy the top trim on most models and the majority of people don't. I just find this quite odd. And most of them cost thousands more than the CX-9 signature. I don't want over 50lbs on my roof all the time! Imagine always having a loaded roof rack when you're taking those exits.
Hi MotoMan! Thanks for the detailed video! And to answer your question at the end of video: I'm considering switching car right now, and I'm also choosing between Volvo XC90 and the CX-9. I'm leaning towards the Volvo more simply because a lot of the features in High-end CX-9 comes standard in the Volvo. However, there is still a 20% price gap, I'd like to think of it as I'm paying for the Mazda package in Volvo. I'm your friendly neighbour from Canada!
I don't understand the comparison with BMW, Mercedes, and Volvo when the competition is clearly Honda, Ford, and Toyota in size, price, and features. But I still enjoyed the video!
I live in Seattle and I have driven the Volvo XC-90. It is a very nice car but in my opinion the back seat (middle row) has a bottom seat cushion that is too thin to be comfortable for adults. When I do have adult rear seat passengers I want them to be comfortable and the XC-90 has me thinking it is children only territory. The two vehicles I am eagerly awaiting are this all new 2016 Mazda CX-9 and the recently announced 2017 Acura MDX. They both look to have better bottom seat cushion bolstering in the photos. I will buy the one that offers the best combination of 4 adult person seating and the best driving experience. The extra seats are nice every once in a while but for me the need 90% of the time I am driving with 2 to 4 adults and that is what matters to me the most. Now for a sidebar here Mr MotoMan, I want to ask you why you constantly refer to children who may be passengers in cars as "rugrats"? What is up with that? Sperm count down? Are you subliminally professing that you never intend to have children? Or that you feel people who do have children deserve to have their children referred to as "rugrats"? You mention often that you do not have children. Do you dislike children? Once or twice and I am not even thinking about it, but do you do know that you say this stuff incessantly? In many different videos? Why on earth do you do this?? From a pragmatic point of view I must say that you are literally dissing an entire burgeoning market segment. You must realize that these children will grow up soon and that they will become actual paying consumers that pay for things like advertising on TH-cam. Which is why you have a TH-cam channel, right? You must also realize that at some point even YOUR parents decided to have a child in you and we all know that without you we would not have your wonderful TH-cam channel. Since you live in one of the most progressive cities in the world, could you stop with the rugrats please?
Wow..thats a lot..its probably something he does unconsciously.. i have no children myself..an i picked up on it..only i sometime say "offspring" until 1 person commented on it..it was just something i did..doesnt necessarily mean he hates kids or anything..Oh and the CX9 is out in dealers know..beautiful car.
Great job mazda! my only concern is at the high trim level there should be a v6 power plant option for those who needs more power to compliment the luxury finish. other competitors have power options so i hope zoom zoom can zoom in on it soon.
I just drove the GT version which is 41k I'll probably recommend that one the difference is on the wood , napa leather and I believe the sensor that lets the suv stop by itself in case needed . I have a cx5 and the driving and feeling on the cx9 is abysmal not mentioning the quietness in the cx 9 . Good job Mazda !
The problem with the $45,000 vehicles mentioned are that they're base vehicles. In the case of BMW/Audi that'll get you tires, a motor, doors, and a steering wheel. Want auto dimming mirrors? That's a $3,000 package. Same with Volvo even. I've yet to see an XC90 in a lot that stickers for less than $55,000 while I can pick up a Grand Touring CX-9 (Everything but the wood and leather) for ~$41,000. We're really impressed with the CX-9, right now it's the pick to replace our TDI.
I will be cross shopping the Signature trim level Mazda CX-9 and Volvo T5 in the future, the difference in price would be about $3800 to dollars between the two, the Volvo costing more. I have not driven either as yet, however I am drawn to the Volvo's panoramic sunroof being that I live in Portland, Oregon and want to take advantage of any and all sunlight. The Volvo brand name and customer service you receive will also carry weight in my decision making process. I have seen both vehicles in person and they are sharp inside and out but I really wish Mazda had gone with a panoramic sunroof, I think it is the only missed opportunity in this CX-9. Love the detail in your videos. Cheers, Aspen
Why not heated steering wheel? Dave C's video from winter testing showed a mule with a heated wheel switch next to driver's seat heat switch. Did that not make it to the final iteration of the car? A huge oversight for a car to be sold in the 10+ freezing cold states in northern USA. I don't get that strategy and would like to hear Mazda's explanation behind it. Please.
Oddly enough, Canadian versions come with it. US customers screwed again. Kinda sad the amount of omissions Mazda made with the CX-9. While I would still consider buying one, they're going to lose many sales just because of some missing features. Costs a billion to develop a new model, you don't want to lose lots of sales because of a couple missing features. Reading the internet has revealed that people won't buy because of no V6, no panoramic roof, no ventilated seats, limited adjustability in seats, and no Android Auto/Apple Car Play. They ignore everything that it does better than the competition. They're only concerned by the feature list.
My Kia Soul has front cooled and heated seats, rear heated seats, heated steering wheel, panoramic, Android Auto. I would only change it for a car that has the same features.
just purchased the 2016 pearl white signature series for 45k. im a honda guy, have only ownes hondas, so test drove the honda pilot before the mazda. to my surprise when i opened the door and sat in this cx9 i was sold. what a different experience the interior was. the engine power is a little down from the honda but u couldn't tell from much of a difference because of the torque. cx9 surprised me quite a bit with its pacakaging. looks a lot sleeker than the pilot and highlander. debadge this suv and u wouldnt be able able to tell its a mazda especially when sitting in the driver seat.
I would prefer a standard sunroof over the panoramic variety. I hadn't thought about the higher weight of a panoramic sunroof affecting the center of gravity but that is a good point too. For me the first reason I prefer a standard sunroof is that the covers that keep the sun out are usually solid and keep ALL of the sun out. Just about all of the "screens" to block out the sun on a panoramic roof have been partially translucent letting sun come through. That's a problem here in Florida and I suspect in places like Arizona, New Mexico, Texas Nevada and other places with brutal sunshine. Also I would expect that there may be more issues with leaking, creaking and breaking with the mechanics in the larger panoramic roofs years down the road. So for me, the standard sunroof is just fine. On another note, I have been looking at a Kia Sorento EX V6 with Premium Package or the SX V6 as a a possible next vehicle. A Kia Sorento SX V6 has an MSRP of $38,600 as per the Kia website. That is vs the 2016 Mazda CX-9 Touring that has an MSRP of $35,970 as per the MazdaUSA website. At that price, I would expect that the CX-9 is going to draw sales away from Sorento. The two SUV's have much the same features. The Mazda is almost $3,000 less. I am not sure if the V6 on the Sorento is worth the extra money vs the turbo 4 in the Mazda. I haven't driven the Mazda of course but it sure looks nice. Sure the Kia has the panoramic sunroof but I would say the Mazda brand still has slightly more cachee than Kia, Zoom Zoom as it were, but Kia is catching up. Also I wonder which dealership network, Mazda or Kia, would be more willing to deal on those MSRP's. What does everybody think about this match-up? 2016 Mazda CX-9 Touring vs 2017 Kia Sorento SX V6?
Thanks, Moto-Man. Another great review. In general, I would much rather buy a car in a lower class with all the bells and whistles rather than buy a base car in a higher class. So a base CX-9 or any other car in base trim is not an option. As for the other choice, I seriously doubt you can get an XC-90 or an X5 or any other luxury or near-luxury SUV with the same level of equipment on the Signature Series CX-9 for anything near $44k.
Pano roofs are over rated. I'm looking down the road, are they part of the roof or are they held in place by rubber seals that can leak? If that's the case what a nightmare to repair. Are they tinted all that extra sunlight will age the leather more quickly. How about roof integrity ? Is it a disadvantage in a roll over?
The new Volvo XC90 is still my favorite family hauler... I do own a 2014 Highlander however bought when it first came out. Reliability and practicality were the top factors. Not sure how the CX-9 will age, or any of the other Euro luxury brands options. We'll see what data CR surveys shows.
+Christian Alarcón We did chat about it . . . So as of now, no Apple CarPlay but the folks at Mazda did confirm it is on the way and not just for the CX9.
Moto- Did the CX-9 tester you drove have 93 octane gasoline in its tank? If not, perhaps that would explain why the turbo was not as peppy in the higher rev range? Mazda tells us that with 87 octane gasoline the car has about 227 horsepower, not 250 with 93 octane. If not, please let us know. Also, please let us know on a scale of 1-10 perhaps your overall impressions with the the car as a whole and if you would recommend someone buying it.
+jpmackin Being that I was driving the car in California, I can only *guess* that the Mazda folks had 91 octane in the cars as 93 is not on offer here. As for a recommendation, as I mentioned in the outro - I feel in the lower parts of the grade walk this walks away from the competition. However, when you get to the model we were driving, a great car but at US$44,000, I would have a hard time deciding between this or a couple more bucks for the Volvo or something along that lines.
Sorento's small tires, little ground clearance, shorter wheel base, pushed me to the new Mazda CX9. Had both a Sorento and the bigger Santa Fe Limited, they're high value rides but the new CX9 has them beat in the things important to me, like not having the massive hole in the roof.
Tires even if smaller are not an issue with Sorento as handling and ride quality are pretty good and not to mention CX9 tires will be expensive to replace. Kia not only managed to provide a roomier interior in the Sorento than the CX-9 but also kept the exterior dimensions much smaller with same curb weight and a smooth, powerful and a reliable V6. Turbo reliability is still suspect. On top of that Sorento offers more seat adjustments, ventilated front and heated rear seats, 3rd row AC vents, pana roof, auto liftgate, better infotainment, more 3rd row room, torque vectoring AWD, around view monitor, better radar cruise, almost equally luxurious and quiet interior, equal handling, better towing and hitch capacities, better gauges better dealer and service network and lastly a better warranty. Sounds clearly like a much higher value than CX9. Only thing Sorento lacks is rain sensing wipers, auto high beam control, dual exhausts, led headlights, higher mpg - all very small considerations for a family hauler.
I'm not buying the weight thing re: the panoramic sunroof. You said Dave weighed the sunroof mechanism of the CX-9 as 15 LBs and the pano roof of a Mini at 53 LBs. This doesn't, however, add/subtract for the sheet metal and framing of the roof, which is silly. Gotta talk apples for apples. A pano roof typically covers the roof from rail to rail, whereas the typical Mazda sunroof is 4 to 6 inches from the roof rails on both sides, meaning the area covered from one option to the other has a different combination of materials in the same square footage. For every square foot of panoramic sunroof, you're deleting steel, steel rib framing, sound batts (which could be integral with...) and headliner material. I'm an Architect and often sit in rooms to discuss with clients and designers what your building's compromises are going to be for usability vs aesthetics vs cost. I'm guessing Mazda's thought process with the sunroof vs pano roof option was based on "let's get this thing built and choose our battles wisely". Bringing a Skyactiv turbo 4 cylinder AWD drivetrain to market to haul around 5,000 lbs worth of vehicle with occupants - after the abysmal results with a similar turbo 4 cylinder/AWD setup in the CX-7 - had to be THE priority for this vehicle. Getting all that right was integral to their current and future success, not the sexy sunroof. My 2 cents.
Fact of the matter is that a panoramic roof does add a lot of weight in the worst spot even though you're deleting the metal in that place. Glass is heavier than steel but it's the other modifications needed that adds a bunch of other weight. In the same way that a soft top convertible weights a lot more than the regular hard top. The whole rest of the upper structure has to be reinforced. You don't simply cut a whole in the roof and stick a panoramic roof in.
I had been searching for an SUV with great tech, sharp design, and something fun to drive. Did not want something that looked like a Dad mobile. I had come down to the Pilot, Highlander, and Durango. The Durango had the look but felt like a tank driving and the touch screen was too cluttered.. The Highlander and Pilot lacked very much on the exterior look and their tech was meh at best IMO. Have been driving a 2014 Civic and thought the Pilot's tech wasn't refreshing enough from Honda for me to drive it. And Toyota's Highlander has a cluttered feel with buttons lined up and down the side of the touch screen. I stumbled upon the CX-9, loved the look and design, took it for a test drive and loved it more. It checked all of the boxes for me. Super smooth to drive. Didn't feel heavy. Really easy to navigate the menus during driving without reaching for the touch screen. HUD is a nice touch and the best part is that I don't think this car looks like a kid carrier as much as other cars in its class. The only negative I found with it was that the towing capacity wasnt as substantial as I liked but it gets the job done towing a jet ski. As far as comparing it to luxury models I'm confused with this guys question. Most of those models start at 45k+ and in order to adequately equip them with similar tech, seating, and AWD you have to hit around the 55k+ mark. So yeah I'm def gonna stick with getting the Mazda.
I think Mazda here is mixing priorities for this segment. Sure, handling is important for a big car like this but they are cutting corners in the wrong places like a pana roof, smartphone integration, around view monitor, full range adjustable seats, ventilated seats, heated rear seats which Sorento has along with a thigh support as well as more combined legroom. With so much of weight savings, the car is not lighter than a Sorento or a Highlander. The torque curve is sounding disappointing to me. Sounds like a big long stroke v-twin (I am a motorcycle nut) that doesn't have the oomph in the midrange. I would prefer a flat torque curve that pulls all the way. I am a 14' Mazda6 owner and I was almost decided on the new CX-9 until I found the Sorento. This segment needs more luxury, comfort features than the CX-9 provides, sadly. All this can be done with keeping good handling and engine dynamics. Seems like Mazda is still a bit confused.
I am beginning my research to replace my 2013 Santa Fe XL or LWB in the US...not because i dislike it...it is and has been a fantastic vehicle. I simply like, for the right or wrong reason, to replace every 3-4 years and try something different. Before my SF, had a 09 Highlander, and ugh, my first experience with Toyota "quality" did not meet expectations. And based on forum comments, my issues were not isolated to me. Important to me are features and aesthetics. Highlander exterior and especially interior are just blah. Pilot exterior....vanilla...its just there. That may be okay for some, not for me. The 9 is a nice looking vehicle, inside and out. Stepped into one (a GT i think) in a showroom and found the interior a bit claustrophobic. Very narrow due to wide console. Pano roof decision is logical, but few are going to be taking this vehicle to the track or hitting on-ramps at 80 mph. The pano roof in my 2013 Santa Fe does not get a ton of use in real hot weather...it's just too hot. But when cooler out, it's awesome to have all that natural light and opening it up to get that fresh air. So no pano is a bit of a let down for me. Another thing....no cooled or vented seats? WTF? My 2013 SF has them!!! And i use them alot in hot weather. Thankfully, the Cdn models get heated steering wheel. Luxury comparisons are a farce. In Cda, the cx9 signature is just over $50K. Any luxury competitors are going to be $15-$20K more once you add all the packages to get similar tech and features. So why do people insist on comparing apples to oranges?
I'm currently driving a VW Tiguan loaner with a pano roof. I HIGHLY enjoy the spacious feeling it provides, but whether it's the overall tuning of the vehicle (which is soft) or the high center of gravity, it doesn't inspire confidence around corners. Shame with the 4Motion that grips for days.
If the drive felt relatively the same with the pano roof then yes. If it would make the SUV drive like all the other mainstream SUV's then absolutely not.
Hey MotoMan - try comparing apples to apples vs oranges. The comparable BMW x35i would be in the mid 50s once you add all the requisite option packages. Thx volvo xc90 T5 AWD (which is another turbo 4 engine and likely a better comparable) optioned up to the Mazda signature model where everything is std puts the volvo @ $51K (with destination) or $6K more than the Mazda signature model @ $45K (including destination). That's 13.5% more expensive. So to answer your question - the Mazda really has no comparison vs. the other luxury and/or near luxury models.
Looks really good but price can be a deal breaker. If price is concisely less than the new Q7 or my ultimate favorite LR4 this can be a future option. I like it. We drive 2015 Q7 Miami FL. Best regards MOTO
From a pure driving stand point I'm not a fan of panoramic roofs, more weight. Although the wife and I just picked up a 2016 XC90 R-Design with a panoramic roof. We live in Dallas and I'm just waiting to get caught in a hailstorm to see how it stands up...
I'm actually glad there's no panoramic roof. In fact, if they can delete the regular sunroof and add a full carbon fiber roof, that will be ever better.
Yes indeed it needs a panoramic roof at least as an option so you can decide. The gear shifter takes up way too much room that is wasted where they could have moved the cup holders up as you literally have to bend your wrist to pick it up.
Definitely go for the signature... 2 kids, Dubai, love to take the family on cook outs in the desert. I feel the tech and space in the CX9 are just enough to enjoy driving but not feel I'm abusing a high end luxury SUV such as the Q7 or XC90. And with this price point... Makes a lot of sense. The pilot is very utilitarian but frankly an oversized boring CRV. And then there is knowing that you're buying in to a company with a real purpose much like Volvo. Other competition are the grand Cherokee... But only 5 seats... So on days I have family join... We'll need 2 cars and I want to feel like have the option to fit all. As for what's missing in this vehicle... Definitely would have wanted the panoramic roof.. It gives the 3rd row a feel of spaciousness. Also makes it feel more luxurious. Also... Really don't understand why there are no paddle shifters that allow us to be in control of shifting at points where the torque just dies out.
my g/f loves the high end model interior and it might be enough to be a win for her. for me... i think the ambivalent performance of the engine is a question mark... is it enough? for $ 44K i'm expecting something of a rug rate rocket.
Thanks motoman for the test . I would like to see unfamiliar cars like mitsubishi montero and outlander cuz I have alot of Questions about mitsubishi. I loved CX9 so much but I m not with killing v6 engine . I wanted to see same specs in CX5 and powerfull v6 engine CX9 . I would choose same level of crossover honestly I ll go for nissan murano . Which has v6 engine and well design .
I have a Buick Enclave and love the Panarama roof. However it really for the kids who don't give a rip. also, this roof adds to the bottom line. Yes it nice but not a deal killer for me.
As long as the vehicle has a sunroof, then I'm happy. As far as the interior on this thing...its down right delicious! I think I would be happy with owning this vs a luxury brand such as a BMW.
From MD, and I would choose the Mazda, which is ironic since I've never looked at them before. The reason why...well, first the GLA is crap. The GLC, which isn't in its size class, at $44k doesn't have anything in it and nether does the BMW X3. Sure they probably have better driving dynamics, but I live in Maryland just north of DC, the traffic is horrible most times of the day, I'm worried about features way more than driving dynamics. Now, its more in line with the GLE and the X5 size wise, but their bases are in the 50's, a full ten grand more than where this thing tops out, and to be honest...this looks nicer on the inside. The BMW and Mercedes look plain on the inside. Now the RX is just as nice, but you still have a price issue. It appears that Mazda figured out exactly where this thing needed to be price wise to attract people who want something nicer than a Highlander or Pilot (which end at about this price bracket as well) but really can't justify the higher end Premium vehicles which really don't give you that much for the money anyway. Its a middle market car of sorts.
We would pick this over all the others @ 40-65 thousand with a gas engine[best engineering approach and mpg for what it's segmented] because of the quality[all round plus it's welds are not covered/hidden by plastic panelling like an Acura MDX(sound vehicle) @ 65000], content[has all the same bells and wistles] yes all round value[45000 for the signature].
The Mazda engineer Coleman is the best example of a teacher you want your child[aspiring to be an engineer] taught by in school.
Answering your question, MotorMan: I have CX-9 Signature. And as you said correctly it is all about Rugrats. I like small, dynamic cars and if not little diaper poopers, I would be driving Miata or maybe RX-8 or even Model S. However, I have them... kids... Before I got CX-9 I had minivan and was spending a fortune on Prozac... Well, almost. At some point I said "Hell, No!" and started having testdrives. Money was not necessarily a significant issue, so I test drove the whole series of cars: starting from Santa Fe to Q7. CX-9 clicked immediately. It is not the fastest car I test drove, but it is definitely the most fun car to drive. At least for me it is. That said, I want to share my phylosophy that luxury cars have outlived their sex appeal. Yes, when people at work ask me: "So, what car did you end up buying? " and I say "I got Mazda!" no kodak moment is being generated as opposed to if I would casually say "Audi" or "BMW". However, I do not give rats ass about it. I do beleive that luxury brands became nowdays similar to paintings of modern artists: critics like yourself would definitely find something to be excited about them, however very likely would hang this piece of art upside down if label accidentally fall off. My point is that when you are talking say about Lexus, the weight of the brand dominates your perception and even if you'd like to critisize it, you are afraid that other art lovers would call your incompetence. Therefore, people rarely choose to swim against current.
Just to add that I often visit Germany and rent cars there. Usually it happens to be either BMW 7 series or Mercedes. I do not see anything special about these cars. Nothing. And since having Rugrats I lost need in having a chick magnet, I choose what I like and in this case it happened to be CX-9.
Good discussion . . .
I also bought 2017 CX-9 Grand Touring Package last week. I would have to agree totally with Baba Yaga, I previously owned a X3 3.0i fully loaded and the charm was def just hype that it's a BMW- everyone asks me, how does it feel to go from BMW to Mazda and I proudly say, it was all just hype. I sit in my Mazda and completely forget where I came from- this car is super fun to drive and the usability of it is spot on. The drive is just so much fun given its size that you really never have a second of buyer's remorse. There are some more basic luxury car features that I think Mazda should pay attention to and if they did I think they would pull more market share from BMW, Merc, Lexus... such as Heated rear seats, cooled front seats, heated steering wheel, auto pull in side mirrors (don't really miss the pano sunroof, I bought beige interior which brightens up the interior plenty). Aside from this one small thought I really have no complaints. Everyone at the office asked the same question as Baba Yaga accurately described and my response was the same and their lack of a kodak moment was the same... but I got the kodak moment the second they check out the front grill of this car. It is literally the most attractive and affordable care in its class- literally you have to see it in person to understand it. The fit and finish is just amazing and I love where Mazda is going- cant wait to see this level of quality trickle down to the 6 so I can upgrade my second car which is a TSX. It all really comes down to what you are looking for, I wanted a car that is fun to drive, luxurious driving i.e. quiet on the road, reliable and affordable when comes to repairs (which Mazda is sooo much more affordable than any other luxury brand), and most importantly fits my family comfortably. This has checked all the boxes and more. Btw my X3 was a 6 cylinder and I am not a gear head- I feel right at home with the torque this baby puts out (I put super 93 octane to get the extra horse power). Hope this helps someone.
nyclerka hi, since have been a year ago, how is the CX-9 behave? Trouble free?
BMW X5 is $54K
Merc GLE is $52K
XC-90 is $44K
Those are all barebones, no AWD, no 3rd row, no leather, smaller wheels, the interior is nicer in the CX-9. The exterior for sure is nicer!!
I think at $44K fully loaded, thats a really good price!!
Xc90 looks better tho but I agree! But, but in Singapore, the base line XC90 is about, USD 209k..... So I guess Americans are really luccky
Who buys the ugly mercedes?
Jewish ppl, LOL!!
And you are correct my friend, he forgot to mention those german suv's are base models that doesn't really comes with any goodies just a fancy badge
It's $45,215 here in Cali plus $4500 in tax and reg. The Signature CX-9 is $50k really.
I could listen to Dave Coleman for hours, Technobabble was my favorite part of SCC. Really gave my 14 year old self a solid foundation to build my understanding of cars.
i like this guy ... he provides intricate details in his reviews which no one even thinks about.
New Mazdas have figured out the design so nicely! Very elegant, yet somewhat aggressive, bravo!
except all they did was copy Audi and BMW.
Yeeeeh, thats the fun part. They kind of did it (copy the quality but not the design) and its soooo much cheaper. You can now imagine how much money you are wasting for just a badge.
FahrerNordschleife I can't see a single line that's similar to Audi or BMW. They copied the idea of 4 wheels and 1 steering wheel, maybe?
+Nik Brudar then you've never been in one.
Exterior is WAY different than an Audi/BMW. Interior, yes slightly, as far as infotainment and looks. Then again, most car designers borrow aspects of other designs, teak it and turn it into their own. I see it as Mazda up-scaling the interior quality (not copying). The only similarity with 'older' Audi designs is the infotainment panel and the center nob. That's pretty much it. Besides, Audi lost the resemblance as they've changed their Q line interior designs, and now looks very different than this CX-9.
I love when he has the engineers on to talk about what makes their car special and not a clone of anything else and you just know Mazda isn't content to take the best tech and implement it, they have to engineer something better and unexpected
I have a CX-3. I love it. I would definitely take this fully loaded model over the competition. Number 1 reason is that unlike BMW or Mercedes, you can drive it over 100k miles and it won't cost you an arm and a leg with maintenance and repairs. It's more value in the end.
This is probably the best interior design (layout) I have ever seen. And it can be one of main considerations when purchasing a car because we spent most of the time in the vehicle.
To answer your question..... tough choice... currently own a '07 CX-9 in the bay area.... at $44K for a 7 adult seater, it's a kind of hard to beat ..... I would suspect that the closest 7 seater in the premium range would run well north of $55K ..... .that said, not sure I would go for the top end model, but rather a mid level trim.
Thanks for the video. I currently drive a Pacifica and am in the Portland, OR area. I am actively looking for a replacement vehicle. The CX-9 has blown me away.
I think your observation that the $45k version of the CX-9 places it into BMW, Volvo, Mercedes range misses the point that such vehicles don't include the laundry list of features found in the CX-9. You have to option those up and you're looking at spending at least $20k more... A similarly equipped Cadillac XT-5 is $58k. The Mazda is within 1/2 a second of the Caddy with slightly better fuel economy and the bonus of a 3rd row seat. Mazda looks to have one of the better head's up displays... real rosewood, and napa leather.
Mazda has, in my opinion, raised the bar in value. As for the torque issue, I would say Mazda understands that I need to go zero to 60 in a reasonable amount of time... not trying to win a drag race...
Oh... and I personally am not a huge fan of the panoramic roofs... so I am happy Mazda saved the weight and applied it to sound deadening material instead. Good choice!
Thanks again for the review.
I'm in love with the interior ♡
Me too! Has BMW and Benz beaten imo.
yeah the Wood + Metal designed interior mazda have done very well :)
YES - this interior had actually made me reconsider
the purchase of a Mercedes or BMW!
+Dani c you will save 20 grand !
My Grand Cherokee has a panoramic roof and I will NEVER go back. Spacious, luxurious, and lets in more light. A must #MotoManTV
I purchased a competitve vehicle in February , and live in the Northeast. I use it as my primary vehicle (commuting, home Depot runs and road trips!) so these CUVs are not just for soccer moms! It's a loaded mainstream model with a $45k+ MSRP. These vehicles provide to ton of value versus a stripper luxury model. If I were in the market now, I'd check out the CX-9. The lack of a panoramic roof was a misstep though (my daughter LOVES ours) and the need for premium to get max performance isn't a great idea either. The interior is nice but the gauges are a little basic. I'll definitely check it out at a dealership soon when I go in for my next oil change.
It seems like you own a Sorento which I ordered instead. Omitting panaromic roof, around view monitor, auto liftgate are big omissions for me in a large crossover.
Yes, I have the turbo Limited model since I didn't need a 3rd row. I doubt most drivers of crossovers need them to feel sporty. I think Mazda misses out on sales by making their cars ride so firm (and loud) I had two Mazda 3s over the last 10 years. Fun but a bit crude for family use. I see they've added sound deadening in this new 9 so hopefully it's more hospitable inside.
I was shopping for a 7 seater a few weeks ago and some of the cars that I did research on was a Highlander, Pilot, Sorento, Explorer,. Basically all cars in the mid price class. The Pilot was my number one choice and the runner up was the Highlander. However, I was still not convince of the cars that was available at the time because it either lack the looks department or features. At the time I didn't know about the CX-9, still thought it had the old style and didn't bother to look it up. The only good looking cars are in the luxury brands but out of my price reach. Luckily for me one of the youtube vid I was watching showed the new CX-9 and I was completely blown away by how good it look even compare to the luxury brands. And the rest was history, two days later, after going out for a test drive and drooling over how good the outside and inside looks plus the technology it offers. It now sits in my drive way and I still can't believed how good it looks lol.
Coleman parts were the best. Motoman reviews are losing their edge. Review the vehicle as intended for the target market! It matters not if you are a sports car guy.
true
(David Coleman, I'm a huge fan, you've taken Mazda to a class of it's own, Japanese reliability/easy maintenance, with Japanese low speed agility, while having German highspeed stability... all the while, giving it a touch of German luxury, at a reasonable price, my hats off to you sir!)
This response is to Motoman's question about people who are in the market for a larger SUV and have the expenditures for it, what I'm looking for, etc. I took the time to reply, it's doozy...
Function over Form ( Function > Form), all day, every day! I can do without the Panoramic Moon Roof... good job Mazda, good job David Coleman, I'm with ya buddy!!
When considering a "larger" SUV (something in say the BMW X5 , Audi Q7 ~ range). I want something that "has it all", or as much as possible if you're going to pay about $50k for it. I think the new Mazda CX-9 has a lot of things right... but not everything of course, when I think about an X5 or Q7, I think of an "ultimate" SUV....it can tow, it can haul people/luggage/volume, it can handle, it can cruise for long distances comfortably, it looks nice/not ugly....if I had to just have ONE vehicle, it would be a large SUV, and with what's out on the market, I'd even demand reasonable gas mileage... little compromise in all areas... the new CX-9 seems very promising, a good balance... but let me list a few things that I think that the CX-9 are lacking/lagging behind...that would prevent a buyer of a $50k+ SUV like me(I don't care much about brand snobbery either... that holds little value to me..say if a Toyota at half the price can do almost everything a Mercedes can do.. .I'd be happy with the Toyota, etc.) :
Severely lacking:
-Towing Capacity (at a meager 3500lbs, this SUV, "can't do it all".... I wish it was at least 5,000! That way it would at least make it competitive with the Toyota Highlander... if it did anything over 5,000lbs, it's a good compromise in my opinion, I'm not asking for 9,000 lbs, but say if it was even 6500lbs, that would give it a lot more utility for guys who like to tow a fully loaded Airstream or a decent Yacht...take note Mazda, this is almost a deal breaker for some who are in the price range of sub $50k larger SUV's!!!)
Moderately lacking:
-Power (I understand that they were aiming for a good blend, so that's why I say "moderate"), like everyone else, wish they could achieve similar mileage with more power... even if it was with Premium fuel( would be cool if the ECU could change MAPS to accomodate, or if there was a "Power mode" you could hit that would give it an instant Software tune, of course I'm expecting a slight hit on Gas Mileage, but just saying... would be nice to have).
-Cruising range... 19.5 Gallons X 27 MPG = 526.5 Miles... of course, practice vs theory... we have to see what it really does, but I admit, for a "Premium" SUV, I expect, desire a longer cruising range (at least 600 miles), it's slightly below the BMW X5... but I'd say this Mazda CX-9 would win me over an X5 with this added extra value of a longer cruising range! I'd love it! Wish it had a 22.5+(I know it's just a tad more, but makes it that much more appealing!, heck give us 24.5 Gallons in the tank!)
Concerned about:
-Rust Protection... I really like Mazda's, they drive great, they're comfortable, they do it right for the most part... and I know Mazda wants to build equity as a "higher" brand... but in order to achieve this, on top of their value and "quality", I'd have to say, to really earn "longevity", they need to monitor what their cars look like after 10+ years... that's what, in my opinion has made Toyota and BMW, noticeably have that brand equity.... I can afford nicer cars... but I've driven Mazda, and this is my biggest complaint.... after 7+ years or so roughly.. you see the body and underpinnings rusting severely... enough to render the once fine vehicle... utter garbage and junkyard worthy years after that... Mazda's Drivetrain and Electronics will outlast the Unibody due to rusting.. which is sad, because if the Unibody would hold up, then Mazda has a car that legends are made of... one that will last the test of time.... my family has had a Toyota for over 20 years! The drive train, electronics, and even the body are still holding up... BMW may have electrical problems, and some drivetrain problems, but the body will at least hold up.... that's the thing with modern Unibody's... once it starts to erode and corrode, you can't "fix" it, it's done for... and with my 11+ years Mazda 3... which I took uber care of... still has severe rust that I'm looking out for... all the while my brother's 16+ years old Honda civic has less under body/structural rust than my car (paint is a different story, lol, Honda's thick clear coat is infamous for bubbling/oxidizing, you see it everywhere, but that can be fixed).... I say this as a guy who hold's on to cars... I also have a 2015 Highlander XLE AWD and see how nice they protected the under body...) So... I hope Mazda corrected this... but I'm not sure... I urge the company to buy back or inspect their vehicles that have been on the wild after 10 years, and take note on the body's rust and integrity of structure... this is what prevents Mazda as a brand from growing into say... something of a Volvo (luxury'esque, while not bearing the snobbery for the sake of showing off labels)....
YOU ALWAYS CRACK ME UP. AND YES, (oops sry about the caps) I saw the wing span of that bird then I looked back WOW! I was glad to see a different type of review from a Mazda vehicle. Glad to see they are thinking all the way around the box :)
5:43 R.I.P. headphone users.. guy is worst than my 5-year-old nephew.
I was looking at the BMW X5 until I watched this video (I went down the TH-cam rabbit hole) I'm looking at the signature for 45k versus 74k with about the same technology. I haven't driven it yet, but right now I'm thinking zoom zoom versus the ultimate driving machine that only seats 5. Thanks for the honest video.
Would be interested to hear your feedback once you test drive both . . .
Believe me it's a good option I had a Mercedes gl 550 and the Mazda feels better and has more technology.
Haven;t driven the Mazda yet, may try over the weekend, but did a month at the port where the Mercedes come in and...they aren't that great and I've seen every feature and price combination Mercedes has. I was thinking of a GLC or GLE before hand, but after that...they seem over priced for what you're getting, and I've tested the X3 and X5, they're good, but plain and somewhat cheap looking on the inside, especially for the price.
Same boat here.
I was waiting for Q7 and God... it turned out ugly.
Mazda will be an intriguing option. I personally don't care about the badge if you can get an almost-as-good SUV for 45k instead of 70k.
I'm actually trying to get out my X5 and pick up one of these. Haven't driven it yet tho...
Great review MotoMan of a SUV that I have on order, confirms my assumptions that Mazda's CX9 is a highly efficient great handling large SUV that has a compliant and quiet ride. Would of liked more HP but being a Turbo there should be Turbo ECU remapping available to mildly tweak torque/HP to my driving needs but I'm jumping ahead of myself and need to drive it first.
Love the looks interior and exterior, all LEDs, HUD, Smart AWD, smooth fast lock up trans, high tech engine, big tires for a good price made this my choice. As for the panoramic sunroofs, I HATE THEM, had it a Kia Sorento, have it now on Hyundai Santa Fe now and NEVER USE IT, its a heavy glass covered hole that raises the center of gravity, reduces rigidity, increases body flex and the probability of failure, from glass shattering, mechanical/electrical issues, water leaks and reduces headroom, no thank you, don't want or need a massive hole in the roof. I wish mfg would have them as a sole option and not group it in with other options that I do like then I would never buy one.
My metal gray CX9 should be arriving in a week or two here in at my southern Wisconsin dealer, until then I will be looking for a buyer for my 2013 white with saddle brown Santa Fe Limited that only has 14500 miles on, its in excellent condition but the new CX9 fits my needs better.
Drove the CX9, bought the CX9, had it for a week now, love the CX9, surpasses all my expectations, very well thought out and constructed, body panels perfect, very quiet/smooth at speed, no turbo lag, tons of torque, great handling for its size, steering was very tight and commutative no slop, hit 90mph while not paying attention felt like 70, its a fun to drive family hauler. I'm a happy Mazda man now.
Enthusiast from Colorado. I daily drive a BMW 128i manual (even in the winter) and our family hauler is a 2010 CX9 that we picked up for the way it drives. Looking at replacing it next year with either this CX9 or a Jaguar F-Pace. It needs to be practical (kids, long road trips) but equally important fun to drive, especially in the mountains here. I hope the sunroof is better than the old version, which is buffeting like crazy when open. If it is as good as the sunroof of my 128i that can be driven at 70mph without discomfort, I would not mind the lack of panoramic sunroof. Looking at the signature trim, comparison with luxury segment does not apply as they would be $20k pricier equipped the same way.
A loaded CX 9 makes a convincing case against luxury SUV's. Seems to compete nicely with the XC90, and make the MDX seem pointless to consider. I also have full confidence in Mazdas long term reliability and durability, unlike Volvo.
As current owners of a 2012 CX-9, I would love to test drive this one and see how it compares. I love our 2012. I drives like a car and handles very well. My only issue with the car is that the braking sucks but that is why I upgrade it to Stainless Steel lines, cryot slotted rotors, and hawk pads which have helped the braking bias. From an aesthetic and interior point of view it has the 2012 beat hands down but I based on your review, I think the pep I have from the V6 just makes it more fun to drive. Will have to test drive and provide input. Great vid!!
Thanks for the shout out to San Jose and the lovely Bay Area where I live! With the modest powerplant available, I'd take the base CX-9 at the low-to-mid $30K price point. Forget all the bells and whistles. Its a Mazda, for God's sakes! Go buy a Volvo XC or Audi Q if you want a luxo/status SUV. Love the Kodo design language though-- Mazda makes some of the prettiest SUVs on the market. I live SJ and am actually anti-SUV/minivan. Our family hauler is a Audi A6 Avant(C6)! It drives like a sedan with the extra storage space and we love it!
There's very good reasoning on getting a top spec mainstream model rather than choosing a luxury brand. Which the luxury brand, you'd have to get a base model to be about $45K. No AWD and missing a lot of the features present in the loaded Mazda, Toyota, Honda, Ford, etc... Plus, many people don't want to drive the pretentious badge. You simply get more car for the money.
I drive a Lotus Evora and Cadillac CTS VSport. My wife drives a Cadillac ATS. She had a BMW X3 previously. We plan to have our first child in the next year or two. Being the car guy I am, we are interested in this redesign but I think we'll go with either a slightly used Cadillac XT5 or Jaguar F Pace (depending on how they depreciate). My wife said hands down, #1 she wants a huge sunroof, she doesn't understand driving dynamics but being in a fully-loaded ATS, I think she will get use to that feel so we'll need something somewhat sporty but also full of luxury/tech. She wants a smaller SUV for when the baby comes. We are here in the mid-atlantic.
5:40 i jumped because i'm wearing a headphone
yup XD so suck
LOL, I was browsing on a different side on that moment, and I thought something was wrong with my PC.
Drove one yesterday, such a nice car.
I have a 2010 Mazda CX 9 and love the car. Reliability was the selling poing for me. And Mazda amazes me in that department. Will wait for more CX 9 reliability reports before trading my old Mazda.
I am in the market for this, and you hit it on the head, it's all about the rugrats. I personally love the driving dynamics, coming from a Mazda 6 and a Mazda 3, it's sort of a natural progression. I did manage to drive one, and I agree that it's definitely got a different "feel" than a traditional V6. It felt a little subdued it is on the highway, but overall, a really nice car. I'd love to take it out on turns sometime.
The question is would I buy this vehicle. Absolutely yes. I was hoping Mazda would build a full size CX 5 and they did! They went beyond my expectations by improving the interior layout and finish materials. They have done an awesome job. Perhaps in future models they'll up the horsepower and torque, add power tilt and telescoping steering wheel, a greater range of motion with the power seats in the front and add an efficient panoramic sunroof that minimizes the risk for head crush in the event of a rollover. For now, I'm cool with this vehicle.
Love the vid. In my immediate family we have about 5 different Mazdas. All but one are 2013+ (kodo design). As a family we have really been fans of Mazda, love most things about them but if I could get a panoramic roof in a Mazda6 or cx5 I'd trade up in a heartbeat. That's the one area they need to get on it.
This is definitely on my next to but car list. Current car is 2014 X5 and I am cross hopping the cx9 and Jeep Grand Cherokee. Main purpose is a daily driver, main family vehicle with 90% city driving. Fuel economy is not a concern but comfort creatures are, I just wished this thing had a panoramic sunroof which kids love and it makes the car less claustrophobic. It seems like a money saving move to not put one in instead of the weight saving, if it's only 45 pounds more it wouldn't make a difference in a car like this one, it's not a track car. Regardless, I will definitely check this one out when it's available.
Thanks for the review motoman, I've been waiting for this one for some time now.
Good show. Very well-designed vehicle. Sunroof is fine.
Currently my wife drove a 15 Sorrento SX. It was roughly 39k sticker. I know that sounds like a lot but this car delivers all that we want with a lot of bells and whistles. That along with the warranty sold us and let me tell you it has been the most reliable car I've ever known. I feel as though after watching this review it seems as though Mazda wasn't sure on which target they were making the car for. It's looks amazing but I feel as though it's gonna miss the mark by certain things they left out like the pano roof.
+Thomas Andrew why are you so butt hurt about my opinion??? I've had a pano for the last 6 years on two different cars and I've never had an issue. Yes okay you're raising the weight and center of gravity but it's a family SUV. When all of your competition is doing it then you should too.
I tested a CX9 last week. Loved it. However, the other cars are more expensive. Along with expense come the dealership experience. My dealership was an old 70s building that in NO would give any nice experience while waiting on my vehicle being serviced. I personally look at the price and vehicle and looking to purchase the HOT red CX9 before our beach Trip. However, most of the market doesn't think like I do. They pay a lot more for the latte bar while servicing their cars. I understand
For me, I;m planning on cross shopping the CX-9 with the new Chrysler Pacifica. I need a people hauler with style and efficiency. I'd love to get the Mazda but I guess we'll see what happens at test drive time.
I love that it has a normal sunroof. I prefer it over panoramic
5:49, I thought I'm watching Office with Steve Carell being excited about something
I would take this over the other two. For the high in Signature price point, You are just stepping into the Volvo and the BMW. The signature gives you every bell and whistle and that luxuriously soft Nappa Leather. I'm from Shreveport, LA and I drive back and forth to work and take road trips with my vehicle. I currently drive a Lincoln MKX, and I took this for a drive to compare. My kids immediately jumped in the 3rd row, my wife behind me in the 2nd and the salesman next to me and we drove the vehicle no problems. The knee room for me, a big guy, was a little tight in the front if I was going to change vehicles, but everyone in the car was comfortable and I can definitely see this working on long trips. My only hesitance is the name. Will Mazda command a "luxury" respect as Lincoln. Lincoln isn't BMW, Mercedes, or Lexus... but it isn't a "Mazda" either. I know that is superficial, but I suffer from 1st world problems.
Standard sunroof would suit me fine. I have a Kia Sorrento (Australia) Platinum which has a panoramic sunroof and to be honest, I hardly ever open it because of sun hitting you in the eyes and washing out the instrument panel. The times I do like it is on a warm evening when it is nice to see the stars and feel the fresh air. I really like the look of the interior of the new CX9 and waiting to see the pricing when it is released over here.
Good evening Richard. Before buying the Sorrento I looked at all of the internet reports I could find about different SUVs and specifically the Sorrento. You may be aware that the USA doesn't go into diesels very much so most of their reviews were on their 3.7 litre (I think it was). I spoke to some people who had Sorrentos and was happy with their reports. Forums and Australian drive reports showed it to be a very good vehicle. As far as coarse chip bitumen goes, it is a little loud although not as bad as the Mazda SP23 I had before sending that back (wheel barrow spare and after 4 punctures gave it up) The Sorrento followed a T31 Nissan X Trail which wasn't bad at all. Not now with a CVT. Once driving along, it is hard to tell you have a diesel and on a smoother road, there is next to no noise at all. Economy is excellent on a decent drive and I have had a s low as 6.8 litres per hundred kays. I think personally that people who buy a 'badge' vehicle do it to enhance their ego. Mine is cheaper to purchase, run, cheaper to service, and it has things that are extras on the elite class vehicles. The only down side if you want to tow is the low taw weight of 2 tonnes and the ridiculous TBW of 100 kgs. Fine for a trailer but caravans are basically out. When it is time to change the tyres (mine only has 38k on it after three years) I will be making enquiries to see if there is a quieter coarse chip road. I was going to change up to the new model but couldn't justify it at the higher price and the fact that tow weights are the same, the engine is the same (no complaint with that) and the extra equipment (although nice to have) does;t offer a good enough reason to upgrade. Tyre noise seems to be the bugbear of most cars here so it is something that has to be accepted instead of a deal breaker. I know I have rambled on a bit in relation to your actual question but I thought a bit more could help in any decision you may be on the way to making. If the price of the CX9 is too high, then I will happily keep my Sorrento.
drove a Sport FWD and all I heard was the tire noise. A slight growl under acceleration. No wind, no engine, no transmission noise. Driving into the sun there was a glare on dash screen. Turned putting the sun to our side, no glare. No apparent culprit.
We live in Tulsa, we currently have an X3 28i M Sport (2014) and it drives fantastic. Hard for me to see the Mazda competing overall...but we've owned a couple of Mazda's and when its time to replace or get something bigger we'll look at the CX-9.
The X3 drives fantastic, I also have a 335i M sport (2015) and the steering in the X3 is actually better, it has more feedback. The suspension is also firmer which I like. Really really fond of the X3 and in my opinion nothing else in the class drives as well...I haven't driven this new CX-9 though, the potential is certainly there.
You mentioned about panoramic roof. Thanks dear because i was wondering why they didnt fix pan roof
Keep in mind that only the top trims on the competition actually have the panoramic roof. So the majority of all sold don't have it. So it's interesting that the public writes the CX-9 off in large part for this omission and then goes and buys, for example, a Highlander XLE or even Limited that doesn't have one (need to go to Limited Platinum for $47K). Same situation for ventilated seats, you have to buy the top trim on most models and the majority of people don't. I just find this quite odd. And most of them cost thousands more than the CX-9 signature. I don't want over 50lbs on my roof all the time! Imagine always having a loaded roof rack when you're taking those exits.
I would defenitly take the panoramic sunroof and captains chairs in the second row. Maybe make them available options in a mid sicle refresh?
Hi MotoMan! Thanks for the detailed video! And to answer your question at the end of video: I'm considering switching car right now, and I'm also choosing between Volvo XC90 and the CX-9. I'm leaning towards the Volvo more simply because a lot of the features in High-end CX-9 comes standard in the Volvo. However, there is still a 20% price gap, I'd like to think of it as I'm paying for the Mazda package in Volvo. I'm your friendly neighbour from Canada!
Dave Coleman is the man
I don't understand the comparison with BMW, Mercedes, and Volvo when the competition is clearly Honda, Ford, and Toyota in size, price, and features. But I still enjoyed the video!
I live in Seattle and I have driven the Volvo XC-90. It is a very nice car but in my opinion the back seat (middle row) has a bottom seat cushion that is too thin to be comfortable for adults. When I do have adult rear seat passengers I want them to be comfortable and the XC-90 has me thinking it is children only territory. The two vehicles I am eagerly awaiting are this all new 2016 Mazda CX-9 and the recently announced 2017 Acura MDX. They both look to have better bottom seat cushion bolstering in the photos. I will buy the one that offers the best combination of 4 adult person seating and the best driving experience. The extra seats are nice every once in a while but for me the need 90% of the time I am driving with 2 to 4 adults and that is what matters to me the most.
Now for a sidebar here Mr MotoMan, I want to ask you why you constantly refer to children who may be passengers in cars as "rugrats"? What is up with that? Sperm count down? Are you subliminally professing that you never intend to have children? Or that you feel people who do have children deserve to have their children referred to as "rugrats"? You mention often that you do not have children. Do you dislike children? Once or twice and I am not even thinking about it, but do you do know that you say this stuff incessantly? In many different videos? Why on earth do you do this?? From a pragmatic point of view I must say that you are literally dissing an entire burgeoning market segment. You must realize that these children will grow up soon and that they will become actual paying consumers that pay for things like advertising on TH-cam. Which is why you have a TH-cam channel, right? You must also realize that at some point even YOUR parents decided to have a child in you and we all know that without you we would not have your wonderful TH-cam channel. Since you live in one of the most progressive cities in the world, could you stop with the rugrats please?
Wow..thats a lot..its probably something he does unconsciously.. i have no children myself..an i picked up on it..only i sometime say "offspring" until 1 person commented on it..it was just something i did..doesnt necessarily mean he hates kids or anything..Oh and the CX9 is out in dealers know..beautiful car.
Great job mazda! my only concern is at the high trim level there should be a v6 power plant option for those who needs more power to compliment the luxury finish. other competitors have power options so i hope zoom zoom can zoom in on it soon.
I just drove the GT version which is 41k I'll probably recommend that one the difference is on the wood , napa leather and I believe the sensor that lets the suv stop by itself in case needed . I have a cx5 and the driving and feeling on the cx9 is abysmal not mentioning the quietness in the cx 9 . Good job Mazda !
The problem with the $45,000 vehicles mentioned are that they're base vehicles. In the case of BMW/Audi that'll get you tires, a motor, doors, and a steering wheel. Want auto dimming mirrors? That's a $3,000 package. Same with Volvo even. I've yet to see an XC90 in a lot that stickers for less than $55,000 while I can pick up a Grand Touring CX-9 (Everything but the wood and leather) for ~$41,000. We're really impressed with the CX-9, right now it's the pick to replace our TDI.
I will be cross shopping the Signature trim level Mazda CX-9 and Volvo T5 in the future, the difference in price would be about $3800 to dollars between the two, the Volvo costing more. I have not driven either as yet, however I am drawn to the Volvo's panoramic sunroof being that I live in Portland, Oregon and want to take advantage of any and all sunlight. The Volvo brand name and customer service you receive will also carry weight in my decision making process. I have seen both vehicles in person and they are sharp inside and out but I really wish Mazda had gone with a panoramic sunroof, I think it is the only missed opportunity in this CX-9.
Love the detail in your videos.
Cheers,
Aspen
Why not heated steering wheel?
Dave C's video from winter testing showed a mule with a heated wheel switch next to driver's seat heat switch. Did that not make it to the final iteration of the car? A huge oversight for a car to be sold in the 10+ freezing cold states in northern USA. I don't get that strategy and would like to hear Mazda's explanation behind it. Please.
Oddly enough, Canadian versions come with it. US customers screwed again. Kinda sad the amount of omissions Mazda made with the CX-9. While I would still consider buying one, they're going to lose many sales just because of some missing features. Costs a billion to develop a new model, you don't want to lose lots of sales because of a couple missing features. Reading the internet has revealed that people won't buy because of no V6, no panoramic roof, no ventilated seats, limited adjustability in seats, and no Android Auto/Apple Car Play. They ignore everything that it does better than the competition. They're only concerned by the feature list.
My Kia Soul has front cooled and heated seats, rear heated seats, heated steering wheel, panoramic, Android Auto. I would only change it for a car that has the same features.
just purchased the 2016 pearl white signature series for 45k. im a honda guy, have only ownes hondas, so test drove the honda pilot before the mazda. to my surprise when i opened the door and sat in this cx9 i was sold. what a different experience the interior was. the engine power is a little down from the honda but u couldn't tell from much of a difference because of the torque. cx9 surprised me quite a bit with its pacakaging. looks a lot sleeker than the pilot and highlander. debadge this suv and u wouldnt be able able to tell its a mazda especially when sitting in the driver seat.
Moto man how is the acceleration compare to rivals
Does it have remote start, heated rear seats and steering?
That torque comment "1,500 rpm to like 15,500 rpm" literally made me LOL...what a great comment...
he said CX-3 CUBED everyone just gonna let the fact that 3 cubed is 3x3x3 = 27 not 9, no? okay guess not
I would prefer a standard sunroof over the panoramic variety. I hadn't thought about the higher weight of a panoramic sunroof affecting the center of gravity but that is a good point too. For me the first reason I prefer a standard sunroof is that the covers that keep the sun out are usually solid and keep ALL of the sun out. Just about all of the "screens" to block out the sun on a panoramic roof have been partially translucent letting sun come through. That's a problem here in Florida and I suspect in places like Arizona, New Mexico, Texas Nevada and other places with brutal sunshine. Also I would expect that there may be more issues with leaking, creaking and breaking with the mechanics in the larger panoramic roofs years down the road. So for me, the standard sunroof is just fine.
On another note, I have been looking at a Kia Sorento EX V6 with Premium Package or the SX V6 as a a possible next vehicle. A Kia Sorento SX V6 has an MSRP of $38,600 as per the Kia website. That is vs the 2016 Mazda CX-9 Touring that has an MSRP of $35,970 as per the MazdaUSA website. At that price, I would expect that the CX-9 is going to draw sales away from Sorento. The two SUV's have much the same features. The Mazda is almost $3,000 less. I am not sure if the V6 on the Sorento is worth the extra money vs the turbo 4 in the Mazda. I haven't driven the Mazda of course but it sure looks nice. Sure the Kia has the panoramic sunroof but I would say the Mazda brand still has slightly more cachee than Kia, Zoom Zoom as it were, but Kia is catching up. Also I wonder which dealership network, Mazda or Kia, would be more willing to deal on those MSRP's. What does everybody think about this match-up? 2016 Mazda CX-9 Touring vs 2017 Kia Sorento SX V6?
CX9
What about the AWD system in thr CX-9 that overloads and shuts off resorting to FWD in incline and diagonal test on youtube?
This is a very good looking vehicle inside and out
Thanks Motoman, by any chance we can see this engine in the smaller CX-5?
Good suggestion . . . I wouldn't be surprised if Dave has made one in his free time and taking it to tracks . . . :)
Thanks, Moto-Man. Another great review. In general, I would much rather buy a car in a lower class with all the bells and whistles rather than buy a base car in a higher class. So a base CX-9 or any other car in base trim is not an option. As for the other choice, I seriously doubt you can get an XC-90 or an X5 or any other luxury or near-luxury SUV with the same level of equipment on the Signature Series CX-9 for anything near $44k.
Pano roofs are over rated. I'm looking down the road, are they part of the roof or are they held in place by rubber seals that can leak? If that's the case what a nightmare to repair. Are they tinted all that extra sunlight will age the leather more quickly. How about roof integrity ? Is it a disadvantage in a roll over?
The new Volvo XC90 is still my favorite family hauler... I do own a 2014 Highlander however bought when it first came out. Reliability and practicality were the top factors. Not sure how the CX-9 will age, or any of the other Euro luxury brands options. We'll see what data CR surveys shows.
Do you know if it has Apple car play? Is the Diesel engine coming or is it a myth ?
+Christian Alarcón We did chat about it . . . So as of now, no Apple CarPlay but the folks at Mazda did confirm it is on the way and not just for the CX9.
Moto- Did the CX-9 tester you drove have 93 octane gasoline in its tank? If not, perhaps that would explain why the turbo was not as peppy in the higher rev range? Mazda tells us that with 87 octane gasoline the car has about 227 horsepower, not 250 with 93 octane. If not, please let us know. Also, please let us know on a scale of 1-10 perhaps your overall impressions with the the car as a whole and if you would recommend someone buying it.
+jpmackin Being that I was driving the car in California, I can only *guess* that the Mazda folks had 91 octane in the cars as 93 is not on offer here. As for a recommendation, as I mentioned in the outro - I feel in the lower parts of the grade walk this walks away from the competition. However, when you get to the model we were driving, a great car but at US$44,000, I would have a hard time deciding between this or a couple more bucks for the Volvo or something along that lines.
Thanks Moto and I forgot to say great videos!
+MotoManTV At that price point if you want to stay in non-luxury, the Sorento is a much better value buy.
Sorento's small tires, little ground clearance, shorter wheel base, pushed me to the new Mazda CX9. Had both a Sorento and the bigger Santa Fe Limited, they're high value rides but the new CX9 has them beat in the things important to me, like not having the massive hole in the roof.
Tires even if smaller are not an issue with Sorento as handling and ride quality are pretty good and not to mention CX9 tires will be expensive to replace. Kia not only managed to provide a roomier interior in the Sorento than the CX-9 but also kept the exterior dimensions much smaller with same curb weight and a smooth, powerful and a reliable V6. Turbo reliability is still suspect. On top of that Sorento offers more seat adjustments, ventilated front and heated rear seats, 3rd row AC vents, pana roof, auto liftgate, better infotainment, more 3rd row room, torque vectoring AWD, around view monitor, better radar cruise, almost equally luxurious and quiet interior, equal handling, better towing and hitch capacities, better gauges better dealer and service network and lastly a better warranty.
Sounds clearly like a much higher value than CX9. Only thing Sorento lacks is rain sensing wipers, auto high beam control, dual exhausts, led headlights, higher mpg - all very small considerations for a family hauler.
I'm not buying the weight thing re: the panoramic sunroof. You said Dave weighed the sunroof mechanism of the CX-9 as 15 LBs and the pano roof of a Mini at 53 LBs. This doesn't, however, add/subtract for the sheet metal and framing of the roof, which is silly. Gotta talk apples for apples. A pano roof typically covers the roof from rail to rail, whereas the typical Mazda sunroof is 4 to 6 inches from the roof rails on both sides, meaning the area covered from one option to the other has a different combination of materials in the same square footage. For every square foot of panoramic sunroof, you're deleting steel, steel rib framing, sound batts (which could be integral with...) and headliner material. I'm an Architect and often sit in rooms to discuss with clients and designers what your building's compromises are going to be for usability vs aesthetics vs cost. I'm guessing Mazda's thought process with the sunroof vs pano roof option was based on "let's get this thing built and choose our battles wisely". Bringing a Skyactiv turbo 4 cylinder AWD drivetrain to market to haul around 5,000 lbs worth of vehicle with occupants - after the abysmal results with a similar turbo 4 cylinder/AWD setup in the CX-7 - had to be THE priority for this vehicle. Getting all that right was integral to their current and future success, not the sexy sunroof. My 2 cents.
Fact of the matter is that a panoramic roof does add a lot of weight in the worst spot even though you're deleting the metal in that place. Glass is heavier than steel but it's the other modifications needed that adds a bunch of other weight. In the same way that a soft top convertible weights a lot more than the regular hard top. The whole rest of the upper structure has to be reinforced. You don't simply cut a whole in the roof and stick a panoramic roof in.
are the turn signals LEDs as well?
I spec'ed my Macan with no glass on the roof for the reasons you describe. I think their unit is closer to 100 pounds
I had been searching for an SUV with great tech, sharp design, and something fun to drive. Did not want something that looked like a Dad mobile. I had come down to the Pilot, Highlander, and Durango. The Durango had the look but felt like a tank driving and the touch screen was too cluttered.. The Highlander and Pilot lacked very much on the exterior look and their tech was meh at best IMO. Have been driving a 2014 Civic and thought the Pilot's tech wasn't refreshing enough from Honda for me to drive it. And Toyota's Highlander has a cluttered feel with buttons lined up and down the side of the touch screen. I stumbled upon the CX-9, loved the look and design, took it for a test drive and loved it more. It checked all of the boxes for me. Super smooth to drive. Didn't feel heavy. Really easy to navigate the menus during driving without reaching for the touch screen. HUD is a nice touch and the best part is that I don't think this car looks like a kid carrier as much as other cars in its class. The only negative I found with it was that the towing capacity wasnt as substantial as I liked but it gets the job done towing a jet ski.
As far as comparing it to luxury models I'm confused with this guys question. Most of those models start at 45k+ and in order to adequately equip them with similar tech, seating, and AWD you have to hit around the 55k+ mark. So yeah I'm def gonna stick with getting the Mazda.
I think Mazda here is mixing priorities for this segment. Sure, handling is important for a big car like this but they are cutting corners in the wrong places like a pana roof, smartphone integration, around view monitor, full range adjustable seats, ventilated seats, heated rear seats which Sorento has along with a thigh support as well as more combined legroom. With so much of weight savings, the car is not lighter than a Sorento or a Highlander. The torque curve is sounding disappointing to me. Sounds like a big long stroke v-twin (I am a motorcycle nut) that doesn't have the oomph in the midrange. I would prefer a flat torque curve that pulls all the way. I am a 14' Mazda6 owner and I was almost decided on the new CX-9 until I found the Sorento. This segment needs more luxury, comfort features than the CX-9 provides, sadly. All this can be done with keeping good handling and engine dynamics. Seems like Mazda is still a bit confused.
I am beginning my research to replace my 2013 Santa Fe XL or LWB in the US...not because i dislike it...it is and has been a fantastic vehicle. I simply like, for the right or wrong reason, to replace every 3-4 years and try something different. Before my SF, had a 09 Highlander, and ugh, my first experience with Toyota "quality" did not meet expectations. And based on forum comments, my issues were not isolated to me. Important to me are features and aesthetics. Highlander exterior and especially interior are just blah. Pilot exterior....vanilla...its just there. That may be okay for some, not for me.
The 9 is a nice looking vehicle, inside and out. Stepped into one (a GT i think) in a showroom and found the interior a bit claustrophobic. Very narrow due to wide console. Pano roof decision is logical, but few are going to be taking this vehicle to the track or hitting on-ramps at 80 mph. The pano roof in my 2013 Santa Fe does not get a ton of use in real hot weather...it's just too hot. But when cooler out, it's awesome to have all that natural light and opening it up to get that fresh air. So no pano is a bit of a let down for me. Another thing....no cooled or vented seats? WTF? My 2013 SF has them!!! And i use them alot in hot weather. Thankfully, the Cdn models get heated steering wheel.
Luxury comparisons are a farce. In Cda, the cx9 signature is just over $50K. Any luxury competitors are going to be $15-$20K more once you add all the packages to get similar tech and features. So why do people insist on comparing apples to oranges?
I'm currently driving a VW Tiguan loaner with a pano roof. I HIGHLY enjoy the spacious feeling it provides, but whether it's the overall tuning of the vehicle (which is soft) or the high center of gravity, it doesn't inspire confidence around corners. Shame with the 4Motion that grips for days.
If the drive felt relatively the same with the pano roof then yes. If it would make the SUV drive like all the other mainstream SUV's then absolutely not.
Warning!!!! around 5:45 turn down your volume especially if you have head phones on. Auto journalist gets excited by bird. LOL
Hey MotoMan - try comparing apples to apples vs oranges. The comparable BMW x35i would be in the mid 50s once you add all the requisite option packages. Thx volvo xc90 T5 AWD (which is another turbo 4 engine and likely a better comparable) optioned up to the Mazda signature model where everything is std puts the volvo @ $51K (with destination) or $6K more than the Mazda signature model @ $45K (including destination). That's 13.5% more expensive.
So to answer your question - the Mazda really has no comparison vs. the other luxury and/or near luxury models.
All turbos?
Looks really good but price can be a deal breaker. If price is concisely less than the new Q7 or my ultimate favorite LR4 this can be a future option. I like it. We drive 2015 Q7 Miami FL. Best regards MOTO
From a pure driving stand point I'm not a fan of panoramic roofs, more weight. Although the wife and I just picked up a 2016 XC90 R-Design with a panoramic roof. We live in Dallas and I'm just waiting to get caught in a hailstorm to see how it stands up...
Dude, calm down, it's just a bird.
I'm actually glad there's no panoramic roof. In fact, if they can delete the regular sunroof and add a full carbon fiber roof, that will be ever better.
Yes indeed it needs a panoramic roof at least as an option so you can decide. The gear shifter takes up way too much room that is wasted where they could have moved the cup holders up as you literally have to bend your wrist to pick it up.
Towing capabilities?
Well done.
Great looking car.
The roof? No sun roof. I've had it on a few cars and eventually didn't use it. So I can do without it. I would prefer the lower center of gravity.
Pano roof : Yes that's one of the big selection criteria for buying the car. That's why i skipped on CX-5
Very few compact CUV's offer panoramic roofs. Which one did you buy?
2017 Kia Sportage 2.4L full option was still less than Mazda CX5 cost.
But i like the way CX5 felt like a sedan while driving.
My Kia Soul has it.
I kept up with most of that about the SkyActiv engine right until he got to the 4-3 header and creating pressure feedback... then I gave up.
i don't buy an SUV for a sporty experience. i buy it for space and comfort so this is a great car for that.
Definitely go for the signature... 2 kids, Dubai, love to take the family on cook outs in the desert. I feel the tech and space in the CX9 are just enough to enjoy driving but not feel I'm abusing a high end luxury SUV such as the Q7 or XC90. And with this price point... Makes a lot of sense. The pilot is very utilitarian but frankly an oversized boring CRV. And then there is knowing that you're buying in to a company with a real purpose much like Volvo. Other competition are the grand Cherokee... But only 5 seats... So on days I have family join... We'll need 2 cars and I want to feel like have the option to fit all. As for what's missing in this vehicle... Definitely would have wanted the panoramic roof.. It gives the 3rd row a feel of spaciousness. Also makes it feel more luxurious. Also... Really don't understand why there are no paddle shifters that allow us to be in control of shifting at points where the torque just dies out.
my g/f loves the high end model interior and
it might be enough to be a win for her.
for me... i think the ambivalent performance of the engine is
a question mark... is it enough? for $ 44K i'm expecting something
of a rug rate rocket.
Thanks motoman for the test . I would like to see unfamiliar cars like mitsubishi montero and outlander cuz I have alot of Questions about mitsubishi. I loved CX9 so much but I m not with killing v6 engine . I wanted to see same specs in CX5 and powerfull v6 engine CX9 . I would choose same level of crossover honestly I ll go for nissan murano . Which has v6 engine and well design .
I would pick Touring trim but want 20 inch rims on it and FWD.... at 35K is sounds like a steal.... I live in Florida .
I have a Buick Enclave and love the Panarama roof. However it really for the kids who don't give a rip. also, this roof adds to the bottom line. Yes it nice but not a deal killer for me.
As long as the vehicle has a sunroof, then I'm happy. As far as the interior on this thing...its down right delicious! I think I would be happy with owning this vs a luxury brand such as a BMW.
From MD, and I would choose the Mazda, which is ironic since I've never looked at them before. The reason why...well, first the GLA is crap. The GLC, which isn't in its size class, at $44k doesn't have anything in it and nether does the BMW X3. Sure they probably have better driving dynamics, but I live in Maryland just north of DC, the traffic is horrible most times of the day, I'm worried about features way more than driving dynamics. Now, its more in line with the GLE and the X5 size wise, but their bases are in the 50's, a full ten grand more than where this thing tops out, and to be honest...this looks nicer on the inside. The BMW and Mercedes look plain on the inside. Now the RX is just as nice, but you still have a price issue. It appears that Mazda figured out exactly where this thing needed to be price wise to attract people who want something nicer than a Highlander or Pilot (which end at about this price bracket as well) but really can't justify the higher end Premium vehicles which really don't give you that much for the money anyway. Its a middle market car of sorts.
We would pick this over all the others @ 40-65 thousand with a gas engine[best engineering approach and mpg for what it's segmented] because of the quality[all round plus it's welds are not covered/hidden by plastic panelling like an Acura MDX(sound vehicle) @ 65000], content[has all the same bells and wistles] yes all round value[45000 for the signature].