CD Article: 2007 Mazda CX-7

[CD_Editor]

First Drive:

"A vehicle with the utility of a compact SUV and the soul of a sports car," the 2007 Mazda CX-7 "heralds a new generation of crossover SUVs," says Michael La Fave.  The Nissan Murano is probably the closest thing to the CX-7 he reports, but the CX-7 "undercuts it significantly in price."   More...

[a4_tom]

I still don't like its proportion, especially the hindquarter. I am now putting all the hopes for the completely redesigned new CR-V, just wish its as significant as new Civic.

[Benhaze]

Excellent First drive article, the best I have read so far, by far, on this vehicle. To the author: 

Well I'm glad to read the powertrain and handling are very promising. I am still a little concerned with a 4 cyl. propelling 3900 lbs but according to this article, it is doing a fine job.

It seems Mazda has another hit with this one. I find the exterior design very appealing, except perhaps from a side view. The roof curvature spoils the otherwise pleasing proportions. The interior seems to be in a class of its own, at that price anyway.

[The Mighty Duck]

18" wheels are going to make snow tires pricey...  but the vehicle seems very well thought out and well priced.  I like the turbo four over a V6 too...  something a little more "trendy" or a trendy vehicle.

[si]

DING DING, WE HAVE A WINNER.

Congrats, Mazda, on a perfectly executed vehicle at a good price.  Even though it's a Mazda, it's got side airbags!

Were I in the market for a non-luxury SUV this would get my vote.  It would be a great car for the girlfriend to offset my coupe!

[johngenx]

$2000 extra for AWD?  Okay, what about $2K for AWD on the Mazda3-Sport?  A reaonably well equipped (not leather, etc, but AC, you know...) 3-sport AWD for $25K-ish?  Yow!

[G0dspd]

Looks like it's targeted specifically at the Murano ... it will be well received but it won't have the success of the 3 or the 6 because of it's price and "restrictions".  Still, looks like a great CUV.

the second row shows: it's damn tight, but Mazda figures that probably doesn't
matter as their target customers don't have kids yet, are just about to make some

Translation: We know our 2nd row is tight and we don't care!  Brutal honnesty ... I like it! 

[Prius]

Hmmm, when I read this article, I had many feelings for this new CX-7. First it told me it was inexpensive. That's good. I heard it'd be around $30,000. My eyes opened up a bit more when he said it was under $40k loaded. That's a really good deal. Then it started saying the rear seat is small, and the fuel economy. ~ 12.9/9.2 for the AWD model? I thought it was a turbocharged 2.3 litre 4 cylinder model with direct injection? Shouldn't it be more efficient? Especially with a 6-speed automatic transmission which, as the author said, has a nice tall sixth gear for cruising?

If the Murano's the direct competitor, it has it beat with a bigger, equally powerful engine (slightly less torque though) on a heavier vehicle all the while consuming less fuel (12.1/8.6). The RAV4 V6 with a larger engine, more power, slightly lighter and more rear space clocks in at (11.1/7.. Shows you the benefits of CVTs.

The CX-7's tyres sidewall height is in between the RAV4 and the Murano. I think to notice though. The Murano has less rear legroom than the CX-7 but I found the Murano fairly roomy at the back. Perhaps the author's 6' 5" frame won't fit but the rest of us will? Or is the design of the rear seat and maybe the backs of the front seats that make the CX-7 less comfortable?

[mdxtasy]

Article was OK.  Pictures are probably worse than Yap's ground zero view.  No rear seat shots....no cargo area shots.....all that was included was shots of the car surrounded by weeds.  I'm not sure what the car even looks like. 

This little cute ute looks pretty good on paper.  I'm not a big fan of the 'streak mark' on the seats....it's not as edgy as the FX in exterior design, but it looks pretty good.  It's not stunning by any means, but it does look distinctive in the otherwise plain jain small SUV market.

[smainville]

Hmmm, when I read this article, I had many feelings for this new CX-7. First it told me it was inexpensive. That's good. I heard it'd be around $30,000. My eyes opened up a bit more when he said it was under $40k loaded. That's a really good deal. Then it started saying the rear seat is small, and the fuel economy. ~ 12.9/9.2 for the AWD model? I thought it was a turbocharged 2.3 litre 4 cylinder model with direct injection? Shouldn't it be more efficient? Especially with a 6-speed automatic transmission which, as the author said, has a nice tall sixth gear for cruising?

If the Murano's the direct competitor, it has it beat with a bigger, equally powerful engine (slightly less torque though) on a heavier vehicle all the while consuming less fuel (12.1/8.6). The RAV4 V6 with a larger engine, more power, slightly lighter and more rear space clocks in at (11.1/7.. Shows you the benefits of CVTs.

The CX-7's tyres sidewall height is in between the RAV4 and the Murano. I think to notice though. The Murano has less rear legroom than the CX-7 but I found the Murano fairly roomy at the back. Perhaps the author's 6' 5" frame won't fit but the rest of us will? Or is the design of the rear seat and maybe the backs of the front seats that make the CX-7 less comfortable?

Hum...except that the RAV does not have a CVT.  The Murano has the best V6 in the world.  At 31k the CRV, X-Trail and RAV are all AWD, but not the CX, strange marketing move no?

[Snowman]

Article was OK.  Pictures are probably worse than Yap's ground zero view.  No rear seat shots....no cargo area shots.....all that was included was shots of the car surrounded by weeds.  I'm not sure what the car even looks like. 

This little cute ute looks pretty good on paper.  I'm not a big fan of the 'streak mark' on the seats....it's not as edgy as the FX in exterior design, but it looks pretty good.  It's not stunning by any means, but it does look distinctive in the otherwise plain jain small SUV market.

I am interested in checking one out having experienced many hours behind the wheel of a Murano. After driving the Pilot and Highlander the Murano is not a class leader in the mid size SUV market. The ride, cargo space, rattles, and “jerky” CVT put me off.

Mazda has always priced their new vehicles aggressively and this is another example. The CX-7 timing is perfect as the Pilot, Highlander and Murano are due for major re-freshening. I think right now the battle will be with the new and larger RAV4.

[Benhaze]

Prius, to add to your concern about the fuel economy, you also need to factor in the cost of premium fuel. Premium usually runs about 20% higher than regular, the fuel consumption cost is equivalent to 15.5L/100Km (city) and 11L/100Km (highway) for a SUV/CUV running on regular gas. The CX-7 will be significant more expansive to run than a RAV4 according to the official fuel economy ratings. This is actually comparable to the heavy full frame Nissan Pathfinder with a V6 4.0L engine ratings...

Though the pictures being not stellar, for once the official website has great pictures so it didn't bother me much.

I though the Murano had one of the largest cargo area with more than 80 cu. ft? That is one thing you can't fault the Murano for... But that CVT trans is also a turn off for me.

[Snowman]

Prius, to add to your concern about the fuel economy, you also need to factor in the cost of premium fuel. Premium usually runs about 20% higher than regular, the fuel consumption cost is equivalent to 15.5L/100Km (city) and 11L/100Km (highway) for a SUV/CUV running on regular gas. The CX-7 will be significant more expansive to run than a RAV4 according to the official fuel economy ratings. This is actually comparable to the heavy full frame Nissan Pathfinder with a V6 4.0L engine ratings...

Though the pictures being not stellar, for once the official website has great pictures so it didn't bother me much.

I though the Murano had one of the largest cargo area with more than 80 cu. ft? That is one thing you can't fault the Murano for... But that CVT trans is also a turn off for me.

The cargo space in the Murano is deceiving because of the angle of the hatch. It is not very usable when you compared to a Pilot or Highlander.

[a4_tom]

FX's cargo space is even more deceiving than Murano, with that sloppy C-pillar. The overall cargo space is less than many compact sportswagons.

[safristi]

at $40K it's no CUTE UTE....more an expensive  "DINK"'eh!! TOY...... .........but dahlin' I'm sure little Apple/Amber/Aristolia/Darwin/Pineapple/Starbucks will be more comfortable in the New Merc waggen

[Bullet Blue]

Is it the same "on demand" type of AWD system I'm assuming?

Oh and mazda REALLY needs to stop with the clear tail lights. They're overkilling it now. It does not look flattering on this vehicle or pretty much any other vehicle.

[safristi]

..ON a clear day ya can see a Mazda forever more.......da dee dah...!!!!!!

[Shnak]

Oh and mazda REALLY needs to stop with the clear tail lights. They're overkilling it now. It does not look flattering on this vehicle or pretty much any other vehicle.

Yeah but the little ricer kids love it! Mazda is clearly going after that crowd with those clear tail lights!

[Craig]

What a nice step up from the Tribute.  We've got our X-Trail, but were this out a year ago, I'd at least have taken a look.

[Howswedeitis]

Maybe pictures don't do this Mazda justice but I can't see what's so special
about its design. To be frank, I think it looks more than a little like the Nissan
which I guess is not necessarily a bad thing it's just that it's not the most
inspiring design to come out. I do hope it rides better than the Murano
however because that thing is brutal especially if you sit in the back
seat and happen to drive on Montreal roads.
I'm guessing the Ford version the Edge will be a better rounded
package than the Mazda...time will tell.