Topic: Test Drive: 2013 Mazda CX-9 GT AWD

[Autos_Editor]

Paul combines a moving job with a road trip in the spacious and stylish Mazda CX-9.

Read More...

[dewey9315]

Nice looking vehicle, really like the wheels. I'd still, however, go after one of the GM triplets if this was the type of vehicle was I was looking for.

[JohnnyMac]

Some nice styling improvements.  Personally I think if I was in the market for a 3rd row SUV I'd probably look at the new Hyundai Santa Fe XL or the Nissan Pathfinder.  I just think those two offer more for less less money and probably a more efficient set up as well.  But I will give Mazda credit for making one of the best looking 3rd row SUV's out there right now.

[Frontier1]

I really like the new Mazda face look.  I suspect the 3 will follow suit.

[Spec5]

We actually looked very briefly at one of these before buying our Odyssey. $40k entry price for AWD was a deal breaker though - and I disagree with the author I think this vehicle is intended to be an entry level luxury piece.

[dewey9315]

I really like the new Mazda face look.  I suspect the 3 will follow suit.

   I'm glad to see the smiley face is going away.

Nice looking vehicle, really like the wheels. I'd still, however, go after one of the GM triplets if this was the type of vehicle was I was looking for.

If I was in the market for a 7 passanger SUV, the Highlander would be my first choice, the Mazda CX9 second. The GM triplets wouldn't even hit the radar for me.

Isn't the Highlander really a 6.5 passenger SUV? I thought they had a makeshift seat that fit between the 2nd row.

[Solstice2006]

The Mazda CX-9 is a decent 7 passenger vehicle.  It handles well, has good interior materials, good exterior styling.  But falls short on the utility aspect.  As with most Mazda SUV, no roof rails.  The CX-9 seems to have the lowest towing capacity (3500lbs), the GM triplets can do 5200lbs, the Highlander 5000lbs, the Flex 4200lbs, Pathfinder 5000lbs. The fuel economy needs some work too.  Pathfinder, Pilot, and Highlander do better. 

If it gets a complete redesign, it would be interesting to see what engine is used.  With the partnership with Ford gone, how long can Mazda use this duratec V6? Weight reduction is required as well.  And rethinking those dumb packages. $2500 for Navi, which also includes power liftgate? 

[PJ]

I forgot they made this, have they sold any yet?  Can't remember if I have ever seen one.

 

[Benhaze]

Although the CX-9 handles well and can actually be fun to drive (for a fairly large SUV) I don't understand why Mazda spent any money on this platform. Sales are dismal (its strong attributes are clearly marginal for this market) and frankly the vehicle is a bit outdated (no significant improvement in 6 years for a vehicle in this class is an eternity).

Don't get me wrong; I liked the vehicle very much and seriously considered buying one in 2007 but I, and I suspect as many other potential customers, could not stomach the $50k price tag for a loaded model that was unproven, sold by dealers who cared very little about customer satisfaction (had 2 Mazda6s at the time so I speak by experience) and had limited towing capacity. Mazda was pricing the CX-9 $10,000 over the US market and got what is deserved IMO.

If Mazda had price the model more aggressively (as it did in the US), it may have succeeded in selling enough vehicles to create a model identity and appeal to a broad customer base in Canada. Then perhaps Mazda could have been successful with its pricing plan.

The best CX-9 was the 2008MY when it introduced the 3.7L and the first generation was the best one esthetically speaking. I find the new rear redo very generic looking and why put the new front corporate design on a vehicle that has nothing to do with Mazda's new direction??

[Solstice2006]

Although the CX-9 handles well and can actually be fun to drive (for a fairly large SUV) I don't understand why Mazda spent any money on this platform. Sales are dismal (its strong attributes are clearly marginal for this market) and frankly the vehicle is a bit outdated (no significant improvement in 6 years for a vehicle in this class is an eternity).

Don't get me wrong; I liked the vehicle very much and seriously considered buying one in 2007 but I, and I suspect as many other potential customers, could not stomach the $50k price tag for a loaded model that was unproven, sold by dealers who cared very little about customer satisfaction (had 2 Mazda6s at the time so I speak by experience) and had limited towing capacity. Mazda was pricing the CX-9 $10,000 over the US market and got what is deserved IMO.

If Mazda had price the model more aggressively (as it did in the US), it may have succeeded in selling enough vehicles to create a model identity and appeal to a broad customer base in Canada. Then perhaps Mazda could have been successful with its pricing plan.

The best CX-9 was the 2008MY when it introduced the 3.7L and the first generation was the best one esthetically speaking. I find the new rear redo very generic looking and why put the new front corporate design on a vehicle that has nothing to do with Mazda's new direction??

I understand what you are saying, since the CX-9 doesn't sell very well, why invest in a minor update?  The Mazda6 (2nd generation) wasn't doing very well.  And it need an update more than the CX-9, so Mazda is updating their lineup with the biggest selling segments, the mid-size CUV market (with the CX-5), and the midsize sedan (the new Mazda6), next will come the compact with the new Mazda3.  With limited resources, Mazda did what it could and provide a minor update.  This is still a 1st gen model, just an update, Mazda wants to provide the entire lineup with a similiar look, which makes sense, so the consumer can help identify with the lineup.  Just like Chevy has the same front bumper across the board.

There are others in this segment that are aging as well, the Highlander is from 2007, with an update in 2010.  The new one will be a 2014 model.  The Honda Pilot is from 2009, with an update in 2012.  Sure they are selling much better, because of the pricing, better packaging, and proven generations before. 

I think this segment is the toughest for Mazda, they have no v6 of their own, and no platform of their own.  So either they need to develop one, or partner up with somebody, or abandon it.

[Koolblue2]

Hmmm...lots of comments here on this article.

Why i purchased:
I purchased a CX9 in 2009 on the advice of my mechanic, who said, that it was considered one of the most reliable vehicles on the market even though it had been out for only two years. Yep....he has been quite right so far....at 80,000 km the car has been bullet proof.  My wife is the primary driver and she is hard on cars...ask my E46. Two of my wife's friends have the GM triplets(one each)...and they  have been quite frustrated with several major warranty repairs for each vehicle, and these were highly rated dealers. My track record with 2 previous GM vehicles was even worse once they were out of warranty.
 
AND WE NEEDED A VEHICLE FOR OUR THREE CHILDREN!


As for fuel mileage:
i see much higher numbers than the reviewer did, however, perhaps he had a CX9 with few km and engine break-in is still not over, and has a much heavier foot when it comes time to pass. We see 650 to 700 km per tank on drives to Sault Ste Marie and to Eastern Ontario (and thats with 5 passengers and luggage). 

Space:
i guess everyones' idea of space is different, i like the space offered by the GM triplets, and wish the CX9 has 2-3 inches more interior width, and had about 6 inches more interior depth. Though the current space is more than adequate for the overwhelming majority of our needs.


Dealers:
yep...spotty service depending on their mood, day of the week, my appearance  etc.....


Heated Seats:

way too hot ...but at least it cycles off and on, so some cool down happens , in 2010, the heated seats received 2 heat settings, our 2009 has 1


OEM Tires:

Bridgstone SUCK! want grip in the rain? oh, that would be another tire brand
Yes we have winter tires, on 18 inch rims....they are fantastic combined with the AWD....just two weeks ago, pulled me out of the ditch when i pulled over to snap some landscape pictures, and I had not realized  that the shoulder was not a gentle slope, but in fact a water runoff buried by 2 foot deep snow. 

Sunroof:
yep ....small  in comparison to this vehicle

Dashboard
a mixed bag for these eyes...easy to read instrumentation, that can change colours from orange to blue....however the center stack is typical stuck on afterthought design, especially with regards to the audio system....which by the way is awful sounding....did someone say BOSE? (yep thats the one)

Heating| A/C
gets warm quickly in the winter  and with second row controls is nice in the summer for A/C.

BSM

blind spot monitor...some days it saves my bacon,when i have difficulty seeing that little miata/moped in my blind spot 

the big questions for us: would i buy again...sure ...if you bring the price down

[sailor723]

^ Pet Peeve Alert!

I hate it when people talk about fuel economy and bring up how many kilometers they got to a tank. It means absolutely NOTHING!....and is useless as a measure of fuel economy. How big is the tank? How much fuel was left in it when you refueled?   


end rant 

[Koolblue2]

^ Pet Peeve Alert!

I hate it when people talk about fuel economy and bring up how many kilometers they got to a tank. It means absolutely NOTHING!....and is useless as a measure of fuel economy. How big is the tank? How much fuel was left in it when you refueled?   


end rant 

oooohhhhh
        

pretty sure this thread was for people who read the article

[sailor723]

^ Pet Peeve Alert!

I hate it when people talk about fuel economy and bring up how many kilometers they got to a tank. It means absolutely NOTHING!....and is useless as a measure of fuel economy. How big is the tank? How much fuel was left in it when you refueled?   


end rant 

oooohhhhh
        

pretty sure this thread was for people who read the article

I wasn't talking about the article but rather your post......

"We see 650 to 700 km per tank on drives to Sault Ste Marie and to Eastern Ont" was what I was referring to as being useless information

[Solstice2006]

^ Pet Peeve Alert!

I hate it when people talk about fuel economy and bring up how many kilometers they got to a tank. It means absolutely NOTHING!....and is useless as a measure of fuel economy. How big is the tank? How much fuel was left in it when you refueled?   


end rant 

oooohhhhh
        

pretty sure this thread was for people who read the article

I think he means in the article it mentions the fuel tank is 76 L.  But I know what he means, some people take the time to get a more accurate reading.

As a side note, some people have mentioned bad service at Mazda dealerships.  I have only had to use the dealership once for a problem with one of the lights on the dash, that would keep burning out.  It was warranty work.  But I never use the dealer for any mainteance from any manufacturer so I guess my opinion is pretty limited.

[OliverD]

Can't complain about the service at my local dealer. Their prices seem reasonable (maybe slightly higher than my preferred independent shop) and the key thing is that I can often make an appointment for the next day. Last week I called at noon for an appointment and by the end of the next day I had my new brakes and lower control arm installed.

[carcrazed]

Hmmm...lots of comments here on this article.

Why i purchased:
I purchased a CX9 in 2009 on the advice of my mechanic, who said, that it was considered one of the most reliable vehicles on the market even though it had been out for only two years. Yep....he has been quite right so far....at 80,000 km the car has been bullet proof.  My wife is the primary driver and she is hard on cars...ask my E46. Two of my wife's friends have the GM triplets(one each)...and they  have been quite frustrated with several major warranty repairs for each vehicle, and these were highly rated dealers. My track record with 2 previous GM vehicles was even worse once they were out of warranty.
 
AND WE NEEDED A VEHICLE FOR OUR THREE CHILDREN!


As for fuel mileage:
i see much higher numbers than the reviewer did, however, perhaps he had a CX9 with few km and engine break-in is still not over, and has a much heavier foot when it comes time to pass. We see 650 to 700 km per tank on drives to Sault Ste Marie and to Eastern Ontario (and thats with 5 passengers and luggage). 

Space:
i guess everyones' idea of space is different, i like the space offered by the GM triplets, and wish the CX9 has 2-3 inches more interior width, and had about 6 inches more interior depth. Though the current space is more than adequate for the overwhelming majority of our needs.


Dealers:
yep...spotty service depending on their mood, day of the week, my appearance  etc.....


Heated Seats:

way too hot ...but at least it cycles off and on, so some cool down happens , in 2010, the heated seats received 2 heat settings, our 2009 has 1


OEM Tires:

Bridgstone SUCK! want grip in the rain? oh, that would be another tire brand
Yes we have winter tires, on 18 inch rims....they are fantastic combined with the AWD....just two weeks ago, pulled me out of the ditch when i pulled over to snap some landscape pictures, and I had not realized  that the shoulder was not a gentle slope, but in fact a water runoff buried by 2 foot deep snow. 

Sunroof:
yep ....small  in comparison to this vehicle

Dashboard
a mixed bag for these eyes...easy to read instrumentation, that can change colours from orange to blue....however the center stack is typical stuck on afterthought design, especially with regards to the audio system....which by the way is awful sounding....did someone say BOSE? (yep thats the one)

Heating| A/C
gets warm quickly in the winter  and with second row controls is nice in the summer for A/C.

BSM

blind spot monitor...some days it saves my bacon,when i have difficulty seeing that little miata/moped in my blind spot 

the big questions for us: would i buy again...sure ...if you bring the price down

It's crazy that you have to look good to get good service at a dealership.   

[Fobroader]

Good review!! One of the few CUVs that actually look good, I like this thing.

[OliverD]

It's too bad that Mazda didn't take this as an opportunity to drastically decrease the price of the CX-9 and make it competitive with the new Pathfinder. Similarly equipped the Pathfinder can significantly undercut the CX-9 and offers more features.