Topic: 2016 CX-9 is out!

[OliverD]

I'm actually a little sad to read about the 4,000rpm torque drop-off...stating that consumers "rarely venture above that figure" is a complete cop-out.

Is it though? Kind of refreshing to see a company build a car and worry more about actual customers over journalists us forum dwellers. 

That's why the manual is dead........

Touché.

Though I think part of the reason the manual is dead is because North Americans insist on buying what's on the lot, which means something grey with an automatic.

[johngenx]

Sharp.  Very sharp!

[dkaz]

Most CX-9 buyers are looking to effortlessly cruise on the highway with a quiet engine running at low RPMs anyway.

Unfortunately Mazda found out that enthusiasts don't make them money. At least they have their new MX-5.

[bridgecity]

She's a beauty as far as midsize crossovers go.  Makes the new Pilot look bad.  I'm with some of the others though on the engine, too bad.  Was hoping for a six.  Oh well.

[EV-Light]

She's a beauty as far as midsize crossovers go.  Makes the new Pilot look bad.  I'm with some of the others though on the engine, too bad.  Was hoping for a six.  Oh well.

let's see how it will perform BC...the low end torque might help get it going up to reasonable speeds, so why not? now if it performs anything like the 2.3T in the Explorer - good Gosh I will pass.

[bridgecity]

She's a beauty as far as midsize crossovers go.  Makes the new Pilot look bad.  I'm with some of the others though on the engine, too bad.  Was hoping for a six.  Oh well.

let's see how it will perform BC...the low end torque might help get it going up to reasonable speeds, so why not? now if it performs anything like the 2.3T in the Explorer - good Gosh I will pass.

I'm sure it will perform fine. I would have like to see the horsepower number closer to the 275 mark, but really, this is a family hauler.  I'd be more concerned with owning a small displacement turbo in a larger vehicle for the long term.

[Blueprint]

93 octane?  Where can I buy this?

California 

Power ratings on 91 octane would be more Canadian-spec IMHO.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

93 octane?  Where can I buy this?

If you were in the West, Husky:

Octane 87. Regular with ethanol (available in all provinces)
Octane 89. Mid-grade (regular blended with premium, available in all provinces)
Octane 91. Premium - no ethanol (available in all provinces)
Octane 92. Premium with ethanol (SK & MB)
Octane 94. Premium Plus with ethanol, the highest octane fuel available (AB, SK & MB)

[Blueprint]

93 octane?  Where can I buy this?

If you were in the West, Husky:

Octane 87. Regular with ethanol (available in all provinces)
Octane 89. Mid-grade (regular blended with premium, available in all provinces)
Octane 91. Premium - no ethanol (available in all provinces)
Octane 92. Premium with ethanol (SK & MB)
Octane 94. Premium Plus with ethanol, the highest octane fuel available (AB, SK & MB)

Come to think of it, Petro Canada has a premium premium with 94 octane in QC. There's a price premium on this premium, though. I suspect most CX-9s will run on 87, some on 91.

[Blueprint]

For V6 lovers, current CX-9 advertised at 30,999$. The CX-9 almost always featured cash on the hood, so we'll see how the new one does. Sante Fe XL & Sorrento will be the main competitors, budget-wise.

[Noto]

She's a beauty as far as midsize crossovers go.  Makes the new Pilot look bad.  I'm with some of the others though on the engine, too bad.  Was hoping for a six.  Oh well.

It's not that I was hoping for a V6...the 2.5T I think can be the right-sized engine for this thing, especially if the weight is <4,000lbs.

And I've actually changed my mind re the 4,000rpm drop-off after sleeping on it.  The engine was tuned to be used for 90% of driving time rather than having peak #s in case of emergency, which may all be moot if the fall-off is gradual past 4,000rpm and there's still plenty of power.  It is also possible that the upshifts will keep the engine in its powerband until top gear (6th...).  The only time the engine will likely feel out of breath is while pushing it in 6th gear in terms of 110-140km/h.  Point = Drive defensively (as you should) and it won't matter.

[Solstice2006]

For V6 lovers, current CX-9 advertised at 30,999$. The CX-9 almost always featured cash on the hood, so we'll see how the new one does. Sante Fe XL & Sorrento will be the main competitors, budget-wise.

Really I thought it was only the last 3 years.  Not sure about those competitors for budget wise, look how Mazda has priced other vehicles in the past, not close to Hyundai, closer to Honda.  Same with interest rates, no deals there. 

[Noto]

If you were in the West, Husky:

Octane 87. Regular with ethanol (available in all provinces)
Octane 89. Mid-grade (regular blended with premium, available in all provinces)
Octane 91. Premium - no ethanol (available in all provinces)
Octane 92. Premium with ethanol (SK & MB)
Octane 94. Premium Plus with ethanol, the highest octane fuel available (AB, SK & MB & Ontario at Petro-Can)

Available, yes, but not the standard.  Petrocan, for example, has <10% EtOH in ALL fuel grades, including the 94 octane.  This was done for winter emissions, IIRC (and used year-round so as to not have to manufacture a further category of fuel).

Shell is the only true EtOH-free gas (V-Power 91 Octane only) in Ontario, with few exceptions.

[mazdaman007]

Wind noise on the passenger side is definitely going to be a problem

[Noto]

I'd say 3rd row seat comfort will be a bigger issue in the completed package

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Wind noise on the passenger side is definitely going to be a problem

 

[Fobroader]

Wind noise on the passenger side is definitely going to be a problem

[OliverD]

I'd say 3rd row seat comfort will be a bigger issue in the completed package

Didn't the original CX-9 have one of the most usable third rows in it class? I can recall these things being very well reviewed but man, that was eight freaking years ago. This redesign is long overdue.

[RoadRageous]

Were I in the market, my decision would come down to driveability, but based on specs, I'd choose the turbo over the (existing) V6:

"a 3.7L V6, putting out 273 hp at 6250 rpm and 270 lb-ft of torque at 4,250 rpm". And that's in a 4500 lb car!
The lighter weight of the 2016, and the +40lb torque should mean better acceleration.

I'm betting that in a Mazdaspeed, this engine will be tuned for a better top end.

[dkaz]

I've sat in the back seat of the CX-9 once, it's mildly better than a Mazda 5 but still not a place for adults to sit for more than an hour.