Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Mazda CX-7 vs. Nissan Murano

123457»

Comments

  • carlitos92carlitos92 Posts: 458
    Car And Driver has tested both, although a few years apart: 7.5 for the Murano, 7.9 for the CX-7.

    C/D is supposed to compensate for ambient temperature etc. during their tests, but who can tell what the range of production tolerances on engines is... I'll concede that the Murano appears to be faster on paper in this case, but I'll throw in that a difference that small really doesn't matter in the real world.

    (I'll also throw in that the turbo engines will gain a LOT more performance in cold weather than an NA V-6 will... ;) )
  • maltbmaltb Posts: 3,572
    I can visualize both accelerating at 9.8 meters/second when driven off a cliff. Does that count for having similar acceleration times?
  • tidestertidester Posts: 10,109
    I can visualize both accelerating at 9.8 meters/second when driven off a cliff.

    Actually, it's 9.8 meters/second2 - but you knew that. :)

    tidester, host
    SUVs and Smart Shopper
  • hpgatorhpgator Posts: 39
    lol beat me to it, tidester

    Perhaps he meant linear speed? ;)
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    However, I guarantee that the CX-9 doesn't have the back seat room of the Murano. It's an "adult" car while the CX-9 was made for families (only small children ever fit in 3rd rows anyway). I sat in the back of a Murano and was able to cross my legs with still about 6" of room to go (and I'm 6'1").

    The CX-9 has superior 2nd row leg room over the Murano. Also, it is apparent that you have never sat in a CX-9. I am 6'-3", and I can fit in the third row with relative ease.

    Yes, the CX-9 has more power and is designed to run on regular ONLY. No recommendation of 91, sans Murano.

    Btw, a fully loaded CX-9 is more expensive than a loaded Murano SL (FWD w/ touring and navigation).

    Um, a loaded Murano SE w/nav, moon roof, leather, memory seating, heated mirrors, etc. and AWD is $38,700. A loaded CX-9 GT with nav, AWD, similarly equipped is $38,730, and you get the 3rd row, more HP. With the CX-9, you get more for the money.

    I could go into extreme detail of both of these vehicle, but, you are better off going to mazdausa.com and nissanusa.com and see for yourself.
  • hpgatorhpgator Posts: 39
    aviboy, a fully loaded CX-9 is more expensive than a SL. Did I say SE AWD? I was comparing directly FWD SL with FWD CX-9 with the same options. I'm glad you decided to contort the numbers to fit your argument against mine when I clearly didn't list the options you have.

    Once again, if you want the 3rd row, go for it. The Murano obviously isn't catered to people with small children that could use the front row because I guarantee YOU never will nor will any full sized adult or teenager. Haven't you seen the CX-9 commercials? That is a "family of 4" car which is why I said murano is more for "adults only". Do you really want to go back and read what I wrote first? I highly doubt you sat back there "with ease" -- probably uncomfortable for any length of time, but I highly doubt you fit back there like it was a couch. Oh, and yes, I have sat in a CX-9. I like it, but for nearly $38,000 (I get a fully loaded SL murano w/navi for $33,000) I think I can go elsewhere.

    I've never owned either car so I'm not a homer for mazda or Nissan, but apparently if you so much as say anything counter to Mazda's being the best all time the homers will come out in full force.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    a fully loaded CX-9 is more expensive than a SL

    Define what trim of CX-9 are you talking about? Sport? Touring? Grand Touring? Since you said "fully loaded CX-9", I assume you meant Grand Touring. Since that is the top trim, I compared that to a fully loaded top of the line Murano, SE not SL, for an accurate comparison.

    Now, lest compare apples to apples, shall we? A "fully loaded Murano SL" as you say, which is the mid trim leval. We will compare that the the loaded mid trim of the CX-9, which is the Touring. A Murano SL w/ leather, DSC (added as option), Nav, sunroof and XM radio (comes with the Nav system) has an MSRP of $37,550. A CX-9 Touring with leather, DCS and RSC (std.), moon roof and Bose Audio system, Nav, and Sirius Radio (added as option to make comparo fair) has an MSRP of $36,637. Both vehicles are FWD, not AWD.

    I have taken a 30 minute drive in the rear seat of the CX-9, and I was ok. I did fit back there with ease, I am in them every day. Would I sit back there for a long road trip, or extended period of time? No, but it was designed for teens and children to be back their, not adults. The 2nd row and front seat are designed with tremendous comfort for the adult passengers. I know the Murano was designed for adults, that why I originally stated that the two do not compare. I believe this is how the convo started. The Murano competes with the CX-7, and the CX-9 is in a different class. That has been my point from the beginning. You confirmed that by stating "The Murano obviously isn't catered to people with small children..." That is the primary target of the CX-9, families with children.

    I've never owned either car so I'm not a homer for mazda or Nissan, but apparently if you so much as say anything counter to Mazda's being the best all time the homers will come out in full force.

    I would disagree with that. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. There are pro's and con's with every vehicle that every mfg makes. If you look in every thread Edmunds has to offer that compares vehicles against one another, you will see everyone seems to agree to disagree.

    Don't assume that I am bashing the Murano, because I am not. The Murano is a great vehicle, and sales have been fantastic. It just does not compare to the CX-9.
  • mike1111mike1111 Posts: 93
    Well my two cents on the argument is the CX-9 is nice and it was on my list.The only problem i had was it is a first year release and they always have problems.I've read the the stablity control in the CX-9 is very intrucive.One site even said it locked a front tire up coming out of a turn.We'll see how well the Mazda stacks up as more and more peolpe drive them.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    I've read the the stability control in the CX-9 is very intrucive.

    thats weird, I have the CX-9 on a road course with many twists and turns at high speeds, and the stability control never kicked in. It takes total loss of driver control before it kicks in.
  • taz16taz16 Posts: 29
    Wow TOTAL LOSS OF CONTROL before its kicks in thats not safe at all but anyway i know in the murano you can lock the AWD via button on until 30 mph, is there any button or switch on the CX-7 that can lock the AWD
  • vbbuiltvbbuilt Posts: 498
    Nope, AWD is continually active, but only transfers power to the rear wheels when necessary. ESC is continually active, as well. On the other hand, TCS can be deactivated, but it automatically reactivates when driving faster than 18 MPH.

    Vince.
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Posts: 1,676
    "AWD is continually active, but only transfers power to the rear wheels when necessary"

    Isn't that like being only a little pregnant :)

    In my mind unless some power is always going there...it's not continually active.
  • vbbuiltvbbuilt Posts: 498
    Your analogy is inaccurate. AWD is continually active. Depending on driving conditions, 0% to 50% of power can be transferred to the rear axle at any moment. It's seemless to the driver, typically, the driver has no way of know if this is occuring. It's only when you're in mud, oil, or ice/snow and wheels begin to slip, then you'd notice the power applied to the rear.

    Vince.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    OK, let me rephrase, my apologies.

    Once the wheels start to break, which is considered "losing control", DSC kicks in, regaining drive position, and keeping the driver in control...
  • extech2extech2 Posts: 120
    We drove the Murano and the CX-9 and they are completely different vehicles, each excellent in its own way. But I had a major problem with the rear visibility in the Mazda, such as backing out of a supermarket parking spot at night when there are a bunch of trucks or SUVs parked right next to us. I don't think I could back out without risking hitting something. I'm 5'10 and my wife is 5'1. She said she loved the CX-9 but would be uncomfortable backing it out from our garage or a parking spot. There is some distance between the driver and the back window, which isn't very large. In the Pilot we didn't have any problems backing out, it is shorter and has a huge rear window. The Murano rear window isn't large but it is closer to the driver, being a shorter car than the CX-9.
  • d_hyperd_hyper Posts: 130
    Try CX-7, the car mentioned in this thread
  • In that case please debate the comfort of the airbags. lol
  • vbbuiltvbbuilt Posts: 498
    "But I had a major problem with the rear visibility in the Mazda, such as backing out of a supermarket parking spot at night when there are a bunch of trucks or SUVs parked right next to us."

    You're going to encounter this problem no matter which vehicle you're driving. Large vehicles, such as the larger SUVs, pickups, and vans, when parked next to you, in adjacent parking slots, will block your view. It's like having a wall on either side of you. I always have to back out (creep out) very carefully, to the point where I can clearly see in both directions, then I can back out a bit more quickly, with confidence, that I'm not going to hit anything. Drivers of the Murano, CX-7, CX-9, RDX, Outlander, Tribeca and other sleeker, squatter vehicles will naturally be at a disadvantage when parked next to taller Escalades, Suburbans and similar vehicles.

    Vince.
  • disladisla Posts: 55
    "But I had a major problem with the rear visibility in the Mazda, such as backing out of a supermarket parking spot at night when there are a bunch of trucks or SUVs parked right next to us."
    --Unless you have a standard rear view camera like on a Murano ;)
  • vbbuiltvbbuilt Posts: 498
    Does the base, entry-level Murano now come with a back-up camera?

    Vince
  • OK, so everyone is talking about what features the CX-7 have, and what features does the Murano have. Well, I want to buy a used car (under 50k mileage) and I'm concern about the reliability of these 2 cars, because I will choose one of them.

    So all of you guys are talking about how good the back-up camera is, how good the handling is, how sporty the car is, how big the trunk is ... well why don't anyone is writing here what problems did you encountered with these models?

    This is what I wanna know, so some information will be appreciated.
  • Heh, I'm replying to myself ...

    So one of the 2 things below might be true:

    1. Both cars are perfect!

    2. Nobody is telling he's real problems, since everyone is praising his own car and now they're all very cautious not to say some bad stuff about it.
  • jayriderjayrider Posts: 3,362
    Just curious--- what price range are you looking for in these vehicles? I am not in sales of any kind -- just a retired teacher.
  • I also was looking for reliability. So I got the Mitsu Outlander: best predicted reliability in class + best 10 year powertrain warranty + free 5 y roadside assistance.

    http://s215240594.onlinehome.us/CR2008_smallsuv.gif
    http://s215240594.onlinehome.us/CR2008_midsizesuv.gif

    CX-7 is not listed here, but in so called "sporty SUV" category where it got slightly less then average. But if I have to choose between Murano and CX-7, I would definitely go for Murano: more space, better reliability, better styling
  • Can any of you experts out there give me your opinion as to what has the best 'driver vision' of these two SUV's.? I have driven a MURANO and loved it but want to know if the CX7 will give me a better peripheral view when driving. Hope I get lots of opinions here. Thanks.
  • The CX 7 actually has more vision from front to rear and side to side. It has a more spacious feel to it as the murano has more of a enclosed feeling to it. The murano also has a slit in the back that blocks some of the visioin to. But what I found on the CX 7 is it comes with a blind spot monitoring system which the murano does not have on any level. It actually uses a radar and let's you know in your side mirror if there is a vehicle there and also if you have a blinker on it will sound an alarm.
  • Thanks for this valuable information!
    It looks like I will be going ahead and buying the CX7 LTD rather than the Murano Ti.
    The model I am looking at unfortunately is not new, but a 2007 model and has 60,000 on the clock (all I can afford at this time) but am going to offer a grand less than the asking price of $NZ 33,000 as it is now one year older. Wish me luck.!
  • I just bought my 2011 Murano yesterday. I TRADED IN MY MAZDA CX7 Turbo.
    We have found anywhere from 40,000 to 50,000 miles the EGR Valve will go out and is an $800 job minimum. It is an emissions problem and should be covered by warranty which of course expired. They should have a recall if the problem continues to exist. It is a pain to change the headlight bulb and you can't even do your own oil change w/o practically taking the whole engine apart.
    The other thing about the Mazda is it is very noisy in the cab of the car, the Murano is very quiet. I just hope I don't have start & stall problems. Crossing my fingers on that. Good luck! ;)
  • It has horrible peripheral, we added the little stick on circles and helped tremendously. The Murano has much better side view mirrors.
123457»
Sign In or Register to comment.