Howdy, Stranger!

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





2007 Mazda CX-9

1171820222357

Comments

  • arumagearumage Posts: 922
    If it is the same as the CX-7, the AWD is 100% FWD until slip is detected. Then it can go up to 50/50. The CX-7 has no differential lock so it's really an on-road system.
  • nxs138nxs138 Posts: 481
    My current car has AWD and stability control, and to tell the truth I find the stability controlt to be the more useful safety feature. I had once tested out the stability control by doing donuts in a wet parking lot: with control on, the car would actively cut throttle and start braking appropriate wheels to eliminate fishtailing; with control off, the car would swing around and fishtail easily, even though I have AWD. So AWD won't help if you start fishtailing, which is a common result of over-correcting.

    I have found AWD to be useful in snowy or very rainy weather, where it seems I have a little more stability than my wife's Geo Prism when going in a straight line. Otherwise, AWD is useful if you're taking corners on a track at the limits of the car, which I'm sure no one will do in a CX-9.

    So I'm still on the fence with the AWD. Probably will wait until the car mags report back on it.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    Is it true as well that the offered AWD is not full time? Seems like a waste of 1K to me. Right or wrong.

    This is true, the AWD system is not full time, but, rather alert full time. Rear wheels will engage when slippage is dectected. If you live in an area that gets snow, or lots of rain, your 1K could be a life saving investment.

    It is the same AWD system in the CX-7, which just won a comparo between the Santa-Fe and RAV4 in off road situations. (Edmunds.com comparo)
  • guyfguyf Posts: 456
    Fully agree with you. Stability control is more important than AWD for safety. I own a Volvo XC90 with AWD and Stability control and a Tucson FWD with stability control. The Tucson wont accelerate as well on snow, but that's about it.
  • fromsffromsf Posts: 19
    After reading reviews and specs about CX-9, decided to put off my Toyota Sienna XLE Limited buy for a while. I wanted to test drive CX-9 before making decision.

    Currently I am having a Civic and Corolla for last ten years, not happy with Civic due to high maintenance cost but pretty happy with Corolla. I am want to be happy with CX-9 too. Is Mazda as reliable as Toyota? Also how does Mazda retains resale value compared to Toyota?
  • wmquanwmquan Posts: 1,817
    Is Mazda as reliable as Toyota? Also how does Mazda retains resale value compared to Toyota?

    No, and no. Especially since the first year of any model can have more issues, and the Sienna's been around for a while. But Mazdas are more than reliable enough (see publications like Consumer Reports) for most buyers (e.g. better than the German marques). Just don't expect it to be at the level of Toyota.

    As far as resale value, while it won't hold it as well, you have to factor in that the initial acquisition price should be good. E.g. heavy discounts, rebates, etc. after the model's been established.
  • d_hyperd_hyper Posts: 130
    Again, can't compare brands. Got to compare models. Avalon is less reliable than say Mazda3, but how it affects CX-9/Sienna is beyond me. Here's an actual brand reliability based on actual insurance statistics in Europe where Mazda is 2nd best right after Honda and better than Toyota.

    http://www.whatcar.co.uk/news-special-report.aspx?NA=217350&EL=3142812
  • wmquanwmquan Posts: 1,817
    Actually, Consumer Reports has the Avalon as more reliable than the Mazda3's (taken as a whole line). That's more impressive given how more complex an Avalon is (lot more things to go wrong, which is also the case for a Sienna or CX-9).

    The Sienna's up to "better than average" after its initial model year, but still isn't at the top level of reliability. So there's room to beat it. I doubt if the CX-9 will in the first year.

    If you look at brand reliability based on CR scores, Toyota beats Mazda significantly. Which is remarkable given that the Toyota model range is much larger In the U.S. than Mazda's.

    In that UK survey you linked to, Toyota has not only several more models in the UK, but they're much more complex SUV's (Mazda only sells one truck). So Toyota finishing 3rd place behind Mazda's 2nd doesn't mean as much.

    If we compare models with relatively similar levels of complexity (e.g. don't extrapolate Mazda3's to CX-9's), the less-sophisticated Tribute started out with more/less average reliability and then improved. The Mazda5 started out as "average" and will doubtless improve.

    That's why I think the new CX-9 in its first model year should be more than adequate for most buyers. Way better than a European brand. Just don't expect the same level of reliability you'd get with a mature Sienna. Subsequent model years of the CX-9 should show improvement.

    Even Toyota and Honda have had some issues with their first-year models.

    One thing that a potential CX-9 vs. Sienna buyer should be wary of, though. If you want AWD, the Sienna's AWD doesn't leave room for a spare tire. So it comes with run-flats. There's been a lot of negative comments about the run-flats.
  • fromsffromsf Posts: 19
    Thanks for excellent replies. What kind of issues generally appear in the first model year?

    Couple of Bay Area dealers mentioned that they will have CX-9 in before mid-Jan. Can I expect lot of discounts and rebates at the very beginning itself? Or will they demand premium price?
  • arumagearumage Posts: 922
    Toyota has had very numerous recalls as a late. Quality is not near what is used to be for them; however, that being said, it is still better than countless other brands. From what I've heard from alot of people, Toyota cars that are less complex do much better, like me little 1999 Camry LE 4-cyl.

    Ford is betting the farm on this 3.5L V6, and to a certain extent, the platform that the CX-9 rides on so I don't really feel that there are going to be too many problems with it from a quality standpoint. Refinement, however, may be a different ballgame. The CX-9 certainly could receive significant upgrades especially with Ford bringing out an all new crossover aroun 2009.
  • arumagearumage Posts: 922
    I would assume they would probably demand a premium price until there are enough of them to go around. CX-9's will probably be in limited supply for a while. With less places to shop around for what you want, it will be harder to get the dealer to budge.
  • music287music287 Posts: 116
    We ordered a loaded CX-9 on the day in October that the dealer got an order form from Mazda. We're paying $800 over invoice (but we had bought another car from the same dealer last year. That might be why he was willing to dicker...)

    We're expecting it to arrive later this month! Full report to follow.

    Jay
  • nxs138nxs138 Posts: 481
    That's exactly why I'm waiting a few more months before making my final decision. But I do believe prices will start dropping a couple months after introduction--heck, even the new 2007 MDX can be had for almost $1k below MSRP, and people had been predicting that full retail prices would hold for one year or more (the MDX was introduced maybe 3 months or so ago).

    There will be so many choices coming out that dealerships won't be able to command premium choices. I'm personally waiting for the CX-9/Veracruz/Enclave to come out.
  • fromsffromsf Posts: 19
    I am looking at fully loaded CX-9 and won't pay more than $150 over invoice. If I have to pay more that then I will buy a vehicle that is proven.

    I did more research on CX-9 and found that major components are not Mazda's own stuff. Look at these: (you can consider these as pro also as cons)
    1. Engine is from Ford (Cyclone duratec35 used in Edge).
    2. Base platform is from Ford (CD3 Platform).
    3. 6 Speed Auto transmission is from Ford & GM joint innovation. (This transmission is used in new Ford models and I believe in GM Acadia and saturn outlook).

    Also, Moonroof is not a base option even on high end Grand Touring and when you do a price compare in truedelta.com against 2007 MDX it's only 3K difference. MDX has lot better resale value and proven vehicle.
  • I won't argue Mazda vs. Acura here, but the MDX has only been on sale for a few months, and is therefore not exactly a "proven" vehicle.

    You also might have to wait a while to pay $150 over invoice for either of those vehicles... The MDX seems to be a great value and is probably stealing RDX sales at this point. Seems like there are also a lot of posts from people that are waiting for the CX-9 to get here. So demand is liable to be high for both of these through the spring. Either way, good luck.
  • d_hyperd_hyper Posts: 130
    You ALMOST got it right ;-)

    1. True
    2. False - The CD3 (for "C/D-class") is a Ford global midsize car automobile platform. It was designed by Mazda in association with Ford and debuted with the Mazda Mazda6 sedan in early 2003
    3. False - Transmission is Japanese' Aisin.

    #1 is the base V6 for most Ford's upcoming vehicles. It better be good.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    3. 6 Speed Auto transmission is from Ford & GM joint innovation. (This transmission is used in new Ford models and I believe in GM Acadia and saturn outlook).

    That is incorrect, the transmission is built by Aisin, the same company that built tranny's for Toyota for many years.

    The platform is from the Mazda6, designed by Mazda for Ford.

    The only Ford part is the engine. The rest is Japanese, built in Japan.

    Also, Moonroof is not a base option even on high end Grand Touring and when you do a price compare in truedelta.com against 2007 MDX it's only 3K difference. MDX has lot better resale value and proven vehicle.

    While I will not argue that the MDX is a proven vehicle (also numerous proven tranny problems) and has good resale, the MDX starts at $40,665. A comparable equipped Mazda CX-9 GT with the Bose Audio and moon roof is $36,230. That is a $4,435 difference. If you want to pay the extra THOUSANDS, then you will get the extras that come with the Acura name.
  • d_hyperd_hyper Posts: 130
    ... or you could have simply said: "I concur". :)
  • lucky_777lucky_777 Posts: 205
    Don't forget that Acura has 4 years bumper to bumper warranty, that's worth something.
  • arumagearumage Posts: 922
    Powertrain warranty is not transferable though so don't buy a used Acura and expect the powertrain warranty to apply.
Sign In or Register to comment.