Howdy, Stranger!

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

Crossover SUV Comparison



  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,419
    I agree. I insisted on leather on my last eight cars. Of course with leather you have to have seat heaters in winter, and they are still sticky in summer, unless you have seat coolers. Leather also wears faster than most modern seat fabrics and it needs more maintenance.

    But then I got suede seats and they were so much better. I cannot understand why they are practically unavailable. My latest car now has cloth (with heaters too). To each his or her own, but I will never go back to leather.
  • lwolf99lwolf99 Posts: 73
    My family consists of me, my wife and our 2 children - ages 11 and 6. We have a 2001 Chrysler Town & Country minivan. Most of the time it is just the 4 of us, but occasionally, we haul a few friends & family members. We do not do a lot of cargo hauling.

    The minvan has been very good - seating capacity wise. It has been very easy to pickup a few extra passengers - comfortable for the 3rd row passengers, and now flipping or folding seats to get back there.

    Looking at some of the CUVs, they certainly do look and feel a sportier that my minivan. We have mostly focused on the Mazda CX9 and the Acadia/Enclave. But I have to say that I am having some sepration anxiety from the minivan.

    The 2nd row captains chairs of the Acadia/Enclave seem more comfortable to me - maybe becuase they are closer to the minivan configuration - compared to the 2nd row bench seat of the CX9. But the Mazda CX9 seems to ride/driver smoother. I am having a hard time choosing.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,419
    I see Ford has priced it, and it is only a bit more than the outgoing FS. However, considering it has the 3.5 engine, the tiny price increase may be a bargain.

    But what's with that clumsy throwback big old seamed airbag cover on a 2008??? That look was fine in my 1998 Ranger, but even the little Mazda2 now has no airbag seams. The VW Golf got rid of all the dash seams as long ago as the 1999 model. More and more people are beginning to notice these details. Ford just has to do better and the sooner the better.
  • barnstormer64barnstormer64 Posts: 1,106
    As a people-hauler, I think you'll be happier staying with the mini-van, honestly.
  • chuckhoychuckhoy Posts: 420
    I, personally, prefer cloth to leather because I don't slide around as much. But, if you have kids, leather is SOOOOOOOOOO much easier to clean.
  • Stever@EdmundsStever@Edmunds YooperlandPosts: 39,059
    Lots more here:

    Leather vs Cloth Seats

    I have one car with (hot) black leather seats and one with (now dirty) cloth and much prefer the cloth (although the cloth ones aren't heated).
  • arumagearumage Posts: 922
    The CX-9 GT actually has 20" wheels standard.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    We have some very passionate people here in this thread. Glad to see folks are having a sense of humor about it.

    I'll say this, if you have to ask what you get going from $30k to $40k, then stick with the $30k model. Obviously those things are not a priority for you, else you would have been looking for them in the first place! ;)
  • bobw3bobw3 Posts: 2,997
    I'll say this, if you have to ask what you get going from $30k to $40k, then stick with the $30k model

    Not true in my case...I just don't like to waste $$ for options I don't want or will never use.
  • albookalbook Posts: 1,282
    It's simply choosing between a little more comfort, and a little more performance (though the choice definitely won't be easy!). The CX-9 is the sportier of the two, and handles a little better. But the Acadia/ Enclave has more space and comfort for about the same size, and still perform well. So if you are not wanting to move far from your minivan, go Acadia. But if you want sporty, go with the CX-9. They will both be priced about the same, so that probably won't be an issue.
  • albookalbook Posts: 1,282
    When was this price released? I wanna see.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,419
    The announcement was on Autoblog today.
  • albookalbook Posts: 1,282
    Just saw the announcement. My thoughts:

    It was smart of Ford to keep the price about the same, but this increase puts the TX very close to other competitors, such as Outlook. I think the FS had going for it it's bargain price. And who knows- there might be a lot of discounts like there are on the FS right now. But this price enclosure will make people really take a look at the product. Because bargain pricing is no longer an offered plus-for now.
  • freealfasfreealfas Posts: 652
    "It's simply choosing between a little more comfort..."

    hence the point of a CUV,

    "and a little more performance..."

    oxymoron, you don't buy a CUV for performance.

    and if the mazda folks were serious about performance they'd get rid of the 20" boat anchors they call wheels. It astounds me they'd do that under the zoom zoom pretense, no it doesn't they want to make money(rightly so) as 20" wheels means "performance" to most buyers.

    sorry, I just don't get it as usual...
  • tim156tim156 Posts: 308
    Autoblog reports the base price will be $27,365.
  • mchappellmchappell Posts: 52
    ""and a little more performance..."

    oxymoron, you don't buy a CUV for performance. "

    More performance relative to each other, not to a Corvette. The CX-9 definitely has less body roll and is more stiffly sprung (than the Lambdas). Additionally, the 20" wheels allow for a shorter sidewall tire, which contributes to better handling.

    I think we're all aware that you don't buy a CUV to perform similarly to a sports car. However, their performance levels are different, relative to each other.
  • freealfasfreealfas Posts: 652
    But what most people don't know is that the larger wheel's increase in unsprung weight actually inhibits better performance, increases braking distances, choppier ride due to lower sidewall, etc., etc...

    Hence most people thinking that more is always better. The "dub" generation is the group that really missed the boat on this and illustrates the point best actually. It's all about the visual bling with no real gain in "performance" implied or otherwise.

    If the 20's w/tires on the CX actually weighed less than the 19's w/ tires then you might have an argument in terms of unsprung weight only as choppy ride would still apply but I'm pretty sure mazda didn't go to the effort to make that happen.

    "More performance relative to each other, not to a Corvette"

    But if you hang out around here long enough you'll find that people are hoping gm will drop the ls-2, why stop there how about the crate 502 in the lambda platform to make a CUV that does compete with the vette and haul 7 doing it, are perfectly willing to accept 12mpg and will call it progress... because what we have out there now just isn't enough...
  • mchappellmchappell Posts: 52
    I'll concede that the majority of wheel 'upgrades' are mostly cosmetic. I would guess that only the true, high performance cars have wheel upgrades for performance reasons (larger, yet lighter). A larger wheel, if heavier than the smaller wheel, will probably only offer an advantage during steady state cornering, on a relatively smooth surface.

    I would also assert that the majority of the people here have no desire to see/buy a V-8 in the lambdas. There will always be a few, but $4/gal gas will trim that number even further. Doesn't GM have a hybrid V-8 in some trucks? That might be interesting...

    As a side note, saw a blurb on the news tonight that full-size SUV sales are up 6% (not sure what time period), probably due to the great 'deals' you can get on them.

  • freealfasfreealfas Posts: 652
    "A larger wheel, if heavier than the smaller wheel, will probably only offer an advantage during steady state cornering, on a relatively smooth surface."

    and ANY advantage would be lost in braking...I know I wouldn't want that...

    "As a side note, saw a blurb on the news tonight that full-size SUV sales are up 6% (not sure what time period), probably due to the great 'deals' you can get on them."

    Or possibly the fact that the CUV's don't offer enough of an advantage yet to compel people to give up on their behemoths that play to their image of success, safety and subtlety. (I'll concede to the towing crowd, but other than that the MAJORITY of SUV's will never see dirt... it's just like the dubs, it's all image...
  • lwolf99lwolf99 Posts: 73
    I am also tryign to weigh the importance of a dealer located cloer versus a dealer located further. The CX9 and the Enclave, in my opinion, compete pretty well with each other - a lot of similar features. I like the "feel" of the CX9 a little bit better, but I like the 2nd row captains chairs of the Enclave.

    But I am also trying to consider the importance, or not, of going with a GMC/Buick dealer who is 5-minutes from my hosue, versus the Mazda dealer who is 30-40 minutes away. I don't go to the dealer very often, but when I have to go, closer seems to work out better.

    I am trying to figure out how much weight to give dealer location in my comparison.
Sign In or Register to comment.