Howdy, Stranger!

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





Acura MDX vs Mazda CX-9

24

Comments

  • cericceric Posts: 1,093
    Other than the $5.5K, I bet you did not factor in the maintenance cost difference.
    They charge you "luxuriously" at Acura/Lexus. Your 1st oil change will wake you up. At Lexus, that will be about $187!!! compared to what I got for my Mazda $25.
    Including tire rotation, that is still less than $45. For a typical Lexus, the 60K service runs about $1000. For a Mazda, it costs about $4-500 at most.
    Anyway, it costs to carry a badge, which I personally do not care as much as you do.

    > My wife is only 5 ft 1" and the CX-9 seat didn't go up that much as did the Acura
    This is one legit reason for choosing MDX over CX9. No doubt. You got to make the wife happy.

    Acura's audio system has been one of the best. The one on CX9 is good but can't compare.

    I did not choose MDX because of
    - styling
    - roominess
    I am a big fan of SH-AWD, but most people probably don't care at all, or don't get to use it enough to appreciate its value.

    Anyway, I am sure MDX will also have better resale value. I own my vehicles for 7-8 years, therefore, resale value does not concern me that much.

    Reliability? My CX9 has been trouble-free (other than 1 assembly defect inside window mechanism and 2 TSBs).

    Overall, depending how people value their $5.5K dollars, I would say that Mazda CX9 still have the best "bang for the buck" value in this class. It desires a test-drive, at least.
  • Well stated. I was ready to pull the trigger on a Q5 back in April but realized the cargo space just wasn't adequate.

    I've been going back and forth since between the CX-9, MDX, Venza, Pilot, Highlander, Q7, X5, and now throw the Outback into the mix.

    This is the toughest segment to shop, IMO. If it were going to be my driver I'd pull the trigger on a CX-9 but as it's for the wife she likes the Pilot best but can't get over its looks and marginal price difference between it and the MDX.

    Every vehicle in this class is excellent for a specific group of people but has a serious flaw for everyone else. The X5 is great but hard to justify the price. The Highlander meets all needs but doesn't really excel in any area (IMO). The Venza is too expensive for where it should compete (for a V6 AWD) and has terrible blind spots. The Pilot is just butt ugly and lacks some of the more luxury quality in the Venza and CX-9. The Q5 and Q7 lack cargo space (surprisingly) and the Q7 has quality issues from what I've heard.

    The MDX is at the top of my list for a car I hope to have in time to lug the family on a long thanksgiving trip but it's hard to buy knowing people were able to get 08 MDXs this time last year at around 32k for a base and 34-35k for a Tech.

    To keep this on topic I wish there was another way to distinguish the CX-9 and MDX other than making it do you want to pay for the Acura badge and resale value.

    Decisions decisions!
  • cericceric Posts: 1,093
    This is off topic, but if you are thinking about Highlanders,...
    It uses a very very special tire size (for the V6 models)
    245/55R19
    http://www.tirerack.com/tires/TireSearchResults.jsp?skipOver=true&width=245%2F&r- atio=55&diameter=19&x=12&y=8
    As you can see from tirerack.com, there is only ONE choice, which is the OE tire.
    The OE Bridgestone Dueler is very bad for its price. It sucks on snow (see tirerack.com's review).

    Yes, CX9 also uses the same Dueler, but with 245/50R20 or 245/60R18. Both tire sizes have many other alternatives.
    Just some things to ponder on before you commit to buy.
  • Ceric,

    Good points ... it was a very tough decision I have made, after many difficult weekends. CX-9 has many features that MDX doesn't. If I had bought CX-9 I would still have thought about MDX and wondering if I made the correct decision and ofcourse vice-versa!

    I still miss two cars, I had eliminated earlier --> Ford Flex and Buick Enclave .... an oh I forgot to mention the mini vans :)

    Even the insurance on Acura is more than CX-9 ... but I knew this before the purchase.

    I know a guy who makes boat loads of money ... he changes his cars very frequently ... he doesn't even do any research or no after thoughts ... right? But for me (and probably for you) ... we just have sufficient money to buy one of these ... that is what makes the decision the most difficult!

    So ... let's enjoy our cars ... yours is great too ... probably as good as MDX.
  • Just to add, the 5.5K difference is in a way not accurate. The mazda dealer was asking for me to forego $3K in incentives, if I wanted to avail the special financing from Mazda - I believe 2.9% for 5 years.

    So really the difference would have been 2.5K!
  • We were in the same boat 2 years ago deciding between CX9 and MDX. We had narrowed it down to these two and did quite a few test drives/comparisons of both. The price difference was around 5K. One of the main things I liked about the CX9 was its steering, it was surprisingly quite comminicative, especially for a vehicle of this size. My wife loved features like the keyless start, rain-sensing wipers and power tailgate. We ended up buying the CX9 and we enjoyed the car. For about a year.
    The first disappointment came when the CX9 faced the second snowy winter. It was so absolutely horrendous in snow that it was shocking! We have had cars and minivans before, but none this bad. And this in fact was our first AWD utility vehicle and we thought we are all set for winters and boy were we wrong! We realized that this was because of the factory tires that the CX9 came with, though we had put on less than 20K miles on these tires and found out many CX9 users were complaining about the same issue from many forums.
    So half-way thru this second winter we replaced the tires and I put on Yokohama Parada spec-x's. The Paradas were a huge improvement over the original Bridgeston Duelers in snow. But to my disappointment gone was the edge in the communicative steering, it's not bad but it no more had the difference to me that made it stand out compared to other SUV/CUV's in this class. Of course may be if I have one set of summer tires and one set of winter tires may be I will be able to enjoy this vehicle more, but I don't want to deal with all that with an AWD SUV (I already do that with my car). Other than that CX9 overall is ok, but I also feel it's not aging well, I feel that the engine has become louder and hear engine whines which weren't there before.

    And finally in general the service dealership experience isn't great with Mazda (I have tried 2 different dealerships) compared to the kind of service two of my friends get with their Acuras. May be this is a co-incidence and not to be generalized, but may be this has to do with the premium (especially Acura) vs non-premium brand. In fact once it was ridiculous that the dealership told me that to address a service bulletin I may have to leave the car with them for 2 days because they may have to order parts once they start working on my car and find out that it needs some parts, but as the overall time take actually spent on my car will be less than 4 hours they can't give me a loaner car! I know my friends that have Acura get a loaner car every time even when they just go for basic service. So some of the money you pay upfront for a brand like Acura you get back indirectly by this kind of better service and of course the better resale value. So the actual difference may not be 5K but something less.

    So overall, though we are not totally disappointed with the CX9, we are definitely not as excited as before. Our CX9 lease is getting over next year and it's decision time one more time but I would definitely lean towards Acura much more this time. Let's see. Of course I understand that these are our experiences and yours and others' may be different.
  • cericceric Posts: 1,093
    So, you are disappointed by CX9 because of tires and dealership service.
    Is that correct? Not by the vehcile itself.

    Tires can be replaced. One can always find another dealer. My dealer is very nice.
    Actually much better than my old BMW dealer, which was basically outright arrogant. I don't know about how much Acura charge for basic oil service to allow a loaner car for you. As far as I know, even for Lexus, you need repairs or major services (15K/30K/45K/60K) to get a free loaners. That is the experiences from my co-worker. i.e. the 5,000 mile service which costs $187 does not include a loaner car. Seriously, a loaner car probably costs dealer only $50 or less.

    My local Mazda dealer provides loaner for repairs and TSB fixes.
    For loaner, they send you to a nearby Hertz, which charge about $50 for a Camry.
    The so-called "free-loaner" is out of your own pocket. Nothing to celebrate about.

    P.S. people over-maintain their vehicles. The so-call 15K/30K/45K/60K services are scams if you ask me. Other than typical oil changes (motor, transmission), modern vehicles do not require lots of maintenances until 100K. One can always change filters by themselves for costs of parts only.... :)
    BTW, CX9 has life-time transmission fluid which is not required to be changed by intervals. Is that the same with Acura MDX?
  • my3rdrxmy3rdrx Posts: 167
    I think you all should do what I and my wife did ~ we got both ~ and we love them both :)!
  • I am driving a 3 year old 2007 Acura MDX (Base model) that came with the Bridgestone Dueler tires. I have gone through 3 brutal super snowy Chicago winters and I never noticed a problem with these tires. This is my third AWD SUV and these tires seem to work just fine in deep snow or snow-packed roads.
  • This has been the most exhaustive car decision I've ever had to make. It's taken nearly 9 months and at different points I was within hairs of buying a Q5, X5, CX-9, and Venza.

    Lots of long holiday car rides over the next couple months forced me to make a decision. I loved the Q5 best but eliminated it for not having as much cargo space as I need. I didn't love the X5 enough to warrant paying the 10k more (how I wanted equipped) over a MDX w/Tech + Ent. The Venza did not appeal at all to my spouse.

    So it came down to the CX-9 or the MDX. For me it came down to personal preference. Since it would be my wife's daily driver, I let her decide. I wanted to get a loaded 2010 CX-9...it was where the value was strongest and I prefer the styling and drive. She preferred the badge, residual value, and SH-AWD on the MDX.

    So, we bought an MDX. I'm happy that she's happy, but still a bit disappointed I won't get to drive the CX-9 on the weekends when I'm running the errands!
  • Last week I went back and forth between a fully loaded Mazda CX-9 Vs the Toyota Highlander. I don't know if it was the dealer (or lack of them) but I was't confident in the Mazda build quality and all the complaints I have been reading. I went with a car which is a whole different story.
    Be glad you didn't go with the BMW X5. After owning 2 of them I will never buy another BMW as long as I live unless I hit the Lotto. The up-keep for repairs gets out of control and they are constantly broken.
    My 2007 MDX (first year of this build) had really loose steering when going down a road or highway over 45 MPH. I was always adjusting. Did they solve this problem?
    The MDX was flawless...never anything but oil changes in the 3 years I owned it!
  • cericceric Posts: 1,093
    In that case, a better tire will surprise you even more.
    The bad reviews from tirerack.com on the Bridgestone Dueler was not all done by me. The score of 4.x vs 8.x is shocking to say the least.
  • cericceric Posts: 1,093
    You needed to own TWO BMWs to learn the lesson?
    I owned one ('98 BMW 540iA) and that was enough for me.
    BMW = Break My Wallet.
    I lost count of the amount of problems I had with my 540iA.
    After owning it for 9 years, I finally got rid of it.
    I estimated that I spent about $4000 on repairs AFTER OE warranty.
    That is not a lie. No major issues, just a bunch of smaller ones (except for the entire cooling system needed to be replaced).

    Early models of CX9 have some minor annoying issues (mainly electronics integration and noises in suspension, etc.) The transmission is as solid as Lexus (same supplier), the engine drinks 87 octane and yet it is responsive, powerful and torquey.
    My 2008 CX9 with 23K miles had only 1 small assembly issue inside the rear doors. Other than that solid still, no rattling, noises, in the cabin. Can't say the same thing about my wife's Toyota Prius... (lots of rattling, but 0 problem).
  • cericceric Posts: 1,093
    I visited SF Autoshow this past weekend, and I own a 2008 CX9.
    I have to admit that the interior quality of MDX is one-step ahead of CX9 (though 2010 CX9 comes with a much nicer leather - softer).
    I guess that is where you spend the money on. I am sure the stereo system is better also. However, the 3rd room remains pretty tight for MDX.

    I hope the new MDX had better transmission that the infamous ones on '01-05 MDX (and many other Hondas). I had a '01 Odyssey. At 80K, the transmission started to show slow engagement. I traded it in within days. I heard that the new 2010 MDX has the new Honda 6-speed transmission. Hopefully, Honda has learned their lesson from the transmission failure before.

    MDX is really nice, but I needed the extra space of a CX9.
    I was also disappointed that some features I like such as the SmartKey remains unavailable on Acura MDX (only RL and ZDX).

    The ZDX when fully loaded costs about $57K. I don't know what Acura has been drinking, but for a luxury "wagon" with 3.7L V6, who is going to pay that much $$$ for it. We will see.... Compared with ZDX, MDX certainly is a much better value.
  • "The ZDX when fully loaded costs about $57K. I don't know what Acura has been drinking, but for a luxury "wagon" with 3.7L V6, who is going to pay that much $$$ for it. We will see.... Compared with ZDX, MDX certainly is a much better value"

    ...not to mention that the ZDX is:

    1) not in the same class as the MDX or CX-9 because Honda/Acura considers it a sports sedan with a hatch crossover (which in my opinion is a big mix of uncertainy to define WHAT that thing really is).
    2) ZDX only seat five versus 7 like the MDX and CX-9 and,
    3) (subjective) that thing they call ZDX is by the far the ugliest creation yet by Honda/Acura also trailed by the "Accord Crosstour" which is essentially a badging engineering.

    No thanks...I will kepp my CX-9 anyday, anytime!!
  • We were looking @ the Q7, MDX and CX9. Test drove all of them.

    Q7 was overpriced and underpowered for the V6. Then Acura came out with the 4K incentives putting the CX9's cheaper pricing completely moot.

    Picked up a spanking new MDX for 33K + 0% financing. Was a no brainer at that time. Love the car.
  • 10sfan10sfan Posts: 136
    Can you share the name of the dealersip with me?
  • Can u pls share the dealer. That is the best price I heard so far for new MDX Base.
    I believe the financing is not 0 % , i only heard of 0.9% & 2.9%.
    If possible the salesman, pls email capricorn-70@hotmail.
    thx in advance :)
  • rbairbai Posts: 8
    Could you share the dealer information with me as well at gracewb@gmail.com? BTW, where I can find that $4000 incentive information?

    Thanks a bunch!
  • sedmundsedmund Posts: 93
    I leased my CX9 in 2007 and the lease end is coming up in June this year. This time I'm planning to buy the vehicle and surprisingly for what we are looking for the choices right now are coming down to the same 2 vehicles that we had come down to in 2007! The CX9 and the MDX. Right now we are slightly leaning toward the CX9 again though it has some shortcomings, as it seems to be the best value for money and the features we are looking for (specifically keyless start, Xenons, rain-sensing wipers and BSM).
    I typically don't give too much importance to resale values as we have typically kept our vehicles for a long time in the past - except of course this CX9 which we have leased. But I just compared in kbb.com the resale value of 2007 CX9 (GT AWD) and 2007 MDX Tech models. When I shopped in 2007 the best deal I got for the MDX was about 4.5K more that the price I could get for the CX9 both new at that time. But I was shocked to see in kbb.com that the trade-in price of the 2007 CX9 comes in at 11K less than the 2007 MDX (I put in 40K miles which is what I have on my CX9 now)! Is this for real? I thought kbb.com isn't necessarily accurate for used car prices but at least a guideline? Is kbb.com completely off the mark here, anybody have any comments on this?

    Thanks.
Sign In or Register to comment.