Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
You got it backwards, vad!
It was the other way around. The Mazda 626 employed the Ford CD4E automatic transmission for the 4 cylinder models. The same one used on the Contour.
It was a disaster. Needing a new transmission was a matter of when, not if. Seriously, they lasted only 60-80k miles, some times less.
Note that the automatic Mazda used for the V6 model was fine, and that one was a Mazda unit. Both 5 speeds were also OK.
We owned a 1995 Mazda 626 and we had an active community here on Edmunds, from about 1998 until we sold ours in 2002. We would have about 3 members per week with blown Ford transmissions.
You basically had to avoid the Ford transmission, or replace it every couple of years. Period. Even the replacements would fail.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_CD4E_transmission
Shame on you for blaming Mazda! C'mon vad, at least look it up!
If I'm not mistaken that same transmission is still in use today in the Ford Escape, Mercury Mariner, and Mazda Tribute with zero issues. I'm not trying to defent the old version used in the 626 as I never owned one. I just wanted to point out that the flaw seems to be fixed.
Regardless of all that, that 4-speed in those SUVs is being replaced later this year by a 6-speed tranny (FINALLY!!!!!) for MY09. I think that officially marks the end of the CD4E and you can light a candle in it's memory when that happens juice. :P
Agreed. This appears to have become pervasive across most makes/models in the last few years. Our 2000 Suburban was the last vehicle that we had where we didn't give the seats a second thought. Everything that we've had since, I'm always aware of how firm and contoured they've become. We found the Lambda's to be the 'least bad' in the vehicles that met our needs. I liked the seats in the CX-9, but my wife and I just couldn't get past how intrusive the center stack/console were.
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
I meant CUV replacement for a Minivan. Of course there is no CUV that outdoes a minivan in space and comfort (for now- and that's not counting the Mazda 3).
I don't know why! I think the VC is a higher achievement for Hyundai than the CX-9 is for Mazda. No. I take that back (talk about thinking outloud!). While the VC is a very nice vehicle, it's done nothing new. It's Hyundai's usual "let's copy!". This time it's Lexus. And they make it no secret. I will admit I'd get the CX-9 before the VC. But the VC is still a nice vehicle.
Now that's extremely oppinion, as I think the Traverse's best point is it's nicely sculpted rear end. Looked god at first sight. The rest had to grow on me. DOesn't seem uncommon (at least for GM). Look at the Outlook and Sky.
Yes, I understand Mazda will never sell as much of anything as GM (except maybe MX-5s to Skys/Solstices). But the real point here is that Mazda didn't steal from anyone. Hyundai didn't steal from anyone. The Accord doesn't steal from Camry sales. They compete. the lambdas came into the market the same time as the CX-9, and both have been doing well, though GM's products seem to be a little hotter (increases in Enclave production, no heavy incentitives on any of te lambdas as compared to the CX-9). And a large number of lambda owners weren't in a GM- or American product before. The only reason that number is a bit bigger for Mazda is because they are so much smaller, and never had anything esle close to that. While GM has attracted som many new customers, there are many that have come from Suburbans and Tahoes and Trailblazers (and their GMC counterparts). I'd consider Cadillac or Lexus stealing from Mercedes sales, because they are more new comers at the world class game. So the Mazda isn't stealing anything, but rather competing- and doing an OKAY job. And lately I haven't hear so great things about CX-7 sales. I don't think it's doing great either.
That was a result of typing a message and not checking over it. I mean the Lambdas are the best CUV replacements for a minivan.
I don't see any reason why GM should put a DI engine into the sinking ship that Saturn is.
Hate to say it, but I've got to agree. Infact, maybe this problem wouldn't exist if the two could swap emblems. 'Cuz if the Outlook's ship is sinking, the Traverse would be the tanking factor.
The CX-7 is out selling the CX-9
Did you know that "IMO" means "In My Opinion"? I do put that in my posts a lot as to not confuse my opinion from fact. Just checking.
as I think the Traverse's best point is it's nicely sculpted rear end. Looked god at first sight. The rest had to grow on me.
I liked the opposite end better. The front looks agressive even if not all that well proportioned from what I see in the pics. Maybe it will look different in person. The rear still hasn't grown on me though. I think it looks too blank and needs something to spruce it up.
Another good point. I've read many a post here and elsewhere speculating what will happen to the current 3 Lambda sales once the Traverse hits the lots. The current 3 are doing well but it seems the majority agree that they will all suffer once the Chevy is on board. Which one suffers most is the big question but I'm with you guys in thinking it will be the Outlook.
The CX-7 is out selling the CX-9"
why let little things like facts get in the way?
BTW - I vote 5 passenger & 6+ as the dividing line if the CUV thread gets split...
and I don't know why the edge and equinox would get a pass to play with the big boys, why have rules then??? an optional 3rd row is just that a 5 passenger with an option, I wouldn't want to sit in an optional 3rd row personally as they are small for a reason and don't get bigger with the optional 3rd row installed, they just to get to carry more people in discomfort.
That said, this is a very good thing for the CX-9, but it seems the CX-7 has lost some traction. Normally, the CX-7 should be well ahead of the CX-9 in units sold but we are being proven otherwise.
Yes, but not as well as it could be, because of sibling company sharing. The Aura was selling decently well, but, after sales cooled off, the new Malibu was introduced. I believe sales have really been slow now. The Outlook? Why? It's nice, but why not the more rugged Acadia, or the more luxurious Enclave (soon, the cheaper, yet sportier Traverse)? And the Ion was never a hot seller. It's taken Saturn forever to get the Astra to the market. Saturn has done a great job. It just seems GMs other brands have done better.
I don't have survey results as to what previous vehicle Acadia owners had, but one thing is for sure, the Acadia is stealing sales from its GM SUV brothers: for 2007, Envoy sales were down 35%, Trailblazer down 23%, Equinox down 22%, Yukon and Tahoe down 10%, and minivan sales down over 75%, but who cares about those, right ;-)
So might gut instinct would have been to say that people who had bought Envoys, etc. in the past decided to jump into an Acadia instead (rightly so, the Acadia is much nicer, imo). But based on your comment, maybe the right thing to say is that people who did buy Envoys, etc, are not buying Acadias and possibly leaving GM to buy something else.
By the way after the putting more that 3,000 miles on Acadia I love it. I have not any problem whatsoever.
A larger market share for a particular vehicle versus its' competitors is a major concern for an automaker. Larger market share means more vehicles sold. More vehicles sold means more vehicles produced. More vehicles produced means longer production runs. This leads to economies of scale (lower costs to make each vehicle). This leads to more profit per vehicle, which can be used to design and build even better vehicles. It's a win/win situation that all automakers want to be in.
I've read various complaints on this site regarding a companies decision to rebadge the same vehicle under a different company brand name. The most common complaint is regarding GMs lambdas; 4 vehicles from the same platform, and factory. (other manufacturers have similar strategies, so my comments are universal) From a production point-of-view this is very smart. More vehicles from the same production line, lowers your cost per vehicle. So each division that gets one of these vehicles, can do so at a lower cost. After that, it's a marketing effort, to make sure that your cost of marketing is covered by your profits. As long as the vehicles produce enough profit for your division, you will keep making them and selling them.
And each division's target market is slightly different, so you can tailor your vehicle to your target customer. In this way a smart manufacturer meets the needs of it's various target markets, while increasing their overall market share within a market segment.
If the Chevy Traverse increases GM's overall Crossover market share, then that is a good thing for GM. If by gaining overall market share, it steals (cannibalizes) a portion of sales from it's other divisions, that is a small negative versus a larger positive.
In the end, the customer wins, because GM (or any other automaker), is better meeting the needs/wants of its' customers with a wider variety of vehicles. I can't complain about that!
For the past few months, most every auto manufacturer has been down. The economy is in the toilet, and not many people are buying. Didn't GM just announce $38 billion in losses??
So while it may indeed have cannibalized its siblings, GM may have lost the sale completely had they not built the Lambdas.
As for large/small, good luck getting everyone to agree on where to draw that line. We can't agree on anything.
Corn chips? Or Tortilla chips? Which is better.
Discuss.
(good luck getting a consensus)
In my world 3000 miles without a problem isn't anything to brag about. I've only ever owned 1 vehicle that did have a problem before 3K. It was a GM. None of our others had any problems before 20K. YMMV.
Why, exactly, would that matter? If the powers that be decide to split the CUV forum into large and small segments they decide where the cut-off is. We can offer our input, but it is ultimately their decision. Then we, as members, have a choice. We can abide by the decision or stop coming to the forum. It is that simple.
BTW: I have never understood the necessity of having everybody agree on a decision. Why is there this obsession of coming to a consensus? Why can't people just make informed decisions and let the chips fall where they may? Must we always make everybody happy? I'm sorry but not everybody will be happy no matter what is done or not done. Steve, just make the decision you think is best and be done with it.
Lack of action is a decision too.
Are those corn chips falling, or tortilla chips? lol
You're right. You can't get everyone to agree. But it's nice to have a forum like this to discuss with others, and to learn from. I know I've learned a fair bit so far.
I think if a manufacturer has more than one crossover, perhaps only the largest belongs here.
Even then you have a gray area, though. Look at Mitsubishi. Do we include the Endeavor? It's bigger than the Outlander. Yet the smaller one offers the (tiny) 3rd row. It may not matter as noone ever brings up the Endeavor anyway. :P
The Ford Edge and Saturn Vue have curb weights that make them seem like heavy weights, but they're not full-sized and don't have a 3rd row.
Ford gets even cloudier when consider that they'll have 4 of these.
It does seem like there is room for 2 discussions, though.
I suggest using this other thread, which already compares small crossovers/SUVs, as the "Small Crossover Comparison" thread:
dogteam1, "Suzuki Grand Vitara vs Subaru Forester vs Hyundai Santa Fe vs Jeep Liberty vs Ford Escape vs Saturn Vue" #4882, 9 Dec 2007 6:05 pm
6 vehicles are listed in the title, but if we can have up to 9, perhaps we add the CR-V, RAV4, and Outlander, so that it gets more traffic.
This one here could then be "Large Crossover Comparison".
The lesson here is it is hard to categorize vehicles in a category that was created specifically because they do not fit into traditional categories!
The Liberty isn't really a crossover. Nor is the Grand Vitara, IMHO.
"I've only ever owned 1 vehicle that did have a problem before 3K. It was a GM"
So, GM is producing good quality cars. I will give you personal update each 1000 miles. May be your TX is not doing as well?
This just in, wife just went to the store, 15miles, no problems... carry on...lol
I'm not really - we replaced our first GMC with another GMC last Summer. We are simply realistic about its reliability.
"I've only ever owned 1 vehicle that did have a problem before 3K. It was a GM"
So, GM is producing good quality cars.
That makes no sense, I'm sorry. If your point is that GM makes quality vehicles because your Acadia has lasted 3K miles, then you have no idea what reliability means. I can see the ad copy now. "We have documented proof that one of our new vehicles went 3000 miles without any problem. That's GM reliability!!"
I will give you personal update each 1000 miles.
Please don't.
BTW we haven't bought anything yet.
By the way after the putting more that 3,000 miles on Acadia I love it. I have not any problem whatsoever.
...was what he said. I don't interpret that as meaning the 3000 miles sans problems was an "accomplishment". Just more that he continues to be happy with his choice and this far in, no problems to report.
On another note...I've had enough fun with the new AWD...it can stop snowing around my way any time now. Though it does look nice!
http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4220226.html
The primary factor they were looking for was:
"real-world practicality. We loaded coolers, beach chairs and baby seats and spent hours riding in third-row seats. We braved parking garages, mountain roads and urban jungles, all in addition to running our normal test regimen."
And the six vehicles tested were ranked as follows:
1. Mazda CX-9
2. Hyundai Veracruz
3. Saturn Outlook
4. Toyota Highlander
5. Subaru Tribeca
6. Honda Pilot
As can be expected, there isn't a bad vehicle out there. Just different vehicles. They all had their good points.
The acceleration, how we do know same.
I'd also argue the lat. G numbers were incorrectly reported on the tribeca as its lane change is 4mph faster than the CX. combine that with it's better looks than the CX, wow, not that PM is a place to read reviews but they missed the boat big time with that order of finish.
and yeah, I just said that...
So CX-9 has almost same space as Saturn, but VC has less space than Saturn.
I suspect we're in the minority but the CX9 just doesn't look "right" to me. The design approach seems to succeed on the CX7 but not the 9. To my eyes anyway.
When we were shopping I almost felt guilty for not liking the looks of the 9 and adding that reason to my reasons to omit from our short list. I almost wanted the look to grow on me so I wouldn't let it cloud my judgement of the vehicle. So I took my wife to see it right away wondering if she could "teach" me to like it. But she liked it less than I did...so it had the reverse effect in that it consolidated my opinion.
But like anything else...beauty is in the eye of the beholder...
One of my close friends prefers the 9's looks over my VC's appearance. Of course he also just installed green granite counters in his kitchen, so...
Which brings up a very important point. Most of us have to live with what we buy for a significant length of time. If the look of it doesn't make you happy, all the features, reliability, handling, etc. are meaningless. There are few things more irritating than getting into a car everday that you can hardly stand to look at.
Made that mistake once around thirty years ago - never again.
that could not be any more , hmmmmm, 80's, I hope he didn't pay a lot for it... ugh...
compared tooo????? curious more than anything
The acceleration, how we do know same.
Popular Mechanics liked ALL the vehicles. If size was the only criteria, the Saturn would have won. Or if they were looking for the best highway cruiser, its hard to beat the Outlook. But according to PM, the size of the Saturn was actually a slight negative when it came to maneuvering in parking lots and parking garages. In "their opinion" the CX9 and Veracruz hit the "sweet spot" for being the right size for them.
In "my opinion" the lambdas hit the "sweet spot" in size for me. But I know that my needs are different from others. I'm just happy that there are so many good Crossover vehicles to choose between. Everyone can get the one that meets their own particular needs.