Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Crossover SUV Comparison

1…6768707273…142

Comments

  • cason1cason1 Member Posts: 65
    That describes my family quite well...2 kids, but like the extra room for them to each carry a friend. That's why I like having a third row...that doesn't get used much (currently have an MDX). I haven't actually bought a CX-9 and might not in the end, but I really think it's a nice vehicle.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    What year is your MDX?

    The CX-9 is not for everyone. You really need to see what fits your needs, what you value in a vehicle. I'm sure price is always a factor too.
  • cason1cason1 Member Posts: 65
    2001...been a fantastic vehicle on a whole.

    IMHO, the only thing the CX-9 doesn't have (that I think is really important) is an Acura badge (which is important to my wife, her vehicle) and proven resale value. I know I sound big-time pro-CX-9 when I post, but there are a couple of nits that I can pick on the CX-9 too. None of them are deal-breakers, but as an engineer I tend to obsess about some things.

    One of those nits is the seat heaters that are tied into the thermostat. Sometimes I like to ride with the heat off, but the seat heater on (bad hip). It looks to me that you can't do that in the CX-9...I need to confirm. Also, from the way the display is configured, it appears than when you add Sirius radio, but don't get GPS, you don't get a lot of information. For that matter, I haven't confirmed if you get much info if you get the GPS. CX-9 storage stinks...good for a person like me who hates carrying around the world, not so good for the wife. There are other things, but you get the idea.

    I know one thing, last time I bought in this class there wasn't much to pick from other than the MDX. Now, there's a whole bunch of nice vehicles. Darn good for the consumer...and there's even a couple of them that probably won't make me look for interstates on my next family vacation (CX-9 and MDX). :)
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Driving an Odyssey is much like driving car (the only minivan I have extensive experience with). I can't imagine a VeraCruz or an Acadia having much more nimble handling than an Odyssey.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    One of those nits is the seat heaters that are tied into the thermostat

    Where did you hear that? I do not think that is true. You can have the heated seats on at anytime, regardless of what temp you have the vehicle set at.

    CX-9 storage stinks

    If you have the 3rd row down, you get over 48cu ft. of room. With the 3rd seat up, its around 17ft, and there is storage under the floor as well. There aren't that many hidden pockets if thats what you mean. It has more then the new MDX and Pilot.

    It almost sounds like you might be a candidate for a minivan?
  • cason1cason1 Member Posts: 65
    Seat heaters - making an assumption since they only have on/off - not two stage switch.

    Storage, referring to pockets, console, etc. I think you're mistaken on the MDX storage. I just spent 3 days in a 2007 and it has more storage (at least at hand) than the CX-9...not that it's all that great either.

    Minivan? Me or my wife? HAHAHAHAHAHA. Not hardly. We're far too irrational for that.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Minivan? Me or my wife? HAHAHAHAHAHA. Not hardly. We're far too irrational for that.

    Hahaha. And thus, the SUV was born.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    Seat heaters - making an assumption since they only have on/off - not two stage switch.


    Yes, only an "On-Off" position

    I just spent 3 days in a 2007 and it has more storage (at least at hand) than the CX-9...not that it's all that great either.

    Gotcha

    Minivan? Me or my wife? HAHAHAHAHAHA. Not hardly. We're far too irrational for that.

    Fantastic! Good luck in your hunting!
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    I still think that they are afraid it will steal from Explorer sales, since (except for towing) it has better MPG, comfort and better dimensions than the Explorer.

    HA! That's impossible, because there are no Explo sales for the TX to steal!
    Even so, I doubt that. And the Explorer actually has more interior room, and about the same cuft of cargo space despite being a little over 8 in. shorter in length.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    I think the lambdas also lack behind in interior design: too much hard-shining material covering the dash and steering wheel, tiny buttons to control the A/C, and that single stalk design for wiper/wash/light control. Not to forget the sub-compact thin steering wheel.

    I still like the design of the Outlook's Interior more. The "sporty" essence of the CX-9 looks cheesy to me. The silver outlined seats? And that strip of aluminum/ chrome running down the side of the center console looks terrible to me. But our thoughts on these aspects are only oppinions.

    You do have to move the second row seat quite a bit foward to have anyhing close to comfort. In the lambdas, the 2nd row seat can stay in rearmost position. And an adult will immediately be comfortable, not sub-decent. So given driver's- and passenger comfort, equipment, and cargo room, I'd say the only reason to go for the CX-9 is a little better performance (maybe price-I'm going to check that.)
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    Reading through the MT of the year columns on the website, I give congrats to Mazda. They have made strides forward.

    But did anyone else notice that there were only three ture SUVs in that test, out of 11? That's less than 70%!!!
    At first, I thought "wow, this is a statement about the market". Then I realized All of Ford and GM's new full sized SUVs came out last year. But still, MT for some reason, was missing two lambdas (why no have doubles this year? THey did it with Tahoe-Yukon-Escalade, and Navi- Expedition last year). THat would total # of 13. The game gets interesting...
  • austx37austx37 Member Posts: 18
    You need to get in and drive a Veracruz before you make that comment. I own one and it was so easy to go from my Accord to a Veracruz in terms of ease of driving. Not hard to park either.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    My comment was valid. I said I couldn't imagine it, not that it couldn't.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    My store is next to Hyundai, I should go check out the Veracruz. The exterior styling has not caught my eye much, but, I have not seen the interior.
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    You do have to move the second row seat quite a bit foward to have anyhing close to comfort. In the lambdas, the 2nd row seat can stay in rearmost position. And an adult will immediately be comfortable, not sub-decent

    actually, there's more legroom in the CX-9 combined in rows 2&3 as compared to a lambda, so even after you move the 2nd row up a few inches, you'll still have more legroom in the CX-9's 2nd row.

    I'd say the only reason to get a lambda is space for those who really, really don't want a minivan.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    actually, there's more legroom in the CX-9 combined in rows 2&3 as compared to a lambda, so even after you move the 2nd row up a few inches, you'll still have more legroom in the CX-9's 2nd row.

    This is one time I have to say I'll agree with Freealfas (!) that we shouldn't look at numbers. I can believe that the CX-9 has a little more 2nd row legroom than an Outlook. But the third rows of the two don't even compare.It's supposed to be an inch or something in difference, but when I sit in the Mazda with row two in the rear most position, my knees touch the 2nd row bench. Not so in the Outlook. You could almost move the 2nd row bench back a couple of inches and regain all the legroom, and still have more third row leg room.
    The CX-9 is a decent compromise, but that's most of what it is- compromise space for styling, capability for performance. If you want comfort for 7 (maybe eight) passengers in in a CUV, you need a Lambda (maybe a Taurus X). Period.
  • nastacionastacio Member Posts: 370
    I still like the design of the Outlook's Interior more. The "sporty" essence of the CX-9 looks cheesy to me. The silver outlined seats? And that strip of aluminum/ chrome running down the side of the center console looks terrible to me. But our thoughts on these aspects are only opinions.

    Actually, the thin steering wheel, the tiny A/C buttons (compared to a traditional turning knob,) and the single stalk are objective points as they interfere with function. I agree that appearance would be subjective.

    So given driver's- and passenger comfort, equipment, and cargo room

    I'll give you passenger comfort when carrying 7 people, the ability to carry 8 people (3 kids in the back,) and cargo room. Driver's comfort goes to the CX-9 (indirect blue lighting, thicker steering wheel, proper two stalks, traditional rotary AC controls), as does equipment (bluetooth, a power hatch and larger wheels) and price (1K less.)

    The lambda's advantage on the equipment point is that you can have rear-DVD *and* the sunroof.

    I wouldn't call performance a CX-9 advantage, although I have not driven the 2008 with the bored-out 3.7 liter engine. Parking space maneuverability is a big advantage though.
  • mrblonde49mrblonde49 Member Posts: 626
    I'd say the only reason to get a lambda is space for those who really, really don't want a minivan. "

    I haven't looked at it that closely, but I get the feeling from reading the forums here that the real world mileage is a bit better in the lambdas as well...
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    That wouldn't surprise me. Mazdas in general get less MPG than their counterparts (eg Mazda3 vs Civic, Mazda6 vs Camry, etc). I think it's because Mazdas are geared more towards sportiness at the expense of MPG. For those drivers not interested in sportiness, better driving dynamics, then Mazda might not be the way to go.

    My Freestyle has about the same room as a CX-9 and I average in the low 20s MPG with mixed highway/non-highway driving. I'm not too interested in sportiness, so that's why I'm keeping my 05 Freestyle for now. It's only FWD, but I can get close to 30mpg on the highway if I keep the speed at about 65mph, and the lowest we get on nearly all subarb driving is about 20mpg.
  • nastacionastacio Member Posts: 370
    I think it's because Mazdas are geared more towards sportiness at the expense of MPG.

    It is mostly because of the engines. The 4 cylinder engines on the Civic use VTEC camshafts and Toyota has a lock on V6 cylinder engine performance/economy right now.

    The Ford-sourced engines in the Mazdas are rev-happy, with torque peaking at 4500 rpm, whereas the GM 3.6 V6 peaks around 3200rpm. In the 3.7, Mazda lowered the peak torque to 4250 rpm, but it probably develops a bit less torque at 3200rpm as the GM 3.6. I wrote it before, but I really think this new GM 3.6 is the secret behind lambda's all-around package.

    PS: The Freestyle has better mileage than a CX-9 or lambda in the same sense a 4 cylinder achieves better mileage than a V6. I know from my own experience the kind of magic a CVT can do, but I would really like to know how Ford kept the FS at 4000 lbs to make the smaller V6 work.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    The Ford-sourced engines in the Mazdas are rev-happy, with torque peaking at 4500 rpm, whereas the GM 3.6 V6 peaks around 3200rpm

    The 3.7L has a different map then the 3.5L Ford engine. So power delivery is different. Mazda gets more power out of a slightly bigger engine, while maintaining the same fuel economy.

    The transmissions have a lot to do with fuel economy. Gear ratio, and shift position, as well as top gear cruising RPM's factor into fuel economy. The engine is not the only factor.
  • chuckhoychuckhoy Member Posts: 420
    ...fail to see how anything as large as these CUVs can be described as "sporty". I suppose some cargo container or supertanker ships are more "sporty" than others, but come on.

    That Oddessy ad still bugs me to no end. You know the one where some idiot (sitting in an empty minivan with the obligatory hot woman in the passenger seat) is driving like a moron down a mountain road. He is taking corners too fast and the woman is hanging onto the grab handle. Now, if they wanted to depict real life the minivan would be full of screaming kids and the wife would smack him for acting like an idiot with the kids in the car. If you want to have fun driving, get a Miata or something small and tossable. Otherwise, grow up and drive responsibly with kids in the car.

    Sorry, but that ad bugs me to no end.
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    Restricting the towing to 1000lbs maybe? I have the FWD and while it has enough power for normal use (passengers and their stuff), there's no reserve for big towing, so maybe that's why the HP doesn't have to be so high? The lambdas can tow a lot more, so the engine has to be powerful enough for the towing potential, even if it's never used. That makes the engine unnecessarily powerful for those not needing the towing capability, but I guess it's cheaper to have only one engine then a optional engine with more power for those needing to tow.
  • nastacionastacio Member Posts: 370
    Standard two capacity is still the same for both (2000 lbs, not sure where you got 1000lbs, unless you are talking about unbraked trailers, in which case the same limit applies to the CX-9.)

    There are still 360lbs unaccounted for and unless the CX-9 has a big metal block welded to its floor, they are going somewhere else. I will rule out the engine as the TX with the same 3.5 liter engine as the CX-9 is listed with the same weight as the FS.
  • stevedebistevedebi Member Posts: 4,098
    "And the Explorer actually has more interior room, and about the same cuft of cargo space despite being a little over 8 in. shorter in length."

    Hmmm, difficult to say from the Ford website. The FS actually has 22 cu ft behind the 3rd seat; the specs don't include the "well" below the floor for some reason.

    The site doesn't give total Cu Ft for the Explorer, but the MPG is better for the T-Rex, and I guarantee that the T-Rex rides better, and has more room in the 3rd seat. The T-Rex also has stadium seating, including a raised roof for the 3rd row.

    All in all, I still think that there is some fear that the T-Rex may take some Explorer customers. Along with that is the past history, when the Explorer was the bread-and-butter vehicle.
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    Which looks better for 2 passengers? Or do they look about the same? Remember you can slide the 2nd row forward for more knee room.

    http://www.familycar.com/RoadTests/MazdaCX9/Images/ThirdRowSeat.jpg

    http://www.familycar.com/RoadTests/FordTaurusX/Images/ThirdRowSeat.jpg

    http://www.familycar.com/RoadTests/ToyotaHighlander/Images2008/ThirdRowSeat.jpg

    http://www.familycar.com/RoadTests/HyundaiVeracruz/Images/ThirdRowSeat.jpg

    http://www.familycar.com/RoadTests/BuickEnclave/Images/ThirdRowSeat.jpg

    http://www.familycar.com/RoadTests/Mazda5/Images/ThirdRowSeat.jpg
  • freealfasfreealfas Member Posts: 652
    any of them other than the mazda's...
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    The Buick has a nice interior overall, but the finishing of the third row, especially below the bottom seat cushion, looks the cheesiest of all of them.
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    The TaurusX 3rd row isn't angled back so much. Some of the others are angled back so they look more difficult to climb out of.
  • nastacionastacio Member Posts: 370
    Were the 2nd row seats all the way forward? Hard to tell, but they seemed adjust at random in the pictures.
  • cason1cason1 Member Posts: 65
    Also, you have to look at the size of the seat bottom; ie: from the seat back/seat cushion intersection to the front of the cushion. Some of them are ridiculously short. Easy way to pick up a couple inches of "leg room", but I suspect that a large number of adults sitting there are going to be uncomfortable as heck given no support under their lower thighs. BTW - the second row of the lambdas has a similar seat cushion.
  • nastacionastacio Member Posts: 370
    Shorter seat cushions don't help legroom, tilting them upwards do. As I understand it, legroom is measured on a straight line from the hip to the front seat and then down to the floor.
  • nastacionastacio Member Posts: 370
    The transmissions have a lot to do with fuel economy. Gear ratio, and shift position, as well as top gear cruising RPM's factor into fuel economy. The engine is not the only factor.

    I didn't mean it in general, but in this specific case. Both the CX-9 and the lambda engines run at about 1600rpm @65mph.

    GM optimized the power curve for 65mph cruising and that was a smart thing to do. I wish Ford had done the same to its 3.7 engine, lowering peak torque RPM way lower than 4250RPM instead of bumping it up so much (21 lbft is a lot for a 0.2 liter increase.) Technical limitation or choice, Ford is not at the same level as GM in the engine department.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    May I ask, where are the specs for the 3.7L from Ford? What vehicle is it in/going to be in?

    Thanks!

    (Just passing by on the way to a different forum, but that caught my eye as I haven't heard).
  • gleppertgleppert Member Posts: 19
    Agreed. Tilting them up provides more support. But when I tilt up the driver's seat in my Outlook, my a-- drops so low I practically lose visibility. In general, I feel the seats do not rise high enough in the Outlook. The driver's seat is barely above the center console. Ergo, no support under the legs.

    For those of you who read my previous posts, you're right! I'm the guy with the leg and hip pain. No resolution yet.

    Test drove a VC, but would need more time behind the wheel to adequately gauge comfort as I drove 1.5 hrs from work in the Outlook and within minutes got behind the wheel of the VC while still in pain. Got a good deal on an '07 GLS with Premium Package that the dealer was willing to offer on an '08, but as expected, I got hosed on a trade.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Got a good deal on an '07 GLS with Premium Package that the dealer was willing to offer on an '08, but as expected, I got hosed on a trade.

    Would the dealer go ahead on the deal if you sold the car yourself and offered no trade? That'd be the route to go if so.
  • gleppertgleppert Member Posts: 19
    Fairly certain he would, but that might depend on what he thought he might get on a resale.

    Still uncertain about the 3rd row in the VC and ingress and egress, but that would be for the kids to decide. Prefer the Outlook - which is why I bought it - but the seating discomfort isn't going to go away!!
  • chuckhoychuckhoy Member Posts: 420
    I would say that the Ford seats look the best.
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    The angled seats may help with thigh support for those seats so low to the floor, but ideally you'd design the seats to be up higher to give thigh support and so you don't feel like you're sitting in a bucket.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Is this a non-contender anymore? If so, why?

    Just curious to hear what you all think.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    Actually, the thin steering wheel, the tiny A/C buttons (compared to a traditional turning knob,) and the single stalk are objective points as they interfere with function. I agree that appearance would be subjective.

    The huge size of the CX-9's center console definitely interferes with front passenger space. And those aluminum strpis can reflect during the day.

    Driver's comfort goes to the CX-9 (indirect blue lighting, thicker steering wheel, proper two stalks, traditional rotary AC controls), as does equipment (bluetooth, a power hatch and larger wheels) and price (1K less.)

    Driver's comfort definitely goes to the lambdas as studies show that red light is better for your eyes when driving than blue- which makes my head hurt. And no one has complained about the AC controls. Eventually, GM will give up and offer bluetooth.

    Parking space manuverability is an advantage, but the lambdas manuver into spaces just as well as the CX-9.

    Right back to the CX-9 's only advantage being performance.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    Pilot's definitely a contender, just an outdated one waiting more desperately than Honda expected for a change. After a remodel, it will definitely top some competitors, like the new Highlander.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    Explorer has more third row leg room, and more interior width. With 2nd row seats moved back a little, Explorer has more overall legroom.

    No offense to the TAURUS X (must we be so juvenile?), but I think Ford is embarassed by it. So they just may want to "get by" until the Flex is showroom-ready.

    Right now I would say that there isn't enough crowd of TX lovers to canibalize Explorer sales.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    The CX-9's looks like there is no legroom- like your legs have to stop at your knees. So you won't be getting the 38 in of leg room promised in the 2nd row.

    Enclave's definitely looks the best to me, and while you definitely sit up higher above the ground in the Buick, the stadium seating in the TX looks nice.
    Off topic- If you want to see real stadium seating, look at the Jeep Commander. I saw one that was lowered for effect, and the rows went up like a mountain. But there is no second/ third row leg room.
  • chuckhoychuckhoy Member Posts: 420
    And no one has complained about the AC controls.

    Most just set the climate control and forget about it. You never have to mess with it again.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    wish Ford had done the same to its 3.7 engine, lowering peak torque RPM way lower than 4250RPM instead of bumping it up so much (21 lbft is a lot for a 0.2 liter increase.) Technical limitation or choice, Ford is not at the same level as GM in the engine department.

    Umm....excuse me...Mazda decided to up the engine to a 3.7L, along with a new map. Not Ford. This engine is rumored to be used in possible up comming Ford products. Mazda builds this engine completely in Japan. It even sounds different then the 3.5L used in 2007.
  • freealfasfreealfas Member Posts: 652
    Found in another forum I read...

    "October 2007
    Reliability findings
    Here are the details on our analysis of how automakers from around the globe fare

    DENTS IN TOYOTA'S ARMOR

    Toyota's reliability record in our survey would make it the envy of almost any other automaker. But Toyota seems to have fallen victim to bug-ridden redesigns. Two models with below-average reliability are the Camry with the V6 engine and the four-wheel-drive V8 version of the Tundra pickup. Both were redesigned for 2007. The third is the all-wheel-drive Lexus GS sedan. Because we don't recommend models with below-average reliability, those three no longer make Consumer Reports' recommended list (see What's up, what's down).

    However, the four-cylinder version of the Camry and the hybrid versions of the Camry and GS all scored above average and will continue to be recommended.

    What went wrong? The survey identified problems with the six-speed automatic transmission as the major concern with the Camry V6. Subscribers reported problems with the four-wheel-drive system in the Tundra. Owners of the AWD Lexus GS informed us of problems with power accessories and the audio system.

    Because of those findings, we will no longer recommend new or redesigned Toyotas without reliability data on a specific design. If Toyota returns to its previous record of outstanding reliability, we may resume recommending its new models based on history.

    FORD'S RELIABILITY IMPROVES SIGNIFICANTLY

    The odds of getting a reliable new vehicle from Ford are the best we've seen in years. Of the 44 models from Ford, Lincoln, and Mercury in our survey, 41 of them scored average or better in predicted reliability. Only the Ford Explorer (V8), Mercury Mountaineer (V8), and the Lincoln Mark LT are below average.

    The Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan remained above average in their second year and ranked among the top reliable family sedans. New for 2007 SUVs such as the Ford Edge and Lincoln MKX, as well as the freshened Ford Expedition and Lincoln Navigator, were all average or above.

    The other domestic automakers did not fare as well. Only 49 percent of General Motors and 67 percent of Chrysler models had average or better predicted reliability. Their new or redesigned for 2007 models were more mixed. The new GMC Acadia, Saturn Outlook, and Saturn Aura XE had average or better reliability; the redesigned 2007 Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra 1500 and 2500 were average or better. But the redesigned Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon dropped to much below average after above-average reliability last year in its initial few months. The redesigned Cadillac Escalade SUV and EXT pickup, the Chevrolet Avalanche, Chevrolet Suburban, GMC Yukon XL, and the new Saturn Aura XR were all below average. The Pontiac Solstice, introduced for 2006, has the worst new-car prediction score in the survey.

    Chrysler had a few reliable first-year models. The Chrysler Aspen, Jeep Compass, and front-wheel-drive Dodge Caliber were above average. But the all-wheel-drive Dodge Caliber and Dodge Nitro were much below average. The Chrysler Town & Country and Dodge Grand Caravan minivans improved to average in their last year before a major redesign. The Jeep Commander and Dodge Charger had improved to average as well.

    MEAGER GAINS FROM EUROPE

    The news from Europe has been mostly dismal in recent years, with models from Jaguar, Land Rover, and Mercedes-Benz doing poorly in our surveys. Things may be turning around, even if some vehicles aren't quite there yet. As recently as 2005, very few European luxury sedans could scrape up even an average rating in reliability; only the Audi A4, BMW 3 Series, Saab 9-5, and Volvo S60 were up to the task. Jaguar and Mercedes-Benz weren't even in the running, with some models having consistently poor reliability.

    But now, the Audi A3, A4, and A6 are all average or better, as are some or all versions of the BMW 3, 5, and 7 Series. The Volvo S60 is above average, as are the V70 and XC70 wagon derivatives before their 2008 redesign. And for the first time in recent years, the Mercedes-Benz C-Class (V6, RWD) is no longer below average. The C-Class has been redesigned for 2008. The Jaguar S-Type has improved to average and the Mini Cooper S hatchback is much better than average. The Porsche Cayman is among the most reliable, but time will tell how this model will hold up. The Porsche 911 is above average and is now recommended.

    We're also seeing a few positives with European SUVs. The BMW X3 and X5 are both average, and so is the perennially troublesome Volvo XC90, at least in its six-cylinder version. All Mercedes-Benz and Land Rover SUVs are still well below average.

    ASIA CONTINUES TO DOMINATE

    Reliability remains a Japanese forte. All Honda, Subaru, and Mitsubishi models that we have sufficient data for ranked at least average. Moreover, 9 out of the 10 models with the top reliability are Japanese makes.

    Just because a vehicle carries a Japanese nameplate doesn't make it reliable. Nissan's Armada SUV, Titan pickup, and Quest minivan continued to be well below average. The Infiniti QX56 has perennial reliability woes. Mazda's new CX-7 and CX-9 SUVs and Suzuki's Grand Vitara SUV have also shown to be unreliable, as are the previously mentioned Toyotas.

    The South Korean nameplates, Hyundai and Kia, continue to show improved reliability; most models are now average or better. But some models are suffering some glitches. Among them are the Kia Amanti sedan, Sedona minivan and its Hyundai Entourage twin, and the Kia Sorento SUV."
  • nastacionastacio Member Posts: 370
    The 3.7 I am referring to is the one found in the CX-9. It is sourced from the Ford parts bin, with some individual tuning by Mazda. I believe the numbers are 273hp/270lbft.

    Some people have mentioned that a DSI version of this engine may find its way to the Lincoln MKX.
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    May I ask, where are the specs for the 3.7L from Ford? What vehicle is it in/going to be in?

    No specs have been confirmed for the Ford version yet grad. But it is rumored to be dropped in the next F-150, Mustang, Explorer, and a couple of Lincolns. The Lincolns will most likely get the DI version making upwards of 320+ HP. A TwinForce 3.5L making around 400 HP is rumored as options for them as well.

    I wouldn't be surprised to see the Flex get the 3.7L either given its size.
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    Right back to the CX-9 's only advantage being performance. and braking, handling and just about every other driving dynamic for those who care about such things...of course braking distance is definitely a safety issue as well.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles