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
Agreed - Lincoln is the worst. It is hard to imagine what sort of thinking went into MKZ and MKS.
Yes, and in that example, the VWs have constantly been chastised for being overpriced, the old Passat W8 4-motion being the worst offender. It may very well be that VW sales suffer because they don't have a cheaper awd solution.
In the case of the CRV, I remember Car&Driver berating Honda for taking the defunct Civic Wagon's "RealTime" system almost intact from that car, with the same logo font and everything. I guess that kind of conservative frugality would be the opposite extreme...
Let's set this straight:
VeraCruz vs Entourage- I would be SHOCKED if the minvan handles better. There is no way.
Pacifica VS Town Country-The Pacifica is quicker because of the new 4.0, and handling is so smooth. After driving both, I'd say advantage Pacifica.
Sienna vs Highlander- Haven't driven a Sienna, but numbers make up for that here and there. The Highlander is quick on its feet, and has a very smooth ride. Auto testers commend it on its size and handling, too. It's not the best interior comfort, but for handling, I give it to the Highlander.
Ford- The FS handled so much better than the departed Freestar.
I'd say the Enclave and Outlook drive just as well as an Odyssey.
So, yes- MOST Crossovers do outdo minvans in performance and handling, but that's not what minivans are for.
With that said, please take your minivan ranting somewhere else.
Not so fast :-) MOST crossovers outdo minivans from the same brand, but MOST crossovers don't outdo the Odyssey or the Sienna. In fact, MOST crossovers would have a hard time keeping up with them.
We are getting into "it is, it is not" territory again, [ateixeira] and I posted the numbers showing virtual ties in all performance/handling numbers, with the Sienna edging even the CX-9 in the accident avoidance maneuver.
Whether it "feels" faster on other CUVs during normal day-driving, that is a discussion without an end. I would, however, have a hard time "feeling" I am going faster when a squarish block of metal with sliding doors leaves me behind at a stop light.
It only took me 2 seconds to find Car&Driver articles with concrete numbers that fill in the blanks generated by your opinionated hypotheses. Do a little research, and yes, you will be "shocked." (For example, the Sienna pulls 0.76g; the Highlander 0.74g)
This is only one example, and not to put words in juice's mouth, but I think this is part of what he has been getting at:
"Why Buy A Crossover?
I still don't want a minivan, but it's interesting stuff.
Well you have to keep this in perspective. I am in no way trying to say the CX-9 is comparable to it's car brethren on the Mazda lots. However, I can't recall a review I've read of the CX-9 where it wasn't praised for it's handling compared to its competitors.
Obviously some people are going to find something that they feel handles better in the class and I'm just curious as to why they would feel that way.
Isn't that what we're here for after all?
No kidding? But within this class why did you feel it wasn't the zoom-zoom champ?
I already explained why: I drove under normal conditions, from traffic light to traffic light, on ramps, interstate, etc. All of the vehicles mentioned have decent suspensions without floating on the highway or excessive leaning on turns. Also the powertrain was not the best of the bunch (I test drove the 2007 model.)
Once again, had I taken it to a track (which only magazines do) maybe I would feel differently.
I had a Mazda6 S before the Mustang and even though it wasn't the best performing sedan out there, it certainly felt like it was to me.
Road noise, maybe? :P
Fair enough. I guess I didn't catch that the first time around. Seems to me you shouldn't be telling people the "zoom-zoom" wasn't there for you if you didn't try to find it in the first place though. :P
Road noise, maybe?
You really don't get what "zoom-zoom" means do you? :P
Try reading again, or even reading it :-) I wrote "The magazines take these things to closed tracks and maybe they behave differently at hold-on-to-your-cheerios speeds. Nothing that anyone in this thread will ever experience though (unless they go work for said magazines.)".
There are cars that feel like a brick on wheels even during normal day driving, with head-tossing weight transfer during gear changes, head-tilting leaning on corners, bouncing suspension on bumps, jarring suspension, etc. Outlook/Odyssey/Sienna were very composed during my test-drives.
You really don't get what "zoom-zoom" means do you?
The Mazda cool-aid powers are strong with you. Road noise was a recurring comment on all Mazda 6s reviews.
What I was saying before was that the only minivan that was outperforming CUVs was the Sienna, and maybe the Caravan.Most CUVs do beat the Odessey (the Pilot isn't one!), but someone said that it did better in braking.
it is commonly known the benefits of the minivan over the CUV -interior room- and for that reason, I thought minivans would live forever. But with the passenger space of the Freestyle/ Taurus X, and the passenger space and cargo room of the Lambdas, I can see their days are limited. Eventually a CUV will do all the things a minivan does, only more and better. Not bashing any van fans out there, but eventually, it will happen.
As for the Taurus X, that particular car may be wonderful and efficient, but style-wise, it's not far enough removed from minivans to usurp much of their sales. My "dude" friends even rib me about my CX-7 "being a minivan," even though I think it's not even close.
I think minivans will always be around, or at least until they make a Lambda with power sliding doors on both sides - and then, what would be the point?
Sounds like you haven't driven either. Have an open mind, you might be surprised.
The Pacifica is quicker because of the new 4.0
If you had driven the new vans you might be aware that they have that same engine!
Haven't driven a Sienna, but numbers make up for that here and there
carlitos92 posted numbers to contradict your theory, and again, have you even driven one with the new 3.5l?
Nissan Quest was compared to a real SUV- the Armada
Actually I believe I mentioned the Pathfinder, and only since the Murano doesn't offer a 3rd row.
What I was saying before was that the only minivan that was outperforming CUVs was the Sienna, and maybe the Caravan.Most CUVs do beat the Odessey (the Pilot isn't one!)
No argument here, but earlier you said most CUVs outhandle minivans, yet the 3 vans you mention in the paragraph above happen to be the #1, #2, and #3 selling minivans! They represent well over 50% of the market share nowadays.
Factoid from C&D: the Ody, Sienna, Enclave, and Taurus X all tie with 0.76g of lateral grip.
I can see their days are limited
The segment is certainly shrinking, but I think there will always be enough demand to keep the better ones going.
0-60 in 7.7s, 16mpg observed, 0.76g lateral grip, and 200 ft braking from 70mph. Good acceleration, but the other numbers are not so good.
For comparison, the Subaru Tribeca did 7.7s also, 18mpg, .77g grip, and 173ft braking. Pretty good overall performance.
Enclave? 9.0s to 60, 180ft braking, .76g and 14 mpg. We have to remember this is the most softly tuned Lambda.
These aren't exactly numbers to brag about, though they're not bad.
Anyone have CX9 data?
0-60 in 7.8 sec, 1/4 mile in 16.2 sec, 16 mpg observed, 0.78g grip, 192 ft braking
These numbers also somewhat match those of MotorTrend
Why do you keep bringing that up? :confuse: Road noise has nothing to do with a vehicles sportiness and I never even mentioned road noise.
I'll be the first to admit that my 6 was noisy, but that's now why I thought it was sporty. It had razor sharp steering, loads of grip, excellent brakes, and a rev-happy motor that, while seemingly underpowered by the numbers, ran with the best of them at the time.
Before the 6 we had a '96 Civic coupe and a '98 ZX2. Those were both much louder than the 6 and neither felt very sporty. The Civic drove like a bowl of mashed potatoes and the steering was numb. The ZX2 was faster in a straight line, by a lot, but handled no better. Therefore, IMO, neither of them had zoom-zoom. The 6 was in a whole different league when it came down to the "fun to drive" quotient.
So road noise = zoom-zoom? Crazy talk if you ask me.
Try reading again, or even reading it I wrote "The magazines take these things to closed tracks and maybe they behave differently at hold-on-to-your-cheerios speeds. Nothing that anyone in this thread will ever experience though (unless they go work for said magazines.)".
I didn't ask why you thought the mags felt the CX-9 was more fun to drive. We all get why they do. Why you don't agree with them is what I asked and you kindly offered your opinions up to all of us.
But even in daily driving the CX-9 should feel different than the others. Things like crisper, more accurate steering and a general feeling of being one with the road are apparent in every Mazda I've ever driven. And I've driven a 2006 MPV. Nice ride, but ironically it was the road/wind noise that turned us away from that one and landed us in the quiet cabin of the Explorer.
Maybe having owned a Mazda I can better tell what zoom-zoom is all about, or at least what most people I've come across feel it is too. Even though my Mustang GT is seconds faster to 60, grips better, and runs circles around 90% of the cars on the road today I don't feel zoom-zoom in it. The steering is a bit numb and I don't feel like I'm riding on rails (even though it basically is) in it. And boy is it loud inside that thing! Apparently zoom-zoom doesn't come from the assembly line either as the 6 and Stang are build on the same line in the same bldg.
I don't have a problem with you thinking the CX-9 doesn't exhibit the much discussed zoom-zoom factor. I was just curious as to why since you were one of the few people I've ever known to dispute Mazda's claim of the CX-9, or any Mazda for that matter, having zoom-zoom too.
Back in June 2007, MT got the CX-9 to stop in 123ft 60-0.
I'm seeing braking distances all over the map. I wonder if trim has an effect, especially if AWD is added (it adds 200 lbs).
AWD would, time of day, condition of tires, condition of test vehicle for the press fleet, surface conditions of the test facility, driver, temperature... yes there are more than a few things that can affect results...
thought the Murano felt very planted on the road, almost like driving on rails. It definitely feels more planted on the road than
my Lexus RX! One of the two things I didn't like about the Murano was the sluggish take-off
(I experienced this while leaving rest areas. It was hard to get up to speed comfortably enough to merge with traffic). The other thing that I didn't care for was the cheap interior. Guess I'm spoiled with that Lexus interior!
We pickup our new 07 JGC tomorrow afternoon.
So this may be the last posting I do on this forum since I am going back to the old true SUV , not CUV.
We do have the unique part of being satisfied owners of a 01 Jeep with only 2 problems: new rear seal & the infamous front rotor replacement, both fully covered under warranty.
It's now my son's car with 82k miles and my mechanic says it's the best engine package with the old I6 and Selectrac (he also helped convince me to get over the fact a new Jeep has a small V8, not much less MPG than the I6 but lotsa torque for towing). While the new Jeep is a lot like the old Jeep it has a much better ride from the 05 redesign and the goodies like heated leather seats (wife has a bad back), remote start, sunroof (optional to me, wife has one in her sport sedan & likes it), trip computer and deluxe audio w/steering wheel ctls sealed the deal. We drive cars 8-10 yrs into the ground so the warranty is a biggie too. In our final test drive of "our" Jeep that arrived via local dealer swap, we got 18mpg in a 1/3 city, 2/3 country drive so I think we'll get the 15/20 on the EPA sticker the way we drive. I considered waiting for an 08 but the rebates were less so even with an improved engine the torque did not increase much which is all I wanted the V8 for anyway.
We actually drove the Outlook one more time since I still really liked a lot about it and the dealer found a way to knock more money off bringing it under the Jeep price. Unfortunately this XE was missing heated leather (we knew that, too bad GM decided to drop it in their 08 XE options), and advanced audio w/steering wheel ctls & trip computer which we did not know. Coulda added remote start for $500. I still like the looks, room although my wife always questioned with kids mostly out of the house why I was so big on room, & idea of FWD>AWD. GM needs to get more competitive on their rebates and warranty to win us over who are satisfied w/competitive vehicles, $500 doesn't cut it.
Look for me still on the JGC forums, I still like a lot of what the Lamdas and VC has to offer & may peek here occasionally!
Please remember that no class of vehicle does it all and different things matter to different buyers. As this is a CUV forum can we drop the minivan dicsussions?
Vera Cruz seemed to lack style - especially from the front. Very bland IMHO. For fun looked that the ML - wife was turned off by the big grab rails inbetween the front seats.
Also surprised by the Subaru - Felt like the right size and shape
Overall a nice class of vehicles, will be a difficult choice this spring! :shades:
Maybe what we need is another support forum to help people get past the shame and stigma of buying a minivan when that's what they need. There's a lot of angst our there and You aren't helping. ; )
Anyway, personally I'm not a minivan candidate, but I still see their benefits, and the whole cultural shift to CUVs is fascinating to try and understand, even when I'm a CUVer myself.
I forgot we have a Upcoming Wagons & Crossovers discussion too. It could use a jolt. :shades:
AWD would add weight, but the 3.7l might make up for it and then some, who knows.
Using the same source (C&D in this case) helps ensure at least some consistency in the numbers.
Quick question about Subaru's AWD system. I have read that the automatic Subaru's have an electronic center diff, and they are basically FWD (95/05) until there is loss of grip, and manual tranny's have a mechanical center diff, and are 50/50. Is this true??
This has to deal with the Tribeca / Impreza
Tribeca: they call it VTD+VDC, Variable Torque Distribution with Vehicle Dynamics Control. Basicall it's a full-time setup, default is biased towards RWD, 45/55 I think is the default split, though it adjusts constantly.
It is not FWD based, in fact it's biased the other way, towards RWD, like BMW, Infiniti, and Mercedes. It's expensive and advanced, so it doesn't make it's way into lower priced Subarus, they haven't found a way to get costs down enough for that.
The Impreza varies by transmission. They had VTD on automatics up until MY2007, but for 2008 it's what they've called auto-AWD, 90/10 default split, FWD biased.
The manuals have a 50/50 split full-time and a relatively simple viscous coupling AWD.
So oddly enough, you have a front biased system, a balanced one, and a rear-biased system all from the same manufacturer. Go figure.
Mazda uses a Haldex, right? Probably the quickest reacting among the front-biased systems out there, though I still prefer full-time systems personally.
The Mazda Club Chat is on tonight. The chat room opens at 8:45PM ET Hope to see YOU there! Check out the schedule
Any chance the Mazda5 will get AWD? I think they offer than in Japan. And power sliding doors, and a 7 seat model, ... :sick:
If the Mazda5 had AWD, I think it would sell a lot better then it does. I think it would fit into the "crossover" catagory as well. I really think it is just too small for the average American family. Great little car. Problem is, it's a bit too small.
Here is the link to the new MPV in Japan.
http://minivans.about.com/od/mazda/ig/2007-Mazda-MPV-Minivan--Japan-/2007-Mazda-- - MPV--Japan-.htm
Driven both- thanks. (That's not something to be proud of- A guy not in the market for a car driving a van for fun!)
If you had driven the new vans you might be aware that they have that same engine!
True, they both have the same engine, but I believe the Pacifica weighs less.
Actually I believe I mentioned the Pathfinder, and only since the Murano doesn't offer a 3rd row.
I wasn't replying to you, but to the person who posted the car and Driver Test. Please Read my posts more carefully.
No argument here, but earlier you said most CUVs outhandle minivans, yet the 3 vans you mention in the paragraph above happen to be the #1, #2, and #3 selling minivans! They represent well over 50% of the market share nowadays.
When I say perform, I mean speed. I'd bet that all CUVs handle better, and I'd win.
True, the minivan will probably be around a long while, but they will end up like stations wagons (the real ones- not CUVs).
Let me just throw out some numbers to clear this up.
The Odyssey does 0-60 in 9+ sec, according to Edmunds. The Caravan does it in around 8.6. The Sienna does it in 6.7 (though I don't understand that 'cuz a Camry with the same engine does it in that time). The Pilot does it in 8.4-6. the Outlook does it in 8.1. The Pacifica does it in 7.4. Any questions?
I think the spread of 6.7 and 9+ is too large to believe.
Right and wrong. Do a little research to learn vehicles' weak and strong points- maybe read two or three magazine articles. Then go in and do a few extensive drives to evaluate the vehicle, as well as its said faults and strengths. But never rely stricly n a source- they don't know what you are looking for. And it is always good to know what professional testers think, as a second oppinion. Then you can look out for what you do and don't get with each vehicle.
Long story short, Odyssey = quick. Sienna = quicker. Both are adequate, but the Sienna has extra oomph. (I didn't want anyone to think I was doubting that).
I think I need to correct myself. According to Haldex, they do not supply any AWD system to Mazda. I did a little research, and found it's very similar to Haldex, which we all knew, but, they build it in house.
I found it very disappointing too. I don't see the attraction beyond "it's a Toyota" which might be enough. I suspect the 7-8 pass. CUV's which dominate here aren't really the competition. Explorer, Pathfinder, Pilot are more likely cross shopped.
It seems like all cars are going DOWNhill in quality in their new models. The Mazda 6 had darn good interior quality relative to its other Mazda brethren, but then again, it is old compared to them too, having debuted something like 6 years ago.
With that said, of the bunch that I have testdriven (Acadia, Highlander, CX-9, Veracruz), I'd have to say that the CX-9 drove the best. The interior could be a tad better, but I do like that sporty leather-wrapped steering wheel!