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
Sounds like the pot calling the kettle black, to me.
You haven't picked up on my real side because I don't beat it into everyone's head. I like discussing the vehicles, not just singing one vehicle's praises since this is about ALL crossover vehicles.
Quite the contrary my good sir! Mazda sales are up 9% over last year. Mazda will never sell in volume like Honda or Toyota. Mazda seems to be doing well in the nitch they are in. Like every other company, they look to increase sales / profit / and market share. They seem to be doing that.
In terms of crossovers, CX-7 sales are at 38,172 up from 18,904 in 2006. CX-9 sales are at 22,501.
That said, from a sales perspectives, the CX-7 18.9K in 2006 is not all full-year, so the year-over-year comparison is somewhat skewed. Further, November, the CX-7 is down 21%, which is not comforting. I feel the more expensive CX-9 has been eating into CX-7's sales upon arrival, which is certainly not a bad thing (profit-wise) but something to be cautioned; as a matter of fact, the CX-9 almost posted the same number of units sold in November as the CX-7.
On another note, I checked out the Hyundai Veracruz a few weeks ago and really enjoyed the vehicle. The one thing I do want to point out, the third row entry/exit is BY FAR the easiest, likely ever (to-date). The three step system is something every similar model should have (but unfortunately most others require a little more work than Hyundai's). Thumbs up!!! By the way, I liked both the outside and inside of the vehicle. The leather seating surface had me stay inside a little more time than I wanted to :-); the quality was fantastic as well.
100% correct. The CX-7 went on sale in May / June of the previous year. Most all sales were down in November, except the Mazda3. It was a tough month. Most mfgrs had this issue with their line as a whole.
I do not see the CX-9 eating away sales from the CX-7. I rarely see they two cross shopped in my store. Same goes for my region as well. They are no where near the same size, and the 9 jumps in in price as well. It's like saying the CR-V is losing sales the the Pilot.
Wrong; it means you like to DRIVE. If you want a coddling cruiser, Mazda isn't for you.
It looks good – shape. That’s only I can think. Ohh, I forgot prem. fuel only. That's forum drives me crazy.
Huh?
Premium is not required for 2008 CX-7's.
That is pretty accurate. I would say the CX-9 and Mazda6 have the softest rides out of all Mazda's. But, in general, they ride stiffer then most cars in their respective class.
If you want a cushy, isolated ride you're not going to get the same handling or feedback from the road.
That's fine. That's why GM makes the Buick, and Toyota, the Camry.
What you're saying totally wrong. I had BMW 733, Audi 90 S, A4, VW Golf, Jetta, Passat and tell you I don't need understand zoom zoom philosophy. All these cars doesn't have any philosophy, they all have quiet sporty, fun ride, not a stiff ride =(Mazda), and fine ride for their year of production.
What you're saying totally wrong.
Oh, everyone understands how Mazdas are fun to drive? That's good to know.
Just disagree, and move on. None of the vehicles you bring up are relevant to this discussion. I'd wager that with Mazda's firmer ride, it's more fun to drive than the Acadia with its softer one. That's what some people don't get. If you don't want driving fun and instead want cushy, buy something other than Mazda. You obviously did (and should get paid by GM and VW for all the commercials you do for them here).
I've driven an Audi A4 for many interstate miles (the ex's dad was a GSM for an Audi/Porsche dealer). It was similar to my Accord, and not nearly as sporty in feel as the Mazda 3. It was heavy, with very deliberate motions. Secure on the highway, but very heavy feeling, and not all that tossable.
That's bull- the 6 is nicer and cheaper and better driver than the Passat. and the 3 is 10 times nicer than the Jetta- which is a Corolla wannabe. The 3 is the best in it's segment-maybe along with the Civic.
Some people prefer a controlled, stiff ride. BMW X3 comes immediately to mind. I drove an early one that was stiff even without the Sport package. I've been told they softened it up a bit. Or what about an Infiniti FX with the 20" wheel and tire package? Not much bump absorption from those sidewalls.
Others prefer a soft, cushy, isolated ride. Think Buick or Lexus.
I'd prefer the Bimmer or FX on a nice, twisty road with smooth pavement.
I'd prefer the Buick or Lexus if I were going to drive a mile on a gravel road, though.
The question is, which do you encounter more often? Curves or bumps? Point is, one isn't better than the other, just more well suited to your particular task.
You dure don't make it sound that way.
Mazda 6 is better passat? Have u drove passat? It's one the finest and safest cars in this class.
what part of that quote did YOU NOT SAY. You bob and weave more than a boxer. YOU SAID that all I did was illustrate your inaccurracy. It's not even sport to shoot holes in a comment like that. so in your world the manufacturer's are not part of what you term the "automotive industry" or even the more vague "auto world"... interesting thesis yet again...
"The lengths I would go to for that would probably land me in prison."
That's a pretty piss poor response for someone who thinks they are an adult. I've disagreed with you on any number of occasion's. I've never thought or even considered an immature statement like this that I'm sure you will now try and say you didn't say or whatever. You can't hold an argument and you shouldn't be in a public forum with childlike statements like that.
Why are we STILL talking about VWs in here, again?
and you facts to support your opinions lie where? My guess is you have never driven a passat or a jetta for that matter but deem your opinion accurate regardless of those petty facts. perhaps you could bolster your opinion with sales figures since that is fun for you to do.
"The 3 is the best in it's segment-maybe along with the Civic'
contradicting oneself yet again, a popular pastime for you, so which is it, or have you not driven either of these to have an informed opinion about them either?
This really has no relevance here. But, since you brought it up...Mazda3 has more interior room then Corolla.
I do remember them calling the CX-9 best CUV under 35, but wasn't the Outlook/Acadia best at something, too?
And though the 3 is inexpensive, it's not cheap. The interior is the finest in its class. And it is very roomy inside.The Jetta is plain and expensive. A perforrmance 3 is 20g. A performance Jetta is 30!!!!!
Don't wager. Just go out and drive it and form your own oppinion. I do for once have to agree with Vad and say the ride is rough and a bit unforgiving compared to the Acadia. The way I see it, all the lambdas need is about 15-20 more horsepower, and they would perform best in class (and they get 30 extra hp in 2009-2010).
Personally, I like the debate, but I am tired of talking about vehicles that have no bearing on this forum. (Compacts, Full Size Cars, etc...)
If we could keep on task, we'd be in better shape around here!
A group of automotive journalist decides the winner. Each group has a total of 25 votes to allocate, and cannot give more than 10 points to a single vehicle. They look at factors such as innovation, design, safety, handling, driver satisfaction and value for the dollar.
“The jurors represent outlets such as the MSN Autos, the Toronto Star,
Car and Driver magazine, AutoWeek, The Chicago Tribune, MotorWeek, USA
Today, Autoline Detroit, Edmunds.com, Road & Track magazine, the San Jose
Mercury News, Consumer Guide, the Boston Globe, Automotive News and
Fortune.”
http://www.autoobserver.com/2007/12/north-american.html.
How is a Jetta relevant, and not minivans? You guys got all over me for that, where are the off topic police now?
If you want to discuss VW, fine, at least stick to the Tiguan and Touareg. :P
Yes, VW interiors are nice, but go price a Touareg.
It is North American, after all, so Buick enjoys home field advantage against Mazda. Among hybrids the Tahoe doesn't break enough new ground to earn it. The Lambdas are probably also the most significant new entry, and since the Encalve doesn't have to compete with its brothers (stealing votes from each other), I bet this will be an easy win.
For cars, I'll say Malibu, because it's a better step up from the old Malibu than the new Accord is from the old Accord. Also, Honda actually dropped the Accord hybrid. The CTS' interior isn't enough, and the powertrain in that car is mostly carry over. If you think about it, the top Malibu actually gets the same engine as the CTS, at a lower price point.
So, my guess is Malibu and Enclave.
Anyone betting against the Enclave?
I'm pulling for the CX.
I do think the CX9 will come in 2nd.
IMO the hybrid won't win a lot of votes.
My guess is it would be either the CX-9 or Enclave. It really helps to define a segment that never existed before.
I'd argue the only thing now that the CUV market gains on the CUV is pricepoint and weight. Now if they could only trim the price and weight while the hybrid drive to get even better mpg and keeping towing capacity you might be on to something.
Yep, I am! I'd putting my internet-money down on the Tahoe Hybrid. GM is the first company to put a hybrid in a truck that can really benefit from it: it gets 21 mpg in the city! And 22 mpg on the hwy! That's nearly incredible for a beast that size. The regular Tahoe gets about 14/20 at best. I think that's the smartest thing GM could have done with its big trucks.
The only thing going against the Tahoe Hybrid is its starting price: nearly $50k. It's not worth that, imo, so that might hurt its chances.
Yet, all GM CUV's are bigger in side (cargo) than Tahoe. I think GM miscalculated the impact of Acadia, Outlook, Enclave and new 09' Chevy CUV.(forgot name). This cars will take away some people who used to be buy Tahoes.
I, personally, was looking to buy Tahoe, but price bite me little bit. I got good deal for almost entry level Tahoe Hybrid (considerably the price tag). Anyway, than I saw Acadia and it was much better deal for same capacities. For people who loves extra ....extra options is best deal, for 45K you will get everything, where same options for Tahoe will be about 55K
I'm pulling for the CX.
I'm pushing the Enclave. But the Tahoe does have a chance as nno other SUV anywhere near that size gets over 20 mpg in the city!
Sorry hosts!!
So what do you all think of the 09 Pilot? Rumor is that it was be out at the Detroit auto show?
Let's look at this picture:
CX-9 - So, so CUV . Very small market, who wants have a fun zoom.....zoom....., while driving with/without family CUV, good options raw, unknown reliability.
Tahoe Hybrid- big, and nasty truck. Gas station have not built yet across US.
Enclave - one of the biggets CUV, ride as Lexus, a lot options, good reliability, very good finishing inside.
no- not the Enclave. The lambdas have it beaten there and come close in MPG.
I second that. I'd bet GM's having a big year in '08.