CX-7 Quality Commentary

[mazdaone]

I want to start a thread on the vehicle quality of anyones new Mazda CX-7. I think people are going to be very impressed with the initial quality of this vehicle. I have 9,000 miles on mine now and it is truely amazing. From the brake system, steering and suspension, and all the way up to the interior design and fit, it is amazing. I have never driven a nicer automobile than this one. Tell me about yours........


Mazdaone

[singlemalt_18]

I strongly agree. We have only had ours a week, but through this site (and two others not nearly as energetic or prolific), I spent about a month researching the CX-7. Upon gaining a better understanding about what the DISI Turbo is really all about - significantly increasing air to fuel ratios, controlled combustion dynamics that create otherwise unachievable thermal efficiencies, and that increase compression ratios even without turbo... I was becoming very excited.

Six airbags, five-star crash ratings, stability control, all in a truly great looking design... now my pulse was quickening. Personally, I think there are ALOT of really ugly new cars out there.

Perhaps what sinched it for me was the brakes - ABS with Electronic Brakeforce Distribution AND Pedal Assist! During the first part of our test drive, my wife and I were buckeled in while a friend of ours in the business, (currently the General Manager of a Mazda dealership), was in control behind the wheel. We started down some two-lane back roads, and he began putting the CX-7 through its paces. In his demonstration, and with fair warning, he executed a panic stop from about 65 MPH ! It was FRIGGIN UNBELIEVABLE!(omg)

There did not seem to be even a hint of front-end dive... and barely a chirp of a tire... we simply felt forward forces, securely restrained by the harnesses, that reminded me of the final braking on the Alpengeist at Busch Gardens.

I traded in my 93 Ford Bronco XLT with 87k miles, mint condition, garage kept, to get the new CX-7. The Bronco was our liesure & travel vehicle. It had nearly 14 years of our memories - dating, engagement, many cross-country vacations & weekend getaways... alot of music and together time... Honestly, the CX-7 is the first vehicle that made me want to get rid of my Bronco.

[kbrennan]

7k Miles on a GT. Love the love my CX-7 but I have noticed a couple things:

1. Rattling coming from the metal trim strip on the driver and passenger doors.
2. Been back to Mazda twice of the nebulous "Gas Cap" CEL.
3. I have encountered either intercooler Heat Soak 4 times. All 4 times resulted in that wonderful knocking sound. Bad gas could be a possible culprit, but I only put 91 octane from teir 1 providers in my CX and I am not married to any particular gas station.

[RaiderMP5]

2500 miles so far barely a month now. It is a great car. Only 1 issue, 2 weeks after we got it, the rear-view camera toasted, just stopped working. 3 weeks to get it from Japan off the assembly line. 1 week to go to get it, and we cannot wait.

Oh, not quality related, but we got our 1st dent today. http://protege5.com/vbb230/showthread.php?p=2649821

[TheMAN]

overall the CX-7 is a good vehicle, but you know the old saying goes... "you get what you pay for"... the price of the vehicle is low so they had to cheap out somewhere... so while the interior looks decent, the plastic is cheap ass (the rough texture on the dashboard and upper door panels make the mazda6's dashboard look expensive), the silver trim and switch panels near the grab handle area of the door panel are not solid (put a bit of weight/force on it and you hear sounds of plastic crackling), the fit and finish is inconsistent... on some its very good, on others its appalling to see from a japanese built vehicle... the little things that matter such as the speaker grilles on top of the dashboard on the bose audio cars... some of cars have them sit flush with the dashboard, on others you see a gap... c'mon mazda, if honda can do it on a cheap ass civic built in north america, you can do that too! the cloth seats feel fragile... the cloth is too thin IMO for rugged abuse... the leather is still, well, your typical mazda leather... rough

but despite all these short comings, if I were in the market for an SUV, the CX-7 is in the top of my list as far as choices goes

[P5w3kids]

I think consumers need better reliability information that would allow them to make clearer comparisons between vehicles. So last fall I started collecting my own data.

I'll start collecting data on the CX-7 once I have 15 signed up. For the details on my research, go here:

http://www.truedelta.com/reliability.php

I already have 45 2007 Dodge Calibers in the panel, even though it has only been on sale for a few months. I'll have some initial results next month. A similar response from CX-7 owners could provide initial results by early next year.

[lllateralus]

The leather is rough? umm, ok.
The rest of your comments.... yea I pretty much feel the same.

I currently own a 2001 Accord Coupe EX V6 with leather (for sale), and recently sold a Honda S2000.
I wont mention all the Toyota trucks I own. (currently an FJC)

The CX7 is a very quality interior! The texture on the door panels is not cheap! Its very solid, and in my opinion feels very durable. (and I think the texture is nice)

The Accord does the same thing you say about the door panel... you push on it and it flexes in a little bit. My CX seems very solid when I do this, and when I pull it to close the door.

Everything you said is bogus to me. (I have not looked at the speakers on the dash though, so I will hold out on that one)

[02589]

removed

[P5w3kids]

How many sites on the Internet provide you with useful, unique data? Not many.

I couldn't agree more that people need to be able to factor in all of the things they care about when buying a car. But they need good information to be able to do this. Right now this information is not available. My goal is to provide it. Beyond reliability information I'm also starting to collect real-world fuel economy data and vehicle comparisons. Eventually you'll be able to pull it all together based on your personal preferences and weights.

To the extent that I personally contribute data, it will be as just another individual in the panel.

I've stated many times that my reviews represent my personal impressions of a car based on my personal preferences. And that the same goes for any other reviewer. Extended account here:

http://www.truedelta.com/pieces/comparison_test.php

My review of the CX-7 makes it very clear that my conclusions suffered from my high expectations, specifically with regard to handling. It also makes it clear that other people will come to different conclusions.

You can only tell so much from talking with a handful of owners. In one significant way, owners are much more biased than non-owners. People who don't like a car generally don't buy it. There's also the matter of sample size. For any real precision, you'd have to talk to at least a few dozen people, and ideally a hundred or more. In the end, it makes sense to get viewpoints from both owners and non-owners. Most importantly, drive the car yourself.

I drive a Protege5, and I influenced my father to buy an RX-8. I love both cars, even though both have significant flaws. If someone cares about having a smooth, quiet ride or a quiver-free structure I'd strongly suggest they not buy my car. But I still love driving it.

[TheMAN]

The leather is rough? umm, ok.
The rest of your comments.... yea I pretty much feel the same.

I currently own a 2001 Accord Coupe EX V6 with leather (for sale), and recently sold a Honda S2000.
I wont mention all the Toyota trucks I own. (currently an FJC)

The CX7 is a very quality interior! The texture on the door panels is not cheap! Its very solid, and in my opinion feels very durable. (and I think the texture is nice)

The Accord does the same thing you say about the door panel... you push on it and it flexes in a little bit. My CX seems very solid when I do this, and when I pull it to close the door.

Everything you said is bogus to me. (I have not looked at the speakers on the dash though, so I will hold out on that one)

compared to a domestic SUV/truck? the CX-7 has a decent interior, but when you compare it to the more other "crossover" SUVs out there (the acura, lexus, etc) that mazda is desperately trying to market the CX-7 as a competitor of, the interior is a pile of shit, simple as that

the large grained rough texture of the dash and door panels DOES look and feel cheap... like I said before, it makes the 6's shit look good... hell, even the 3's door panels are way better than the CX-7's

the truth is, mazda (like nissan), is trying to make their interiors look expensive through the cheapest means possible, and it shows it... both mazdas and nissans are cheap in the broad scope of things, so where the money spent on performance items (engine, brakes, suspension, etc), they had to cheap out somewhere... namely thinner sheet metal and cheaper interior parts... this shit happens when there's a thing called "budget"... the big 3 is the epitomy of bean counting, and thats the trend now even with japanese auto makers (even toyotas are not what they used to be).... fact is, if you want quality all around, you have to pay 40k+ for a SUV, it just can't happen with a 25k SUV


I work on CX-7s all the time, so I've seen how inconsistent the quality are
and yes, the leather mazda has sucks compared to what honda and toyota (lexus) puts in... hell, even a JEEP has kick ass leather compared to a mazda

as for the RX-8 and new miata, I'd have to say they both have the cheapest interiors out of all the new mazdas... huge interior panel gaps in the RX-8, broken sun visors ALL THE TIME (yes they break even at 1000 miles!), the new miata has rough, hollow, and cheap feeling hard plastic... and BOTH cars I've seen have tons of rattle complaints already
like I said, they wanted to keep the car's price low, so they had to cheap out somewhere!


I'm not saying they're bad cars, I'm just pointing out their shortcomings
in terms of quality, the older japanese built mazdas are in some ways better than the new school mazdas... IMO, less ford involvement back in the days = better

[lllateralus]

Yea... I sure hope the 4.0 litre V6 in my FJC lasts as long as both of my old Toyota 3.0's. (nevermind the head gasket failures and zero oil pressure spontaniously)
Please inform me on what older Toyota is built better than a new one.
(the 89-95 Trucks, less the V6, might be tougher than the Tacomas that replaced them)

In my personal opinion, everything you just said is rubbish.
I owned a 2002 P5, and it was solid as a rock.
Lots of experiences with Miatas (owned a 94) and they are VERY well built.
My buddy finally blew up his 99 10AE running 18 lbs of boost a couple years ago. Very solid car inside and out.

Lastly, the fact that you come to the CX7 forum and call the interior a 'pile of shit' makes me question your motives and just basically say whatever man!
Do you own a CX7? If not, why would you come here to post comments such as "you know the old saying, you get what you pay for..."

Have a nice day.

ps. The CX-7 is 100% Hiroshima Japan built. (along with the 3, and the Miata......)

[nopstnz]

Yea... I sure hope the 4.0 litre V6 in my FJC lasts as long as both of my old Toyota 3.0's. (nevermind the head gasket failures and zero oil pressure spontaniously)
Please inform me on what older Toyota is built better than a new one.
(the 89-95 Trucks, less the V6, might be tougher than the Tacomas that replaced them)

In my personal opinion, everything you just said is rubbish.
I owned a 2002 P5, and it was solid as a rock.
Lots of experiences with Miatas (owned a 94) and they are VERY well built.
My buddy finally blew up his 99 10AE running 18 lbs of boost a couple years ago. Very solid car inside and out.

Lastly, the fact that you come to the CX7 forum and call the interior a 'pile of shit' makes me question your motives and just basically say whatever man!
Do you own a CX7? If not, why would you come here to post comments such as "you know the old saying, you get what you pay for..."

Have a nice day.

ps. The CX-7 is 100% Hiroshima Japan built. (alone with the 3, and the Miata......)

Thank you... I was thinking the same thing...

[TheMAN]

Yea... I sure hope the 4.0 litre V6 in my FJC lasts as long as both of my old Toyota 3.0's. (nevermind the head gasket failures and zero oil pressure spontaniously)
Please inform me on what older Toyota is built better than a new one.
(the 89-95 Trucks, less the V6, might be tougher than the Tacomas that replaced them)

In my personal opinion, everything you just said is rubbish.
I owned a 2002 P5, and it was solid as a rock.
Lots of experiences with Miatas (owned a 94) and they are VERY well built.
My buddy finally blew up his 99 10AE running 18 lbs of boost a couple years ago. Very solid car inside and out.

Lastly, the fact that you come to the CX7 forum and call the interior a 'pile of shit' makes me question your motives and just basically say whatever man!
Do you own a CX7? If not, why would you come here to post comments such as "you know the old saying, you get what you pay for..."

Have a nice day.

ps. The CX-7 is 100% Hiroshima Japan built. (alone with the 3, and the Miata......)

the P5 and the 99 miata is an "old mazda"... in otherwords, any mazda (recently) that still has a name on it (except for the tribute and B-series) instead of a number is an "old mazda", which *are* built more solid than the new ones (the CX-7 doesn't count because mazda never made an SUV truely on their own before then)... yes, that means my protege is way more solid than my 3 (even though it doesn't look as nice; but looks are deceiving as the old saying goes)... if you think that's "rubbish" then you obviously don't work on mazdas every day

I don't have to own a CX-7, I work on them every day... how about I question you, the owner's motives? every time I see someone constructively criticize (in whatever thread) a mazdaspeed6, cx-7, etc I see people who *own* them come and cry foul.... if that's not bias or over defensiveness or a huge display of cognitive dissonance, I don't know what is

I already said the CX-7 is japanese built, READ

as for toyota, why don't you look at the quality ratings of today and 10 years ago? enough said

on another note, if you actually read any of the *european* reviews for the newer mazdas, you might actually find some of them talking about how cheap the interior feels even though they like the car overall... I've seen enough threads here of people posting those reviews then people reply all defensive saying their 3's or 6's or whatever interior is so good, blah blah... tell you what, when we in america got used to the shitty interiors that the domestics have and you step into a new mazda, of course you'll say it's "good"... it is good but not "great", in europe its a whole different level... people there are used to much nicer shit (even though they have a fair share of shit, they at least have more choices than we do) and so obviously they expect better

so as far as I'm concerned, this level of defensiveness only shows ignorance and arrogance... the car you live with and the couple that you've only seen/interact with holds NOTHING as far as *informed* opinions goes when you're talking to someone who seen/interacted with hundreds of vehicles PER week

oh and btw, even autoweek was bitching about the CX-7's interior... it was like 5 or so issues back... don't like to hear about it? tough shit

[Z_Monzter]

on another note, if you actually read any of the *european* reviews for the newer mazdas, you might actually find some of them talking about how cheap the interior feels even though they like the car overall... I've seen enough threads here of people posting those reviews then people reply all defensive saying their 3's or 6's or whatever interior is so good, blah blah... tell you what, when we in america got used to the shitty interiors that the domestics have and you step into a new mazda, of course you'll say it's "good"... it is good but not "great", in europe its a whole different level... people there are used to much nicer shit (even though they have a fair share of shit, they at least have more choices than we do) and so obviously they expect better



(shocked) Is funny that I was bitching to my wife that I don't like the carpet on the CX-7 and my 350z. They both have cheap carpet and is a pain in the @$$ to vacum dirt out.

That's cause I was spoiled by the carpet on my previous 2002 honda civic. It was better quality and easier to clean.

I have to agree on the fact that Americans are used to the cheap interior of Ford and Chevy, so when they see a Mazda they drool.(omg)

[cruzdreamer]

It's all a matter of opinion and things must not be that bad in the CX 7 because it were, we would all agree on the same specific items. My husband thought the plastic was cheap looking and hard and me....well, I did not feel that way. It's not top of the line but I am not paying $45-50,000 for an SUV. To me the worst looking interiors are in teh GM vehicles...talk about cheap.....Chevys, Fords are all cheap and Pontiac being one of the worst! I think my RX 8 has the best looking interior of most cars out there, so I 100 % disagree with "The Man". So, see it's a matter of taste, opinion and it's all good to hear either way. NO CAR IS PERFECT!! Look people pay $50,000 and up for Mercedes and Jags and they have the worst reliability and I don't think Mercedes has very nice interiors!! The CX 7 is a great vehicle for the money and there are some touches that could have made it close to perfect, but I don't know too many cars that are. It's a solid vehicle that's fun to drive, looks cool and is priced right. Enjoy!!!

[cruzdreamer]

Sorry...missed the word it (if it were) and a typo teh=the

[Z_Monzter]

It's all a matter of opinion and things must not be that bad in the CX 7 because it were, we would all agree on the same specific items. My husband thought the plastic was cheap looking and hard and me....well, I did not feel that way. It's not top of the line but I am not paying $45-50,000 for an SUV. To me the worst looking interiors are in teh GM vehicles...talk about cheap.....Chevys, Fords are all cheap and Pontiac being one of the worst! I think my RX 8 has the best looking interior of most cars out there, so I 100 % disagree with "The Man". So, see it's a matter of taste, opinion and it's all good to hear either way. NO CAR IS PERFECT!! Look people pay $50,000 and up for Mercedes and Jags and they have the worst reliability and I don't think Mercedes has very nice interiors!! The CX 7 is a great vehicle for the money and there are some touches that could have made it close to perfect, but I don't know too many cars that are. It's a solid vehicle that's fun to drive, looks cool and is priced right. Enjoy!!!


You are right. And that my friends is why they sell aftermarket parts and products, so you can customize your ride to satisfy your taste. There is also a "buyer's option plan", "you either buy it or you don't".

So quit the B!tc#ing and start moding your rides!!!

[RaiderMP5]

my wife and I both find the quality there for us Americans. The fit and finish is very good for us. A lot more refined than other cars we looked at that cost a lot more. We love the feel of the leather, the dash texture is nice too. We love it.

It is all a matter of opinion. Of cours, an FMIC and CAI are planned, of course.

[lllateralus]

I would love for you to enlighten us on a few sources that complain about the quality of todays Toyotas vs a Toyota 10 years ago.
(and if you can, ill eat my words!)

Dont get me wrong, I think toyotas are the best, bar none... going all the way back.
But, having owned and experienced many toyotas going back to my original 1991 Toyota 4X4, and even farther back, a early 80's Tercel, to my 1990 Yota 4X4, my brothers 1992 Yota 4X4, my wifes 1997 4Runner, my other brothers 2001 Tundra, and my current 2007 Toyota FJC.
Quality has ALWAYS been excellent... and the FJ is the most solid structured with its fully boxed frame rails. (vs Tacomas "U" shaped)

Please provide some credible sources that speak of a 10 year old Toyota as much improved quality over a new one.

LOL man you make me laugh... you sound like the typical "internet tough guy"... "dont like it? Tough shit" LOL
"THE MAN" sure sounds like the clown, to me.(poke)

[P5w3kids]

The reliability study stats will show that Toyotas have improved in reliability, but that other makes have improved more, so the gap has narrowed. So Toyotas won't stand out like they once did.

I spent some time inside GM. The thinking was that if they could get their quality up to Honda's and Toyota's, then sales would take off. What they didn't realize was that Honda and Toyota because so popular not because they were a little more reliable than American cars, but because they were A LOT more reliable. And even if it is possible to equal Honda and Toyota in reliability, it's just not possible to be a lot better than they are. They're too good for that. So the best Detroit can hope for is to match them, and have reliability simply go away as an area of competition.

This is already beginning to happen. When people focus on things like the quality of the carpet, they're not thinking of how often the car's going to break.

[RaiderMP5]

from personal experience within the last 5 years, GM and quality are not to be mentioned in the same sentence, unless "crappy, shitty, sucky, bad, terrible, awful, or subpar" ar in between.

[P5w3kids]

I am a bit surprised to see the Protege5 held up as an example of how solid Mazdas used to be. I love my P5, but I don't think of it as solid.

My previous car was a 1996 Ford Contour, which was produced before Ford decontented that car from its Euro spec. That car felt much more solid. Things like how the doors and door hinges were constructed and what they felt like to open and close. Far fewer minor buzzes and rattles, too.

I've also noticed that it takes nothing to ding the sheetmetal on my P5--lots of little dings along both sides of the car. I haven't had this issue with previous cars. I'm going to have to write a nice check to a paintless dent removal guy when it's time to sell.

[P5w3kids]

from personal experience within the last 5 years, GM and quality are not to be mentioned in the same sentence, unless "crappy, shitty, sucky, bad, terrible, awful, or subpar" ar in between.

Yes, but what's the source and basis? Many people just repeat what they hear everyone else saying.

GM's cars definitely have their faults, but they aren't nearly as bad as many people say they are. Look at something like the dash-to-door fit on the new DTS and Lucerne, then compare it to that on my Protege5. I can just about fit my fingers in the gap between the dash and the door on my car. The gap on the new Cadillac and Buick is about two millimeters and perfectly even.

On the other hand, I have noticed poor fits with the rear doors on the new Tahoe. But I've noticed much worse panel fits on some new Hondas. The Acura RDX I drove recently had awful fits between the hood and front fenders. The front fenders were much higher than the hood, and the gaps narrowed going forward. Noticed similarly bad fits on the current Odyssey. Honda used to do this stuff very well.

One thing GM does that helps keep their rep in the gutter is outfit the base trims with awful upholstery/suspensions/wheels/etc. then flood the rental fleets with these cars. The only experiences many people have with GM cars is with a rental.

[cruzdreamer]

This will be my 3rd Mazda for me and I love them despite some of their flaws(which all cars have). The cars do feel solidly built to me in comparison to many American cars. I have had Chevy's,one Pontiac(bad),Chrysler(the worst) Ford's, Nissan's and Acura's. The best were in order 1 -Acura 2- Mazda 3 -Nissan. I had a Protege 5 and loved it but the RX 8 bug bit me hard and I had to have it. Now I have had some trouble with the 8 but I have had great service from Mazda and they always got back to me and would do what they could to make it right. The 8 has 38,500 miles on it and it has never failed me but it had some rough idling issues and a smashed airbag wire. And the rotary is a unique beast!! The Mazda's are really cool, nicely appointed cars and their prices are great for what you get. Toyota's and Honda's are very reliable but rather boring in and out...(new Camry finally looks good!). Acura's are awesome and have better styling than Toyota's and Honda's. Just a little bit more expensive. I guess what I am saying is Mazda's are great cars, top notch in the styling and performance and really are worth every penny. If you are reading this and have never driven one...it's time!! Enjoy the ride everyone!

[RaiderMP5]

I had a 1 year old GMC Sonoma that Certified Used. I was at the dealer 30 times or so in the 1.5 years I owned it. They knew me as "Eric with the Sonoma. Yes, still." 17 were for the same problem. The seats slid into the dash when I stopped. like as if I pulled up the handle to adjust it. On the 17th and final time it was rigged to not slide, the dealer told me my car was out of warranty, and said no more free repairs. The next day, it was traded in for 2 Mazdas. NHTSA has it reported by me each time, GM too. I knew of 4 other trucks locally with the problem with the bench seat in that vehicle. It was a know problem, that they redesigned the seat for in 2003. But they refused to replace mine.

I had alternator, rear end, brakes, transmission, drifeshaft simply fell off after breaking the weld at the u-joint... seat recline handles, and other things fall apart.

GMC Safari owned by a friend had pretty much everything in the drivetrain replaced including 2 transmissions by 50K miles.

The list can go on and on, but after my experiences, and seeing and talkin gto many others, I can say that GMC means Generally Made Crappy.

But that is my take on GM making piss poor cars and trucks. Sorry for the threadjack.

[lllateralus]

I wouldnt consider it a threadjack. This is a discussion about cars in general, so its cool.

That being said, GM is, by far, the worst. Feel the window switches on a newer silverado. They are so flimsy and loose, theres no way they WONT break. (the switches on my toyota FJ are so tight, it takes considerable pressure to get them to "switch", and there is ZERO 'play' in them)

Im sure the CX's are similar, but havnt taken notice.

I just wanted to comment on the GM comments, thats all..
the only vehicle that GM has produced that appeals to me is the new Vette, specifically the Z06. 500+ HP, and world class performance and a hell of a bargan. Bottom line, its still a Chevy, and I'll never own one.
GM lost me a long time ago. Buicks, Pontiacs, GMC's, the new "Hummers", they are all bad quality, especially long term.

PS. Its not just what Ive heard, its personal experience. Like our good buddy "THEMAN", I was a mechanic for a while too....Ask me how many bad motor mounts Ive seen in pontiacs, jeeps, etc. (just one example that comes to mind... and yes, Chrysler products are poor quality too...)

ps, for those who dont know what the Toyota FJ I keep referring too:
http://img86.imageshack.us/img86/6315/img2901as2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[Z_Monzter]

ps, for those who dont know what the Toyota FJ I keep referring too:
http://img86.imageshack.us/img86/6315/img2901as2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


I LIKE IT, that thing looks like is fun to drive in the wilderness. Is like a 4 wheeler with a roof top.(glare)

[P5w3kids]

I had a Protege 5 and loved it but the RX 8 bug bit me hard and I had to have it. Now I have had some trouble with the 8 but I have had great service from Mazda and they always got back to me and would do what they could to make it right.

Go here http://www.truedelta.com/models/RX-8.com and click on the review link, and you'll see what I think about the RX-8.

I've also got to credit Mazda for stepping up and recalling every RX-8 to check for engine issues, and potentially replace entire engines, even though the problem is often that people use synthetic oil even though the manual says not to.

A large problem with the Big Three is not problems with the cars per se but that they rarely step up like this. Instead, they often try to ignore problems rather than fix them. Like with the pickup seat above. The Sonoma was designed around 1980, so it wasn't one of the General's most recent designs. Not an excuse, just a bit of an explanation that still doesn't explain why they paid for 17 failed repair trips rather than properly fixing the seat.

A big problem with all current reliability stats is they're all based on averages, while what I think most people really care about is the chance of getting a lemon. With average scores, which usually aren't far apart, you cannot tell what your odds are of getting a lemon. It just isn't possible.

It's going to take a very large sample, but I hope to remedy this. At first I'm going to have to report averages as well, but once samples are large enough I intend to report the odds of getting a lemon with each car.

[nugen22]

I've been lurking through this forum for a few weeks now, and I just picked up my CX7 yesterday and I LOVE it. I wanted to thank everone for their quality posts to help me come to my decision. Keep it up

[singlemalt_18]

There is obviously a lot of fit & finish thoughts out there, and its hard to argue about something that some may think "looks cheap", such as the interior of the CX-7.

I understand that there may be some method to the madness here. Part of the reason for using a mat finish, slightly tectured or modeled surface material, is probably to reduce annoying glare. With such a large, steeply raked windshied, the glare reflecting off of a large, smooth dash surface would be a serious downer. By creating a stepped-down, or tiered dash configuration which allows for more contours, and using the piano-black, textured material, they go a long way to eliminating the possibilty of glare.

Hand finished mahogany & smooth tanned leather is nice to look at, except when it is a reflection in your windshield.

Just a thought...

[P5w3kids]

No doubt you're right about the texture. It's not piano black, though, as "piano black" refers to very shiny black trim that resembles the finish on a piano.

I vaguely remeber some reflections in the CX-7 windshield even with the texture. Incorrect memory?

As you say, people who different perceptions, especially in this area. I drove the RDX with a friend of mine. Afterwards we went to a Mazda dealer, where we sat in the CX-7. My perception is that the RDX has a more upscale, more nicely finished interior, as it should given the much higher price. But he preferred the more unique styling and sportier ambiance of the CX-7 interior. Liked it quite a bit, in fact. Exterior panel fits are much better on the Mazda.

[singlemalt_18]

No doubt you're right about the texture. It's not piano black, though, as "piano black" refers to very shiny black trim that resembles the finish on a piano.

Actually, in the traditional sense of Grand pianos, the finish is known as "satin ebony"; that is the mat or brushed finish. On the "old school" wood finished pianos, this satin not only showed less marks & fingerprints, but was also less likely to become crinkled & split with age as the less common polished ebony.

In todays modern, mass produced pianos with poly-urathane or composite finishes,(Japanese and Korean, no less!), the high-gloss or polished black finishes are all the rage, and can be cleaned with glass cleaner. Sorry to digress on this, but the piano has been a part of my life for most of these 47 years. If I EVER buy myself a Steinway - it will be satin ebony. Would you buy a Ferrari in something other than Red?

Also, I'm sure there will be some reflection or glare, even in the CX-7... So your memory is fine! I just meant that they are making efforts to reduce it as much as possible.

[Mazda3]

:rolleyes:

[wongster]

I love the interior.. than my previous car was a 98 eagle talon.. but i like the interior.. the car feels to be solid built only put about 900km on it in 3 days!! holy crap.. so i guess time will tell when i put more km on it.

[lllateralus]

Nothing yet on the dominating quality of the 10 year old Toyotas.....

[spike blue]

I LIKE THE INTERIOR OF MY CX-7 AND I DON'T THINK IT FEELS CHEAP FOR ME !!! i THINK THAT IF YOU LIKE IT AND YOU HAVE FUN DRIVING IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THINK , SECOND I WILL SAID THAT THE RX-8 INTERIOR ISN'T CHEAP , ITS ONE OF THE NICEST LOOKING INTERIORS I EVER SEEN!! I ALLREADY TEST DRIVE THE ACURA RDX AND IT FEELS WAY TOO HEAVY AND IT DOESN'T HANDLES LIKE THE CX-7 , THE INTERIOR IS THE SAME AS THE CIVIC SI SO I WOULDN'T PAY 32K FOR THE BASE!!

[cruzdreamer]

I LIKE THE INTERIOR OF MY CX-7 AND I DON'T THINK IT FEELS CHEAP FOR ME !!! i THINK THAT IF YOU LIKE IT AND YOU HAVE FUN DRIVING IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THINK , SECOND I WILL SAID THAT THE RX-8 INTERIOR ISN'T CHEAP , ITS ONE OF THE NICEST LOOKING INTERIORS I EVER SEEN!! I ALLREADY TEST DRIVE THE ACURA RDX AND IT FEELS WAY TOO HEAVY AND IT DOESN'T HANDLES LIKE THE CX-7 , THE INTERIOR IS THE SAME AS THE CIVIC SI SO I WOULDN'T PAY 32K FOR THE BASE!!

Anymore you can say about the Acura RDX? It looks small and I think though it has more cargo than the CX 7....did it seem small? I guess it's looks will have to grow on me. I think this is probably it's closest competitor in my mind. A bit more expensive and we shall see how that turbo fares.