What do you guys think? You think it has something to do with the performance and handling aspect of the vehicles? I would image having a huge piece of glass on top of the car would effect the performance. I actually have heard people say they can tell a difference with just a regular sized sunroof. I just see more and more companies including panorama sunroofs. What really got me thinking about this with the new cx9. I would of thought they would of included one with the new remodel. Personally, I'm okay with the regular sized sunroof. Although the Mazda one could be a little bigger but oh well.
Will Mazda ever include panorama sunroof?
- Thread starter jhu8
- Start date
- :
- RDX Aspec Adv.
Porsche has a panoramic roof on the 911. Performance is fine. For 45k the cx9 better have pano, or I'll laugh. That thing is totally overpriced, imo. Nothing justifies it.
- :
- San Antonio, Texas
- :
- '15 CX-5 Miata AWD
I looked at it; the moonroof is about the same proportion as the cx-5 version. One thing I liked about my moms old X-5 was the big ass roof.
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
But if you look at the new 2016 Mazda CX-9 Signature, they put a fancy expensive curved one-piece real wood made by a guitar maker in the center console. On the other hand Mazda makes its power driver seat having less adjustments on seat bottom than our CX-5 power driver seat. Actually I think Mazda has weird and different way of thinking from other car manufactures. Unusual SkyActiv high-compression gasoline and low-compression diesel engines, unique SkyActiv-Drive direct-feel automatic transmission, and old rotary engines etc. Ever noticed the power lock rocker switch on driver door panel? It has opposite on / off position from everybody else. The up/down manual shift direction on automatic transmission shifter has opposite up-shift / down-shift direction from most others too.
The mirror control and temperature control are opposite of North American car makers too - but it all makes sense logically when you look at it. (turn mirror knob to the right moves the indicator to the left for the left mirror, pull back to go up a gear, push forward to go down).
I would hope they don't do a panoramic roof. I was driving a Ford Edge last week that had one and couldn't see the navigation screen because of the glare and the back seat passenger had sun in her eyes the entire drive. There is no shade on the Ford. I rarely use mine and it's something I could live without if it was a choice.
I would hope they don't do a panoramic roof. I was driving a Ford Edge last week that had one and couldn't see the navigation screen because of the glare and the back seat passenger had sun in her eyes the entire drive. There is no shade on the Ford. I rarely use mine and it's something I could live without if it was a choice.
- :
- RDX Aspec Adv.
Pano roofs have covers for them. You just slide the cover over and boom, no more glare.
Yeah, definitely disappointing they didn't include one in the CX-9. Seemed like a great vehicle to start including one in. At the very least, include a slightly larger sunroof. And while they're add it, add in a one touch close button. I think they need to rework the whole sunroof on the Mazda vehicles. Does the 6 have the one touch close button by any chance, or any other CX-5 versions beside the US? I know they generally have more enhanced features than our CX5.
But cx-9 still don't have panoramic roof, Mazda claim it effect performance and weight. However, cx-9 is a family SUV, not everybody buy a third row SUV for its' sporty feeling and also the engine is not that powerful anyway. They just don't want to increase the cost.
Did Mazda confirm saying it would effect performance? I think the CX9 is geared to be a sporty SUV. Just like every vehicle Mazda sells. Turns out, those individuals are in the minority. It's like the dad who needs a 4 door sedan but wants a V-8, performance, and speed. Well he choose the Charger SRT, Chevrolet SS. Just talking about regular vehicles and not luxury ones. So most people will just go for the Accord and Camry but there are some who get the SS and Charger. Just like some who buy the CX9 for the sportiness. I still think most people who even buy Mazdas just do so because they like the styling inside and out. I'm guessing your average citizen doesn't really care about the sportiness drive of a CUV/SUV.
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
Like power windows, one-touch close feature on moonroof is nothing new. Mazda can easily implement it into the moonroof. The only thing to stop them doing it is the cost. But then again, they'd rather spend money on expensive curved one-piece real rose wood, that extra cost definitely can cover one-touch close function on moonroof and more. Go figure...
- :
- RDX Aspec Adv.
But in an SUV, SPEED = SPORTINESS, 9x out of 10. How often do MOST people "hit the twisties" in their family hauler? Okay, now how often do they get around that slow bugger on the freeway, or need the next lane over FAST? Right...
The CX-9 is a total dog in acceleration. 0-60 in what? almost 8 seconds, is it? I think that's actually slower than a base grand jeep cherokee, not to mention the V8, or the Explorer Sport. Why do I throw those in there? because the CX-9 loaded out is $45k. It BELONGS in that market-segment based on its MSRP. IMO, it's a total flop feature/performance wise at $45k. Slow as balls. No pano-roof. Likely a ton less tech over-all on the interior, really. With a 3-row SUV in the mid 40's, interior tech is king. Otherwise a base Explorer/Pilot would suffice for high 20's.
Oh...but I'm sure the handling dynamics of this 3-row SUV are impressive...
I just strongly disagree with the philosophy behind the CX-9 that I'm seeing.
Most people won't really test out the cx9s suspension and handling . At all lol. But it's there I guess. As for it being slow, Mazda never went about their cars looking to be fast. It was the driving experience that mattered, not just 0-60. And there is no denying Mazda has nailed that.
I gotta agree with you though that the philosophy of the cx9 isn't really ideal. This thing needed to be loaded with every tech option possible first and foremost. that's what people want.
My fear is Mazda will eventually pick up on this and change. Not that I wouldn't love a completely techd out car, but the possibility of losing a driver's car without having to pay luxury money. At the end of the day that's what Mazda offers. They offer a BMW, Audi, Mercedes driving experience at an affordable price for your average person. What other non luxury company can say that? None.
I don't think the 0-60 time is that slow. It's much better than the old CX-9 and besides the max power and torque is achieved lower in the rev range so you don't have to wring its neck out to get maximum performance. It's main focus was to improve fuel economy which was not great in the previous gen.
As for tech, it's loaded with safety tech over here with BSM, RCTA, etc and LED headlights in the base model.
I am sure I would enjoy panoramic it but my wife hates sunroofs period... I don't think she has ever opened the sunroof once on our Infiniti. I'm ok with standard size sunroofs though. When it matters more I'll just buy a MX-5.
I see a video on Youtube about new cx-9, they interviewed a Mazda cx-9 engineer ask them why no panoramic roof, he said it is because the weight and for best fuel efficiency and performance.
- :
- RDX Aspec Adv.
He's an idiot.
The engineers who built the Prius figured out how to make pano fuel efficient: http://www.toyota.com/priusv/#!/features/versatile-interior/panoramic-view-moonroof
The engineers who built the 991 911 figured out how to somehow get performance with a pano: http://www.6speedonline.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=256871&dateline=1372774315
So did the makers of the SRT8 Jeep: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iI87U8ym2kc
Somehow it didn't upset the handling of one of the world's premier sports cars from a company with more racing wins than ANY OTHER in history.
Somehow it didn't prevent Toyota from putting it in the Prius.
They need to stop swooning over their underpowered, over-priced family hauler, and get with the program and put a darn panoroof in it.
Performance? It weighs what? 2 tons? Has a whopping 250bhp? ROFL! Give me a break. "no! The extra few pounds would KILL IT!"
For some reason this just irks me like no other. Maybe because I've met my quota for stupid this week already, and this was just too much.
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
It seems Mazda truly believe added weight of panorama sunroof would hurt fuel efficiency and performance on new CX-9. I imagine they designed it with significant smaller cabin than previous gen is also for weight reduction? They even secretly removed one adjustment motor on driver seat just to reduce another 2 pounds! In reality, I think the bottom line is money saving is the key! They're a small company and they have to reduce the cost in every way. But I still don't get it as why they're willing to use expensive curved one-piece real rose wood though.
Yeah we can talk about good handling and nimble on CX-9, or CX-5 and CX-3, but with minimum horsepower, definitely not performance!
- :
- RDX Aspec Adv.
It seems Mazda truly believe added weight of panorama sunroof would hurt fuel efficiency and performance on new CX-9. I imagine they designed it with significant smaller cabin than previous gen is also for weight reduction? They even secretly removed one adjustment motor on driver seat just to reduce another 2 pounds! In reality, I think the bottom line is money saving is the key! They're a small company and they have to reduce the cost in every way. But I still don't get it as why they're willing to use expensive curved one-piece real rose wood though.
Yeah we can talk about good handling and nimble on CX-9, or CX-5 and CX-3, but with minimum horsepower, definitely not performance!
Yeah, I am just seriously off-put that they are pedalling that BS. "Oh, it's for performance!" Great. So delete the GT/Tech trim. Extra weight slowing that rocket down. Sport model ALL the models!
So much fail in that $45K family hauler.
