Spied: 2017 Mazda CX-9
- Thread starter crikey
- Start date
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
Agreed. This may be the best looking SUV/CUV regardless of price.
redturboeclipse
Member
- :
- mazda rx7
Has anyone confirmed if this has Remote Start via the key fob?
Especially on the Touring, Grand Touring, and Signature models
Especially on the Touring, Grand Touring, and Signature models
- :
- 2017 Mazda CX-5 GS AWD, 2017 Honda Pilot EX
Looks like it's currently only available as an option for your smartphone with a yearly subscription after the first year. Has a bunch of other features as well with the mobile app but it's $65 a year plus the price of the feature itself.
can always put in an aftermarket remote start for cheaper
RedHotFuzz
Member
- :
- '16 Durango R/T, '10 VW Sportwagen
They are not that much cheaper. Plus, with the keyless fobs, many aftermarket systems require the use of one to work, leaving you with just one key to use for the car. Its very pricey to replace that key.
It's just not worth it.
The base sport model deletes most of the chrome and looks a lot cheaper on the CX-9. I get what you're saying though. If done right, chromeless at least looks sportier.
deepfriedsushi
Member
- :
- 95 Miata, 14 CX5 Touring FWD, 18 CX9 GT FWD
I was able to test drive a GT AWD with Black interior this weekend and here are my (very) detailed thoughts.
Baseline stats. I’m 5’10 with a 30” inseam. I daily drive a ’14 cx5 fwd touring. I’ve also previously test driven a ’15 Highlander XLE FWD, ’16 Pilot EX-L FWD, and a ’14 MDX (6spd) FWD w/tech pkg (mother in law’s car).
Exterior: Beautiful in person, long hood is definitely a statement, but it’s proportional and looks very good with the style of the car. The snout/grill is a jewel piece. For some reason, the car doesn’t look as big in person as it does in the pictures to me. The athletic look makes it seem about the size of the highlander. The pilot looks big and ponderous in comparison.
Interior:
1st row. I raised the driver’s seat as high as it could go (just like I do in my cx5) and adjusted the steering column accordingly. This gave a nice commanding view and allows me to actually see the hood. At lower heights, the hood is not visible. If I’m in an SUV for a higher seating position, I’m going to give myself the highest comfortable seating position I can get. Even with the seat all the way up, there was still plenty of headroom for me. The angle of the seat bottom was a little flat, but I was able to be comfortable. I think you really just have to try out the seat for yourself. However, I can agree that a tilting seat bottom would help bring more comfort to a wider range of drivers. The dash appeared low, but the center console was higher and wider than any of the other cars. However, my legs were not impeded by the center console. I can see that it can be for others though. My CX5 has a roominess that the CX9 doesn’t have due to the smaller and lower center console. The arm rest was at a good height and the shifter and command knob fall right in to my hand’s reach. Both the driver and passenger’s arm/shoulder room was plenty, more than my CX5.
The heads up display is also worth noting. I had it at the brightest setting, and also drove it in bright sunlight. I wear polarized sunglasses and it cut the brightness of the HUD by at least half. It’s still somewhat visible, but you gotta look for it. Without the sunglasses, it shows up really bright, clear and provides a good amount of info. I’m sure it’ll be awesome to use whenever (polarized) sunglasses aren’t needed.
2nd row. The height from the seat bottom to the foot well floor is definitely higher than the MDX, which has a flat load floor. I don’t recall how it was in the Highlander or Pilot, but when I was in the MDX, my knees were in the air. The CX9’s greater seat height made it much more comfortable in the 2nd row and provided more thigh support. There was plenty of leg room, even sitting behind myself. The Highlander and Pilot seem to have a tiny bit more. We got 3 adults sitting in the 2rd row and there was a good amount of shoulder room for everybody. No one was squished. The shoulder room when sitting 3 across matched what we felt in the Highlander, Pilot and MDX. Folding down the seats can be a little heavy and each side folds a little differently. However, it’s only 1 lever to tilt and slide the seat forward to access the 3rd row. On the driver’s side, using the lever at the top of the seat back, the seat back tilts forward and the whole seat slides forward. This is the side that can move while a child seat is installed. The passenger’s side operates a little differently. The top lever tilts the seat back forward and the seat bottom drops down and the whole seat slides forward. There is a tag on the seat saying you cannot have a car seat in that seat and tilt the seat forward to access the 3rd row. However, if you pull the top lever all the way and let the seat back tilt as far forward as it can go, it will actually hit the back of the front passenger seat and not be able to slide forward enough to give room to get into the 3rd row. What you have to do is only tilt the seat back forward a little, the seat bottom drops, and you can actually slide the seat more forward than the driver’s side and give ample feet room to climb into the 3rd row. The “step” created on the passenger side is bigger than what the Highlander, Pilot and MDX offer, but the driver’s side is relatively similar.
3rd row.
Once sitting in the 3rd row, there seems to be sufficient width, but the headroom was a little tight. My hair brushed the ceiling, when sitting up straight, but my skull doesn’t hit the ceiling. I deemed it sufficient because I would be the largest person who would have to sit back there anyways. A huge feature that the CX9 and the Highlander have over the Pilot and MDX is the way the 2nd row gets locked back into position by a 3rd row passenger. In the CX9 and Highlander, the 3rd row passenger can pull the 2nd row seat back and it would lock into a very forward and upright position. Then they can use the lever at the top of the seat to tilt the 2nd row seat back or just wait for a passenger to sit in the 2nd row and slide the seat back to divide the leg room between the 2nd and 3rd row. In the Pilot and MDX, the only way to lock the 2nd row is to slide it ALL the way back in its tracks before the seat locks in place to be adjusted again. The problem is that the passenger in the 3rd row (me) can be too big to allow the 2nd row to slide all the way back. I can imagine some bigger kids not having enough space. The only way I could get the MDX/Pilot’s 2nd row to lock is if I turn and put my legs on the adjacent 3rd row seat, which isn’t always an option if there’s another passenger sitting there. If I can’t get out of the way, the 2nd row has no way of locking before a 2nd row passenger make adjustments to divide the legroom. I think it’s a HUGE mistake in the order of operation for the MDX and Pilot. If you guys know how to lock the 2nd row without having to push it all the way back in its tracks, let me know, because I think it’s really stupid. The total amount of leg room shared with the 2nd and 3rd row is plenty for me to sit behind myself comfortably in all 3 rows. One big omission in the CX9’s 3rd row is that there are no air vents back there. The most rear air vents are at the back of the center console for the 2nd row. Not cool in my view. The 3rd row is easy to fold down and pull up from the trunk. Effort and operation is easier than the highlander’s awkward pull strap. The CX9 is a simple lever on the back of the seat that is used to pull up or fold down.
After sitting in all 3 rows and determining the actual passenger space as sufficient and not cramped, I wondered why the interior didn’t feel as airy as the Highlander or Pilot. Then I noticed…the car has a black headliner. The Highlander and Pilot I test drove both had light colored interiors with light colored headliners. The MDX I sat in has black leather, but a light colored headliner. I think the black headliner really gives the appearance of a smaller and tighter space. This is probably the main contributor of why people think it feels cramped inside, even though I had ample shoulder and leg room in all 3 rows.
Driving experience:
The engine is good! Very responsive with a ton of torque. We had 4 adults and 1 middle schooler in the car. I drove it moderately quickly. Not any quicker than I would really want to drive a 3 row SUV. Even driving it moderately aggressively, the engine didn’t need to go past 4krpm. This included accelerating up to speed on an uphill freeway ramp. Passing cars both on the freeway and surface streets, or accelerating quickly from a 5mph roll was done quickly and easily. It felt like a more powerful CX5. One downside was that the engine seemed louder when pushing hard compared to the V6 equipped cars. Both the CX5 and CX9 can hold the gear and let the engine’s torque pull you forward in normal light acceleration maneuvers. In comparison the MDX usually has to down shift before giving enough acceleration. It’s usually not really noticed because the MDX downshifts smoothly, the engine is very smooth and that’s what we’re just used to cars doing. However, after driving a car with more low end torque, just not having to downshift in general is nice. You can just roll into the throttle of the CX9 (and to some extent the CX5) and waft your way along.
The steering is very accurate and precise, although a bit on the light side. It is a bit lighter in effort compared to the CX5. It feels just as light as the Highlander, Pilot, and MDX’s (comfort mode) steering. The biggest trait I look for is the steering precision, regardless of steering effort, and the CX9 had it. More precise steering directly helps with the responsiveness of the car.
The ride was the most impressive part of driving the CX9. The car feels REALLY solid. The bumps are absorbed and there’s no sensation of jiggling or floatiness. The car just stays level and smooth. The pilot felt soft and smooth, but gave the sensation of floatiness and makes the car drive as big as it is. Even the MDX in comfort mode isn’t as impressive. The MDX absorbs the bumps, but can feel a little floaty (in comfort mode). The Highlander didn’t feel as bloaty or soft as the Pilot, but also gives a smooth ride, just not as solid feeling as the CX9.
In the end, the CX9 leaves me impressed, but with mixed feelings about the perceived interior space. I know there’s enough room for me, it just doesn’t look that way. There is definitely an emphasis on design and quality at the expense of some functionality and utility. I think as customers, we just have to decide whether we’re willing to sacrifice some things for superior driving dynamics.
Baseline stats. I’m 5’10 with a 30” inseam. I daily drive a ’14 cx5 fwd touring. I’ve also previously test driven a ’15 Highlander XLE FWD, ’16 Pilot EX-L FWD, and a ’14 MDX (6spd) FWD w/tech pkg (mother in law’s car).
Exterior: Beautiful in person, long hood is definitely a statement, but it’s proportional and looks very good with the style of the car. The snout/grill is a jewel piece. For some reason, the car doesn’t look as big in person as it does in the pictures to me. The athletic look makes it seem about the size of the highlander. The pilot looks big and ponderous in comparison.
Interior:
1st row. I raised the driver’s seat as high as it could go (just like I do in my cx5) and adjusted the steering column accordingly. This gave a nice commanding view and allows me to actually see the hood. At lower heights, the hood is not visible. If I’m in an SUV for a higher seating position, I’m going to give myself the highest comfortable seating position I can get. Even with the seat all the way up, there was still plenty of headroom for me. The angle of the seat bottom was a little flat, but I was able to be comfortable. I think you really just have to try out the seat for yourself. However, I can agree that a tilting seat bottom would help bring more comfort to a wider range of drivers. The dash appeared low, but the center console was higher and wider than any of the other cars. However, my legs were not impeded by the center console. I can see that it can be for others though. My CX5 has a roominess that the CX9 doesn’t have due to the smaller and lower center console. The arm rest was at a good height and the shifter and command knob fall right in to my hand’s reach. Both the driver and passenger’s arm/shoulder room was plenty, more than my CX5.
The heads up display is also worth noting. I had it at the brightest setting, and also drove it in bright sunlight. I wear polarized sunglasses and it cut the brightness of the HUD by at least half. It’s still somewhat visible, but you gotta look for it. Without the sunglasses, it shows up really bright, clear and provides a good amount of info. I’m sure it’ll be awesome to use whenever (polarized) sunglasses aren’t needed.
2nd row. The height from the seat bottom to the foot well floor is definitely higher than the MDX, which has a flat load floor. I don’t recall how it was in the Highlander or Pilot, but when I was in the MDX, my knees were in the air. The CX9’s greater seat height made it much more comfortable in the 2nd row and provided more thigh support. There was plenty of leg room, even sitting behind myself. The Highlander and Pilot seem to have a tiny bit more. We got 3 adults sitting in the 2rd row and there was a good amount of shoulder room for everybody. No one was squished. The shoulder room when sitting 3 across matched what we felt in the Highlander, Pilot and MDX. Folding down the seats can be a little heavy and each side folds a little differently. However, it’s only 1 lever to tilt and slide the seat forward to access the 3rd row. On the driver’s side, using the lever at the top of the seat back, the seat back tilts forward and the whole seat slides forward. This is the side that can move while a child seat is installed. The passenger’s side operates a little differently. The top lever tilts the seat back forward and the seat bottom drops down and the whole seat slides forward. There is a tag on the seat saying you cannot have a car seat in that seat and tilt the seat forward to access the 3rd row. However, if you pull the top lever all the way and let the seat back tilt as far forward as it can go, it will actually hit the back of the front passenger seat and not be able to slide forward enough to give room to get into the 3rd row. What you have to do is only tilt the seat back forward a little, the seat bottom drops, and you can actually slide the seat more forward than the driver’s side and give ample feet room to climb into the 3rd row. The “step” created on the passenger side is bigger than what the Highlander, Pilot and MDX offer, but the driver’s side is relatively similar.
3rd row.
Once sitting in the 3rd row, there seems to be sufficient width, but the headroom was a little tight. My hair brushed the ceiling, when sitting up straight, but my skull doesn’t hit the ceiling. I deemed it sufficient because I would be the largest person who would have to sit back there anyways. A huge feature that the CX9 and the Highlander have over the Pilot and MDX is the way the 2nd row gets locked back into position by a 3rd row passenger. In the CX9 and Highlander, the 3rd row passenger can pull the 2nd row seat back and it would lock into a very forward and upright position. Then they can use the lever at the top of the seat to tilt the 2nd row seat back or just wait for a passenger to sit in the 2nd row and slide the seat back to divide the leg room between the 2nd and 3rd row. In the Pilot and MDX, the only way to lock the 2nd row is to slide it ALL the way back in its tracks before the seat locks in place to be adjusted again. The problem is that the passenger in the 3rd row (me) can be too big to allow the 2nd row to slide all the way back. I can imagine some bigger kids not having enough space. The only way I could get the MDX/Pilot’s 2nd row to lock is if I turn and put my legs on the adjacent 3rd row seat, which isn’t always an option if there’s another passenger sitting there. If I can’t get out of the way, the 2nd row has no way of locking before a 2nd row passenger make adjustments to divide the legroom. I think it’s a HUGE mistake in the order of operation for the MDX and Pilot. If you guys know how to lock the 2nd row without having to push it all the way back in its tracks, let me know, because I think it’s really stupid. The total amount of leg room shared with the 2nd and 3rd row is plenty for me to sit behind myself comfortably in all 3 rows. One big omission in the CX9’s 3rd row is that there are no air vents back there. The most rear air vents are at the back of the center console for the 2nd row. Not cool in my view. The 3rd row is easy to fold down and pull up from the trunk. Effort and operation is easier than the highlander’s awkward pull strap. The CX9 is a simple lever on the back of the seat that is used to pull up or fold down.
After sitting in all 3 rows and determining the actual passenger space as sufficient and not cramped, I wondered why the interior didn’t feel as airy as the Highlander or Pilot. Then I noticed…the car has a black headliner. The Highlander and Pilot I test drove both had light colored interiors with light colored headliners. The MDX I sat in has black leather, but a light colored headliner. I think the black headliner really gives the appearance of a smaller and tighter space. This is probably the main contributor of why people think it feels cramped inside, even though I had ample shoulder and leg room in all 3 rows.
Driving experience:
The engine is good! Very responsive with a ton of torque. We had 4 adults and 1 middle schooler in the car. I drove it moderately quickly. Not any quicker than I would really want to drive a 3 row SUV. Even driving it moderately aggressively, the engine didn’t need to go past 4krpm. This included accelerating up to speed on an uphill freeway ramp. Passing cars both on the freeway and surface streets, or accelerating quickly from a 5mph roll was done quickly and easily. It felt like a more powerful CX5. One downside was that the engine seemed louder when pushing hard compared to the V6 equipped cars. Both the CX5 and CX9 can hold the gear and let the engine’s torque pull you forward in normal light acceleration maneuvers. In comparison the MDX usually has to down shift before giving enough acceleration. It’s usually not really noticed because the MDX downshifts smoothly, the engine is very smooth and that’s what we’re just used to cars doing. However, after driving a car with more low end torque, just not having to downshift in general is nice. You can just roll into the throttle of the CX9 (and to some extent the CX5) and waft your way along.
The steering is very accurate and precise, although a bit on the light side. It is a bit lighter in effort compared to the CX5. It feels just as light as the Highlander, Pilot, and MDX’s (comfort mode) steering. The biggest trait I look for is the steering precision, regardless of steering effort, and the CX9 had it. More precise steering directly helps with the responsiveness of the car.
The ride was the most impressive part of driving the CX9. The car feels REALLY solid. The bumps are absorbed and there’s no sensation of jiggling or floatiness. The car just stays level and smooth. The pilot felt soft and smooth, but gave the sensation of floatiness and makes the car drive as big as it is. Even the MDX in comfort mode isn’t as impressive. The MDX absorbs the bumps, but can feel a little floaty (in comfort mode). The Highlander didn’t feel as bloaty or soft as the Pilot, but also gives a smooth ride, just not as solid feeling as the CX9.
In the end, the CX9 leaves me impressed, but with mixed feelings about the perceived interior space. I know there’s enough room for me, it just doesn’t look that way. There is definitely an emphasis on design and quality at the expense of some functionality and utility. I think as customers, we just have to decide whether we’re willing to sacrifice some things for superior driving dynamics.
I've sat in the 3rd row of a 2016 Pilot 3-4 different times. I am 6'4" 200lbs. I noticed that when you climb into the 3rd row and pull the seat back until it locks, the stopping/locking position is set at 3-4" from the most rearward position that the 2nd row seat can slide back to. At the set stopping position, I still had 2" of knee room to the back of the 2nd row with me being 6'4". So, a second row passenger can (wouldn't recommend it) slide the seat back another 3-4" after the 3rd row passenger has pulled the seat back into its set locking position. I found that this preset seating position gave me adequate knee room in both 2nd row and 3rd row if it was just left alone at where it stops at on its own. If you jump in the 2nd row with no 3rd row passenger and slide the seat back all the way in its tracks, the second row knee room becomes quite large I felt.
deepfriedsushi
Member
- :
- 95 Miata, 14 CX5 Touring FWD, 18 CX9 GT FWD
Hrm...interesting...did you pull up and lock the seat back first before sliding the 2nd row back? Maybe that's what i'm missing...
I know in the Highlander, you can slide the 2nd row back to anywhere you want, hold it with your foot, then pull the seat back till it locks and the whole seat will be locked in place till another passenger adjusts it.
I know in the Highlander, you can slide the 2nd row back to anywhere you want, hold it with your foot, then pull the seat back till it locks and the whole seat will be locked in place till another passenger adjusts it.
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
Thanks for a nice and detailed review on a new CX-9. Mazda really needs to change its all-black color scheme in interior! I personally hate the all-black interior in our CX-5 GT and wished there're other alternatives than black. Every other brand offers at least two or three choices for interior color. For Mazda, even if you have 2nd choice such as parchment from a few exterior color combinations, most trims, dash, carpet, and seat belts are still totally black. Totally black interior simply makes me feel more pressure and hard to see anything in the cabin, not to mention it makes us feel a lot hotter in Texas. As you said, totally black interior also makes people feel cramped and tight, creating a image of a smaller cabin!
deepfriedsushi
Member
- :
- 95 Miata, 14 CX5 Touring FWD, 18 CX9 GT FWD
Personally I'm fine with the all black (lower) interior, even though it may seem pretty monochrome. But in the CX5, it has a light colored headliner, so it makes it feel more airy.
I didn't get a chance to check out the parchment/light colored interior of the CX9, but can anyone confirm whether it still has the black headliner?
I didn't get a chance to check out the parchment/light colored interior of the CX9, but can anyone confirm whether it still has the black headliner?
redturboeclipse
Member
- :
- mazda rx7
wow, thanks for the confirmation.
that is very disappointing that a car that most will buy in mid trim $40K+ does not have remote start built in to the car/key fob, and only way is to use the gimmicky smart phone app with a YEARLY fee?!?! more points docked really from this car. i think every other vehicle in it's class, and heck maybe every other class in the mid trim levels have remote start. SMH
no way, as someone said before, 1 it requires messing with stuff, hard to trust aftermarket installers, probably voiding some warranty as well. really uncalled for not to include it at this price point.
Thanks for the detailed review, deepfriedsushi. Our 2010 CX-9 GT also has a black interior with a light colored headliner. So, yes, it doesn't feel cramped at all. The contrast made it more upscale, actually. I wonder why Mazda chose to make it an all-black interior on the new CX-9.
disagree. i had a viper smartstart put in my CX-5 for <$500 total. Mazda dealer was going to charge me $800 to install Mazda mobile start. i'm sure it would've been cheaper to install at time of purchase, but i'm just saying the difference is only a few $100 at most. my point is that having remote start pre-installed is not a deal-breaker in the grand scheme of a $40-45k car.
works fine on my CX-5. definitely have to find a reputable place to do it...would not disagree with that.
- :
- '24 CX-5 Turbo Sig
'23 MX-5 GT
Stopped by local dealer today and got to briefly check out a GT.
Although I would really like to have those front seats ventilated, to echo the above I wasn't that turned off by the lack of driver's seat adjustment as I thought I'd be. Without any bottom (or total) tilt movement, it is true I felt more "flat" in it but as was mentioned, there's a little offset in the horizontal plane when it is either raised or lowered that may be used to medium-tune position as best as possible. I found the seating material very comfortable as well, but I'm hoping that adjustment comes back in the next iteration (for me, personally, as the Mrs doesn't seem to mind). As for the passenger's seat, ugh, no up/down but I felt there may be a little more headroom than the previous gen because I did not have to recline the seat very much to be comfortable and not hit headliner (with a hat on
). Re: the interior itself, it certainly does feel like an upgrade to the same model vehicle. More refined and aesthetically pleasing, and a nice touch going with brown leather trim mixed in with the black interior (similar to what they did with the Mazda 6). Seems to have a tad bit more cargo space with the third row up. Also a fan of the black headliner.
Re: driving, I can definitely see points made in online first drive reviews (ie, motoman) about how off-the-line responsive the engine is (great delivery of torque with the usable HP) but also how it flattens out on the top end at highway speeds, while not leaving me with the feeling that the vehicle is under-powered. I felt that the suspension was dialed in properly, but did find it a little too soft ("floaty") exiting a highway off-ramp a few mph above the posted one. Still, steering is predictable and I was quick to adapt to how it would respond. Also, the heads up display was well designed and functional, and let's not forget the very, very notable difference in cabin noise. They weren't kidding about the effect all of the additional sound-deadening material added has (along with front window glass improvements as well) - she really is much quieter. But then, I also drive an MX-5, so everything is much quieter, relatively speaking (whistle)
(2thumbs)
Overall impression was good enough to say that this refreshed model will most definitely be on our short list to replace our '15 CX-9 in a year (or two), so will be reading intently on the experiences of early adopters here.
So with that, congrats and best of luck to all of you with your beautiful new rides!
