CX-9 has won virtually every comparison test

JPL

:
2018 Mazda6, CX-9
The latest being Car and Driver. CX-9 beat out among others, the new '18 VW Atlas and Honda Pilot!

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/three-row-suv-test-vw-atlas-vs-dodge-durango-gmc-acadia-honda-pilot-mazda-cx-9-comparison-test

http://www.motortrend.com/cars/mazda/cx-9/2016/2017-gmc-acadia-2016-mazda-cx-9-2017-toyota-highlander-comparison/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFV6Ws6Ut20


Too bad sales will never reflect the fact that the CX-9 is best in class. The sheep will keep flocking to the sea of plastic Explorer.
 
It doesn't really matter. 90%+ of crossover drivers do not care a lick about most of the aspects of the car that the car mags care about.
 
Mazda needs to do something to drive sales. Bumper to bumper 10'year 100,000 mile warranty. Making the best car will not do it.
 
Last edited:
It doesn't really matter. 90%+ of crossover drivers do not care a lick about most of the aspects of the car that the car mags care about.

Thing is, the CX-9 doesn't "compromise" as much as some people suggest. It doesn't have the room of the big box Pilot and Atlas but most people will also never use that space. The CX-9 has all the space you need for a family of 4 or 5. It seems people forget the value in having a car you WANT to drive.

Others like the Sorento and Highlander have less room in some areas but sell far more. Everyone has their own priority. Some people like to stereotype a "crossover" buyer but everyone has different wants and needs. Some want max space, some want the most bells and whistles. The CX-9 checks a lot of boxes, but is overlooked in many cases because people forget to check out Mazda in the first place.
 
If Mazda made a body-on-frame true 4x4, I'd sell my 4runner for one. Until then, I don't wanna get stuck in the sand with an AWD crossover, even if it's built by my favorite carmaker.

Something that stands out about the Toyota though...If you got 500K miles on a Tacoma or 4runner and the engine dies, you got a lemon. There are dozens of people on the Tacoma club with over 1/2 million miles on their trucks, still running perfectly.
 
Mazda needs to do something to drive sales. Bumper to bumper 10'year 100,000 mile warranty. Making the best car will not do it.

You mean powertrain? No automaker would ever do a 100,000 mile bumper to bumper, they'd be out of business in no time.

Warranties that matched Hyundai and Kia's would be a big jolt to their sales. It worked big time in growing the Koreans into a powerhouse. Most would never have bought their cars without the big warranty put in place years back. Thing is, I don't think Mazda wants to be that big. They are happy being a small company.
 
Unfortunately there is a stigma attached to a 4 cylinder only vehicle, which would be erased if they got behind the wheel. It is the future, look at the new Accord.
 
If Mazda made a body-on-frame true 4x4, I'd sell my 4runner for one. Until then, I don't wanna get stuck in the sand with an AWD crossover
Huh?...How does frame vs. unibody relate to the drive train the manufacturer chooses to put under the vehicle?

While I still like my '16 CX9 a lot, I'm not enamored of the driving position. I'm 6' tall, and I feel that I'm too low in the car--or more accurately the car's beltline is too high around me. When I extend the seat position fully, the seat also drops, which doesn't meet my needs. If it was stolen or totaled, would I buy another?...hmm.
 
Huh?...How does frame vs. unibody relate to the drive train the manufacturer chooses to put under the vehicle?

Off road ability. Locking diffs, frame strength, etc. An AWD car uses brakes to keep wheels from spinning, sending power to the wheels that don't spin. A 4X4 keeps all 4 wheels going no matter what.
 
You mean powertrain? No automaker would ever do a 100,000 mile bumper to bumper, they'd be out of business in no time.

Warranties that matched Hyundai and Kia's would be a big jolt to their sales. It worked big time in growing the Koreans into a powerhouse. Most would never have bought their cars without the big warranty put in place years back. Thing is, I don't think Mazda wants to be that big. They are happy being a small company.


Yes, I mean a bumper to bumper for 100,000 miles or 10 years. You can buy that insurance right now on your new Mazda for $1200-$2000. Just build it into the price and do it. Hyundai was known as a cheap car maker that no one took seriously until their 100,000 mile 10 year power-train warranty. Mazda needs something like that to really throw down the gauntlet and drive sales.

Mazda says they are happy to be a small company because they are a small company and that is the only reason. They can say what they want but they are beholden to their share holders who want the company to grow and grow much faster then their are now. The CX-9 has been an unmitigated sales disaster. Fantastic car but terrible marketing and sales.
 
Yes, I mean a bumper to bumper for 100,000 miles or 10 years. You can buy that insurance right now on your new Mazda for $1200-$2000. Just build it into the price and do it. Hyundai was known as a cheap car maker that no one took seriously until their 100,000 mile 10 year power-train warranty. Mazda needs something like that to really throw down the gauntlet and drive sales.

Mazda says they are happy to be a small company because they are a small company and that is the only reason. They can say what they want but they are beholden to their share holders who want the company to grow and grow much faster then their are now. The CX-9 has been an unmitigated sales disaster. Fantastic car but terrible marketing and sales.

I agree Mazda needs to do something, from a marketing standpoint, to boost sales. It's about getting people to consider Mazda when the majority of people don't even have Mazda on their radar. It's become obvious that making the best cars isn't good enough. It would also be beneficial to match others on feature content since it seems people shop based on bells and whistles rather than what really makes a car good. Hyundai and Kia got big also by offering more features for the money. When you end up selling more cars, you end up making more money even if initially you make less by offering more tech.

As far as the warranty, automakers often find ways to avoid honoring claims. A quick look online and I found an example by Hyundai. 100,000 mile powertrain warranty right? This guy had his engine overheat at 60K to the point of it needing to be replaced. Hyundai determined that the engine sensor responsible for identifying the issue malfunctioned so no dash light. Hyundai said the warranty didn't cover that sensor and said because the engine failure stemmed from that, the owner wasn't entitled to a new engine. This guy still had 2 years of payments left on a useless car.

Point is, if a company offers a "bumper to bumper", which gives an automaker even more leeway than a powertrain warranty, would often not be honored. The company would often cite normal wear and tear.
 
I agree Mazda needs to do something, from a marketing standpoint, to boost sales. It's about getting people to consider Mazda when the majority of people don't even have Mazda on their radar. It's become obvious that making the best cars isn't good enough. It would also be beneficial to match others on feature content since it seems people shop based on bells and whistles rather than what really makes a car good. Hyundai and Kia got big also by offering more features for the money. When you end up selling more cars, you end up making more money even if initially you make less by offering more tech.

As far as the warranty, automakers often find ways to avoid honoring claims. A quick look online and I found an example by Hyundai. 100,000 mile powertrain warranty right? This guy had his engine overheat at 60K to the point of it needing to be replaced. Hyundai determined that the engine sensor responsible for identifying the issue malfunctioned so no dash light. Hyundai said the warranty didn't cover that sensor and said because the engine failure stemmed from that, the owner wasn't entitled to a new engine. This guy still had 2 years of payments left on a useless car.

Point is, if a company offers a "bumper to bumper", which gives an automaker even more leeway than a powertrain warranty, would often not be honored. The company would often cite normal wear and tear.

I don't care how Mazda enforces the warranty. They just need to do something to drive sales. If people think Mazda can survive in the USA with only one model that actually sells, I got a bridge to sell you. They need to find out why people are not buying their cars and fix it. People around my location think Mazda's are cheap, noisy and un-reliable.
 
I don't care how Mazda enforces the warranty. They just need to do something to drive sales. If people think Mazda can survive in the USA with only one model that actually sells, I got a bridge to sell you. They need to find out why people are not buying their cars and fix it. People around my location think Mazda's are cheap, noisy and un-reliable.

Thing with reputations is that it takes a long time to change the negative aspects of one. The new CX-9 is actually the first really quiet Mazda, where Mazda actually identified that this is a problem of theirs and they added 50+ lbs of sound deadening over the previous model.
These are also the first series of Mazda's to have quality interiors. And not only have they caught up to the competition, they are the best interiors in class. Mazda also rates well in reliability. Some people still associate Mazda with rust issues. I believe this is also a thing of the past. This all takes time to sink into peoples perceptions.

Mazda is in no danger of failing. They have two core sellers, the 3 and the CX-5. You want to see a company with problems take a look at Mitsubishi, how are they still in the US?? Or Fiat, they're barely moving cars. Tesla is now worth more (market cap) than Ford, yet they barely sell any cars.
 
Thing with reputations is that it takes a long time to change the negative aspects of one. The new CX-9 is actually the first really quiet Mazda, where Mazda actually identified that this is a problem of theirs and they added 50+ lbs of sound deadening over the previous model.
These are also the first series of Mazda's to have quality interiors. And not only have they caught up to the competition, they are the best interiors in class. Mazda also rates well in reliability. Some people still associate Mazda with rust issues. I believe this is also a thing of the past. This all takes time to sink into peoples perceptions.

Mazda is in no danger of failing. They have two core sellers, the 3 and the CX-5. You want to see a company with problems take a look at Mitsubishi, how are they still in the US?? Or Fiat, they're barely moving cars. Tesla is now worth more (market cap) than Ford, yet they barely sell any cars.


Reputations do take some time but can turn around quick. Again, Hyundai and Kia are two great examples. I am not saying Mazda will go under - they sell over 1.5 million cars worldwide but only ~300,000 in the USA. Sales of the Mazda 3 and Mazda 6 are tanking. The CX-5 sells and that is it. They need to come up wth a new marketing scheme. If you have a good product, but no sales, blame your marketing department.

The scariest thing is that Mazda is closer to Mitsubishi than it is to the Honda, Nissan, Toyota, Hyundai, or Kia. In many ways, Mazda is in the exact same as position in the USA as VW, but unfortunately without the global sales that VW has.
 
Last edited:
Given that most people don't out cars that often, it's hard to get people to break away from the perceived "safe" of other manufacturers.
Once you sit and drive one, Mazda usually wins - but you have to get people in the seat.

Also, a fun-to-drive SUV? People assume that's not possible, as most SUVs are basically trucks, which drive like, well, trucks.

Sure, creature comforts abound - the mantra of most SUVs todays are "we will out-comfort the competition, not out-drive them"

I'm still surprised how good the CX-9 compared to the competition - looks better, drives better, is laid out better - it's a well thought out vehicle.
Sure there are always trade-offs, but so what? There always are.

I guess the one good thing is in the age of internet, etc., more info gets out there, and then people may try it.
 
Mazda is betting that driving matters. They may be wrong though, maybe driving doesn't matter. Amazing to me is how terrible other brand offerings feel to drive, and people seem fine with it.
 
Mazda is betting that driving matters. They may be wrong though, maybe driving doesn't matter. Amazing to me is how terrible other brand offerings feel to drive, and people seem fine with it.

I think you might be right. The Toyota Highlander is a terrible driving car as is the Nissan Rouge, but both greatly outsell their Mazda competition.
 
You have to wonder why the driving angle always worked so well for BMW. Was always less luxurious than Mercedes and Lexus, much less reliable than Lexus, but holds its own in sales because it's the Ultimate Driving Machine. Mazda is the mainstream version of BMW, although and even more reliable, yet it doesn't sell on those merits in the way BMW does.
 
Sadly, driving doesn't matter to some, because most people either don't know what fun driving is, or they want to drive a marshmallow.

BMW is historically are "driving oriented luxury", but morphed status symbols. Mazda is not view as a status symbol, nor luxury - but it is reliable (generally).

The phrase that I read on a review was they are "punching above their weight"; they made such a good vehicle relative to expectations, that people are a bit shocked and are trying to explain it.

The one thing I find is I feel the CX-9 is much safer to drive; I feel I have more control over the vehicle than other SUVs, based on driving dynamics and engine and brake response.
 
How do people drive? For me the vast majority is either in bumper to bumper city street congestion, or going dead straight at cruise mph on the hwy? And thats if you're lucky, otherwise its congestion on both.. Does driving matter under these conditions?
 
Back