2017 CX 9 Customer Reviews

I will post my rankings based on my driving experience. These are ranked for value vs features not pure luxury. XC-90, Sorento, Atlas, Q7, Explorer, Santa Fe, cx-9, Enclave, mdx, pilot. Not taking reliability into account. That's why I didn't go for XC-90.
 
CrazyBiker said:
I will post my rankings based on my driving experience. These are ranked for value vs features not pure luxury. XC-90, Sorento, Atlas, Q7, Explorer, Santa Fe, cx-9, Enclave, mdx, pilot. Not taking reliability into account. That's why I didn't go for XC-90.
Click to expand...

Youre a dickhead, and I think youre worse then mangochilli and have no place on here bashing one of the only brands that still cares about driving feel and connection to the road. You should really just get out of here and go to a XC-90 forum so you can start bashing the CX-9 which is the best SUV for the average consumer and whine about how you couldnt afford the XC-90.

Man, you are negative, Whiney, annoying as hell and crazy all at once. Everyones had enough my friend.
 
Rofl

CX-9 wins driving dynamics and interior luxury department for sure. But those are not the only parameters. Rest of the shortcomings are easily fixable. If Mazda does that even with an extra 2-3k it will catapult to near top for me at 47-48k signature.
 
Last edited:
CrazyBiker said:
I will post my rankings based on my driving experience. These are ranked for value vs features not pure luxury. XC-90, Sorento, Atlas, Q7, Explorer, Santa Fe, cx-9, Enclave, mdx, pilot. Not taking reliability into account. That's why I didn't go for XC-90.
Click to expand...

The Explorer is a dinosaur, lowest rated in this big segment. The Santa Fe is also very long in the tooth with a cheap plastic interior. The Enclave is 10 years old! New one coming soon. Atlas and Pilot both lost easily to the CX-9 in a recent Car and Driver (or Motor Trend) comparo.
 
You didn't go for the XC-90 b/c it wasn't reliable, is that right?

That's an interesting list - all three row, some german SUVs, some domestic brands, and some asian brands... no Highlander or Pathfinder?

The german ones - can't get them under $50K decently spec'd so it's hard to compare.. MDX is the same.. heck the Explorer/Enclave push past $50K (fully loaded)..

None of them are perfect - can't get all the features you want at the price you want..
 
JPL said:
The Explorer is a dinosaur, lowest rated in this big segment. The Santa Fe is also very long in the tooth with a cheap plastic interior. The Enclave is 10 years old! New one coming soon. Atlas and Pilot both lost easily to the CX-9 in a recent Car and Driver (or Motor Trend) comparo.
Click to expand...

Yes they are old but a fantastic value. The new enclave looks very good. CX-9 will win most shootouts for the driver but will lose in the family front.
 
Tiggs said:
You didn't go for the XC-90 b/c it wasn't reliable, is that right?

That's an interesting list - all three row, some german SUVs, some domestic brands, and some asian brands... no Highlander or Pathfinder?

The german ones - can't get them under $50K decently spec'd so it's hard to compare.. MDX is the same.. heck the Explorer/Enclave push past $50K (fully loaded)..

None of them are perfect - can't get all the features you want at the price you want..
Click to expand...

Agreed. Yes, XC-90 has a ton of electrical and leaky sunroof issues. The car is so advanced that the Volvo tech at the dealers don't know how to fix them. XC-90 lease was safe price as a loaded Sorento or CX-9. The Germans are low because of price. MDX was a disappointment. Cheap feeling interior with confusing infotainment. CX-9 trumps over it except for the SH-AWD is evenly matched.

No highlander or pathfinder due to horrible looks, poor handling, cheap interiors and bland exteriors.
 
CrazyBiker said:
Rofl

CX-9 wins driving dynamics and interior luxury department for sure. But those are not the only parameters. Rest of the shortcomings are easily fixable. If Mazda does that even with an extra 2-3k it will catapult to near top for me at 47-48k signature.
Click to expand...


Remember that the 2018 GT and Sig adds some of the missing items people were looking for.

-Heated rear seats
-Heated steering wheel
-Driver seat tilt, passenger seat height and lumbar adjustment

+
-improved g-vectoring system
-improved rear seat function for access

The only important things missing now is the pano roof and ventilated seats. As we've talked about, the pano roof isn't coming because Mazda deliberately decided against it for dynamic reasons.
 
Panoroof is heavier but it's not that bad to affect handling. Add 3rd row vents especially with that horrible AC. Those are a must for my kids and dogs.
 
CrazyBiker said:
Yes they are old but a fantastic value. The new enclave looks very good. CX-9 will win most shootouts for the driver but will lose in the family front.
Click to expand...

It has won most tests as a whole, not just driving. These reviewers have considered the overall experience.
Ultimately, most families in most situations don't need more space than the CX-9. Hell, most families have gotten along just fine with sedans so a 3-row crossover in any form is superior. If you have more than 3 kids, get a minivan.
 
My first post here. Greetings all.

In Australia the Sorento fully loaded is advertised at about the same price as the top spec CX-9, albeit the Wife and I got the impression there was more discount to be had out of the Kia dealer.

Nevertheless we still went with the Mazda. The test drive process showed it to be by far the best car in its class. It was the most comfortable, best handling, smoothest and quietest car out of the Kia Sorrento & Carnival, Hyundai Santa Fe & iMax, Nissan Pathfinder and Holden Colorado (i think that is an Isuzu GM markets here). The Europeans were out of our price league and the Toyota Kluger seemed cynically overpriced for what it was.

7 months and 14K km later we really really like it! Only caveat I suppose is that we have 2 kids and use this vehicle as a 5 seater with a big boot (trunk to North Americans). We used the 3ed row once and according to my 6 yo son, the rear seat is "Fantastic Daddy!". Only other reservation, and not that I have that much experience towing, but it doesn't strike me as the sort of car you'd want for dragging a boat or caravan around.

Someone here mentioned the lack of a V6 as a negative: I beg to differ, in real world driving the torque curve delivered by the 2.5T makes it a very rapid car, irrespective of the power numbers. By comparison, my past cars were all RWD sedans with either 6 or 8 cylinders.

I don't think I'm a fan of every Mazda. Not sure about the 6 wagon or CX-3. The CX-9, 2 and MX-5 are in their respective ways very impressive cars. Factor in price makes them amazing actually.

Cheers
 
CAAD9 said:
My first post here. Greetings all.

In Australia the Sorento fully loaded is advertised at about the same price as the top spec CX-9, albeit the Wife and I got the impression there was more discount to be had out of the Kia dealer.

Nevertheless we still went with the Mazda. The test drive process showed it to be by far the best car in its class. It was the most comfortable, best handling, smoothest and quietest car out of the Kia Sorrento & Carnival, Hyundai Santa Fe & iMax, Nissan Pathfinder and Holden Colorado (i think that is an Isuzu GM markets here). The Europeans were out of our price league and the Toyota Kluger seemed cynically overpriced for what it was.

7 months and 14K km later we really really like it! Only caveat I suppose is that we have 2 kids and use this vehicle as a 5 seater with a big boot (trunk to North Americans). We used the 3ed row once and according to my 6 yo son, the rear seat is "Fantastic Daddy!". Only other reservation, and not that I have that much experience towing, but it doesn't strike me as the sort of car you'd want for dragging a boat or caravan around.

Someone here mentioned the lack of a V6 as a negative: I beg to differ, in real world driving the torque curve delivered by the 2.5T makes it a very rapid car, irrespective of the power numbers. By comparison, my past cars were all RWD sedans with either 6 or 8 cylinders.

I don't think I'm a fan of every Mazda. Not sure about the 6 wagon or CX-3. The CX-9, 2 and MX-5 are in their respective ways very impressive cars. Factor in price makes them amazing actually.

Cheers
Click to expand...

strongly agree on the engine. for real-world daily driving, you just need strong and linear torque from a relatively low RPM for the car to be efficient and effective. for example our 2.5L mazda 6 makes 185ft/lb of torque at 3250RPM, so revving to 3000PM the car really gets up and goes + the gearing makes the most use of the available torque - all in all it's a good drivetrain that Mazda has been making lately.

you're not a fan of the 6 wagon? really? if that was available in north america I probably wouldve ended up buying one. it's lower, lighter sleeker then the CX-5 and I bet it has the same amount of space if not more... hell even my sedan has quite a lot of space, we never had a problem packing for a 4 day trip with 5 people, everyone and everything comfortably fit and I am very glad this means we don't need to buy a lumbering crossover.

seriously, the more people that buy the wagon over the crossover, the better.
 
GJ-Molestor said:
strongly agree on the engine. for real-world daily driving, you just need strong and linear torque from a relatively low RPM for the car to be efficient and effective. for example our 2.5L mazda 6 makes 185ft/lb of torque at 3250RPM, so revving to 3000PM the car really gets up and goes + the gearing makes the most use of the available torque - all in all it's a good drivetrain that Mazda has been making lately.

you're not a fan of the 6 wagon? really? if that was available in north america I probably wouldve ended up buying one. it's lower, lighter sleeker then the CX-5 and I bet it has the same amount of space if not more... hell even my sedan has quite a lot of space, we never had a problem packing for a 4 day trip with 5 people, everyone and everything comfortably fit and I am very glad this means we don't need to buy a lumbering crossover.

seriously, the more people that buy the wagon over the crossover, the better.
Click to expand...

When driving the 6 wagon I got the feeling the rear suspension was just a bit on the too hard side. Gave me the impression that it made the car a bit out of balance in turns that where tight but still allowed for you to stay at the speed limit. The other odd thing about the 6 wagon is that it drives on a shorter wheelbase than the sedan oddly enough. I don't think that does it any favours dynamically either. I haven't driven the 6 sedan, but I have heard it is very well sorted.

As for luggage space, my notes say that the depth of the boot/trunk was about the same between 6/cx-5 but the taller body meant you had more volume.

I get the sentiment against the crossover/SUV. Coming from RWD sedans, and the last one had 50/50 weight distribution and very wide track with minimal overhang, I felt a lot of trepidation. And indeed most of the vehicles we drove were lumbering. The one exception was the cx-9, it handles like a proper car. I won't comment on the cx-5, it couldn't fit the pram we had on order so we didn't bother taking it any further.
 
CAAD9 said:
When driving the 6 wagon I got the feeling the rear suspension was just a bit on the too hard side. Gave me the impression that it made the car a bit out of balance in turns that where tight but still allowed for you to stay at the speed limit. The other odd thing about the 6 wagon is that it drives on a shorter wheelbase than the sedan oddly enough. I don't think that does it any favours dynamically either. I haven't driven the 6 sedan, but I have heard it is very well sorted.

As for luggage space, my notes say that the depth of the boot/trunk was about the same between 6/cx-5 but the taller body meant you had more volume.

I get the sentiment against the crossover/SUV. Coming from RWD sedans, and the last one had 50/50 weight distribution and very wide track with minimal overhang, I felt a lot of trepidation. And indeed most of the vehicles we drove were lumbering. The one exception was the cx-9, it handles like a proper car. I won't comment on the cx-5, it couldn't fit the pram we had on order so we didn't bother taking it any further.
Click to expand...

I hear you. But all these people who buy v8 trucks, lumbering SUVs which use tons of fuel unlike the CX9 which has some sort of actual vehicle dynamics is actually ridiculous. The average consumer should really just take a look at the trunk/boot of a Mazda 6 and see what Im talking about. If the sedan really wont fit the bill for this average consumer, the. Im sure a CX-9 would be a perfectly good choice. Im so dissapointed that Mazda builds this CX-9 actually designed for the real world around the consumer and all these people buying some other piece of s*** instead. Then theres the Sedan market dying which makes no sense in a world where resources are limited. Sedans have lower running costs while being quicker and more fun to drive, more stable/planted all while still having quite a lot of space. Im not saying that everyone can get by just fine with the space that a sedan has to offer, because thats not true. But how many average consumers actually use a truck for its true purpose?

Lets also keep in mind that an FR RWD car will have less passenger/cargo area space then a FWD sedan. For example I have an f10 5 series 528i, and I wholeheartedly agree that balanced RWD sedans are the most wonderful driving experience, yet this huge boat of a sedan somehow has less rear passenger space then the smaller Mazda 6. Im 62 and with the front seat all the way back there is no space in the rear. And I dont care. Finding a RWD BMW in our snowbelt province is like finding a unicorn. I specfiically picked up an early model 528i which was RWD only had the older generation naturally aspirated Inline 6 engine right before switching to turbo only in 2012. Such a wonderful car..

2i2bu3t.jpg
 
JPL said:
It has won most tests as a whole, not just driving. These reviewers have considered the overall experience.
Ultimately, most families in most situations don't need more space than the CX-9. Hell, most families have gotten along just fine with sedans so a 3-row crossover in any form is superior. If you have more than 3 kids, get a minivan.
Click to expand...

Had a chance to fully go through a CX-9 at the dealer while my 6 was having its first service done. Considering the CX-9 as a future replacement for our Durango. The problem is the CX-9 is significantly smaller behind the 2nd row than the Durango and probably most of the other 3 row CUVs (as confirmed by teh magazine reviews). On family trips we load our 65 lb dog and enough luggage for a family of 4 for several nights and the Durango comfortably swallows it all (though with no room to spare). The dog would be significantly more cramped in the CX-9. I'd probably have to get a luggage carrier for it to at least meet the storage space in the Durango. That's a big CON in my pros and cons analysis.
 
DeepCrystal17 said:
Had a chance to fully go through a CX-9 at the dealer while my 6 was having its first service done. Considering the CX-9 as a future replacement for our Durango. The problem is the CX-9 is significantly smaller behind the 2nd row than the Durango and probably most of the other 3 row CUVs (as confirmed by teh magazine reviews). On family trips we load our 65 lb dog and enough luggage for a family of 4 for several nights and the Durango comfortably swallows it all (though with no room to spare). The dog would be significantly more cramped in the CX-9. I'd probably have to get a luggage carrier for it to at least meet the storage space in the Durango. That's a big CON in my pros and cons analysis.
Click to expand...

The durango is a piece of s***. If the CX-9 is too small Id be looking at other Japanese competitors like Nissan Infiniti Toyota or perhaps a 2011 BMW X5 35i (reliable, fun to drive and overall a great SUV)
 
DeepCrystal17 said:
Had a chance to fully go through a CX-9 at the dealer while my 6 was having its first service done. Considering the CX-9 as a future replacement for our Durango. The problem is the CX-9 is significantly smaller behind the 2nd row than the Durango and probably most of the other 3 row CUVs (as confirmed by teh magazine reviews). On family trips we load our 65 lb dog and enough luggage for a family of 4 for several nights and the Durango comfortably swallows it all (though with no room to spare). The dog would be significantly more cramped in the CX-9. I'd probably have to get a luggage carrier for it to at least meet the storage space in the Durango. That's a big CON in my pros and cons analysis.
Click to expand...

I really haven't experienced any issue with the amount of cargo space. I've recently taken trips with our two dogs (55 lbs and 20 lbs) and had enough room for both of their crates, their supplies, and bags for me, my wife, and two toddlers. No room to spare, but everything fit.
 
Cargo volume is less than a Ford Edge and equal to a CR-V. The length is not an issue. The height is too less.
 
Please log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
2022 CX-9 noise when steering
Replies
5
Views
2K
Agape_365
A
B
Buying my first Mazda (2023 CX-9). Looking for the Forum's collective wisdom!
2
Replies
20
Views
5K
MazdaViking
M
D
2010 CX-9 How to make cigarette lighter port turn off with car?
Replies
1
Views
669
Bronco Boy
Bronco Boy

Latest posts

Back