You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
1st Gen CX-9 versus 2nd Gen Cx-9
- Thread starter ZoomFive
- Start date
Padre Dave01
Member
- :
- 2011 CX-9 GT
Big advantage for me driving a Gen 1, 2015 GT is that it is paid for! Trade in on a 16-17 would kill me. Real world MPG with 40,000 miles on her is 18-20 cruising at 85mph (I drive Phoenix to Yuma every weekend to be a vacancy Pastor there. Cruising under 80 raises MPG to 21-23mpg on 89 octane Top Tier fuel. My only mod is a K&N insert air filter. I am running Michelin Legacy tires on it. Sure, I wish I had the Signature interior in my GT, but the seat adjustment is awesome, the Bose stereo is excellent, except when I plug in my iPhone or iPod and it takes about 4 minutes for the system to read that there are over 4,000 songs on my devices. It always starts over at the first song, which is really irritating.
My wife’s 2016 CX-5 GT has a much nicer sound system but I haven’t tried plugging my phone into it. It is her car and I seldom get to drive it.
My 2010 Mazdaspeed 3 is my amazing driving machine. What a car!
My wife’s 2016 CX-5 GT has a much nicer sound system but I haven’t tried plugging my phone into it. It is her car and I seldom get to drive it.
My 2010 Mazdaspeed 3 is my amazing driving machine. What a car!
My wife could care less about the wood and napa if she cannot get comfortable in the seat. This is a basic function that should have been included. It is on just about any other car with power seats. How much money did that save Mazda? Infotainment system has already gone blank on her a few times and scared the sh** out of her. Of course the dealer can not replicate the problem. We have a thing for Mazdas as I owned a 1982 RX7. I was a badass in college with that car. When I met my wife, she was driving a 1984 626. I put over 160k miles on that RX7. I think it used almost as much oil as it did gasoline! Anyway, I was spoiled growing up as my dad and uncles drove Mercedez and Porches. I got used to german handling and vault solid builds of these cars and boy they are made to be driven at high speeds for long periods of time. The Mazda CX-9 in my opinion reminds me of german handling more than any of the other SUVs.
At a constant 70 mph on flat Florida interstate, the most we got on a tank of fuel is 23mpg. And we were getting run off the road for going too slow. At 75 mph, we got 21mpg. Same mileage as our 2013 and neither me or my wife are lead foots. My 2018 Q7 v6 is getting 20 mpg around town and 24 on the highway and it has less than 1000 miles on it. Bear in mind that vehicle weighs 4700 lbs. 0 - 60 in 5.7 sec., quarter mile speed trap at 100 mph.
Living in the Northeast, with hills and valleys as the common terrain, I can get 27mpg highway in my AWD equipped CX-9. I average 20, with a lead foot.
According to real world user data, 2017 CX-9 owners get 22mpg on average and 2017 Q7 V6 owners get 19.3mpg.
Whatever your driving habits are, they do not align with others, even considering you do not live at altitude and drive on flat ground.
http://www.fuelly.com/car/audi/q7?engineconfig_id=12&bodytype_id=&submodel_id=
http://www.fuelly.com/car/mazda/cx-9
My apologies if the links are not inserted properly. I'm doing this from my phone.
Just remember that the 2018 gets seat tilt.
who's gonna trade in a 1yr old car for the tilting seat bottom? Do you not get the point?
Last edited:
my family went 1st-gen (2009 GT AWD) to 2nd-gen (2016 GT AWD) CX-9. we like the 2nd-gen in pretty much every aspect. not sure we ever fully utilized the space so if we lost space (i'm sure we did), we don't notice it. the interior comfort, amenities (my kids love having USB charging in their console), improved fuel efficiency (never got over 16 mpg in 1st-gen and average 21-22 mpg in 2016), QUIET cabin, and safety features more than make up for a few lost cubic feet. it is no contest for our family, 2nd-gen is a clear winner.
who's gonna trade in a 1yr old car for the tilting seat bottom? Do you not get the point?
Yes, Mazda shouldn't have left out such a standard feature. So it sucks if you have a 2016/17 and can't get comfortable. Just talking to those who haven't bought one yet.
my family went 1st-gen (2009 GT AWD) to 2nd-gen (2016 GT AWD) CX-9. we like the 2nd-gen in pretty much every aspect. not sure we ever fully utilized the space so if we lost space (i'm sure we did), we don't notice it. the interior comfort, amenities (my kids love having USB charging in their console), improved fuel efficiency (never got over 16 mpg in 1st-gen and average 21-22 mpg in 2016), QUIET cabin, and safety features more than make up for a few lost cubic feet. it is no contest for our family, 2nd-gen is a clear winner.
The 2nd gen definitely lost interior space, particularly is the cargo area. While that bothers me, we haven't seen need for the lost space yet in over a year of ownership.
The 2nd gen definitely lost interior space, particularly is the cargo area. While that bothers me, we haven't seen need for the lost space yet in over a year of ownership.
The main difference is seen only when both rows are down and you need to stack things high or fit in large (tall) objects. Space behind 2nd row isn't much different which is what most people will normally have it set up.
CrazyBiker
Member
- :
- 14' Mazda6 GT Tech, 17' Kia Sorento SXL V6 AWD V6, BMW S1000R/RR
Gen2 doesn't have mirror memory like Gen1. Its annoying. Mazda half-assed the CX-9
Is it just me or do the side view mirror settings not get saved when you save your seat adjustment settings? Mine is a 2017 signature. This is really annoying me.
This has been mentioned already in this thread. It is one of the features lost in the new Gen.
Gen2 doesn't have mirror memory like Gen1. Its annoying. Mazda half-assed the CX-9
I could list 50 features of importance before memory mirrors.
Let's just all forget the numerous shortcomings the 2nd gen cured and focus on something as minor and virtually irrelevant in the car decision process such as memory mirrors.
Gen 1 is a dinosaur compared to what's on the market today, but was industry leading.....a decade ago....
CrazyBiker
Member
- :
- 14' Mazda6 GT Tech, 17' Kia Sorento SXL V6 AWD V6, BMW S1000R/RR
I just can't pay 45k for a vehicle without basic luxury features.
I could list 50 features of importance before memory mirrors.
Let's just all forget the numerous shortcomings the 2nd gen cured and focus on something as minor and virtually irrelevant in the car decision process such as memory mirrors.
Gen 1 is a dinosaur compared to what's on the market today, but was industry leading.....a decade ago....
mirror memory is irrelevant to you, but it is to people who swap drivers frequently including myself. The lack of mirror memory eliminates the car for me.
lot of people do consider this in the top list of features esp when this is available in cheaper suv and old gen.
CrazyBiker
Member
- :
- 14' Mazda6 GT Tech, 17' Kia Sorento SXL V6 AWD V6, BMW S1000R/RR
Precisely, people here are defending the CX-9 for the sake of it! I like Mazdas but I am not of the fanboy mentality (of any brand for that matter)
Precisely, people here are defending the CX-9 for the sake of it! I like Mazdas but I am not of the fanboy mentality (of any brand for that matter)
same here. I do own a mazda but I look at the competition objectively at least.
same here. I do own a mazda but I look at the competition objectively at least.
I've never owned a a Mazda before but I love this car. It was this or a Q7 for me. I'm glad I was able to save $15k+ and still end up with a car I enjoy driving. Whether the mirrors fold or autodip isn't a big concern to me personally. I like those features but it's a small price to pay in my mind for a car that handles decently (excellently for its size) and is overall a pleasure to drive, whether on winding roads or cruising on the highway at 90+mph. If you disagree, there are plenty of options in the segment for you it seems.
I've never owned a a Mazda before but I love this car. It was this or a Q7 for me. I'm glad I was able to save $15k+ and still end up with a car I enjoy driving. Whether the mirrors fold or autodip isn't a big concern to me personally. I like those features but it's a small price to pay in my mind for a car that handles decently (excellently for its size) and is overall a pleasure to drive, whether on winding roads or cruising on the highway at 90+mph. If you disagree, there are plenty of options in the segment for you it seems.
I do wish the AWD was more rear biased or otherwise tamed the torque steer, but I knew that going in. And there's no excuse to not stick LEDs in the rear turn signals, but that was a simple fix. Overall it's a win as far as I'm concerned.
mirror memory is irrelevant to you, but it is to people who swap drivers frequently including myself. The lack of mirror memory eliminates the car for me.
lot of people do consider this in the top list of features esp when this is available in cheaper suv and old gen.
Ok, it matters to you and some others. I respect that. However, it doesn't to others, such as me.
Gen 1 is missing many features that by today's standard is unacceptable. Most importantly to me, is was rated bottom of the class by the IIHS in safety. Something that's a huge concern to me.
It was a 10 year old car with minimal improvements during its life. It was made to compete with the first gen Pilot! The memory mirrors only came about in its 7th year of production.
If I'm not allowed to express my opinion in favor of Gen 2, you're not allowed to express your opinion in favor of Gen 1. It's a two way street.
I happen to enjoy Gen 2. I do miss the tilt feature of the driver seat and the reduction in space. I think everything else they added more than makes up for it. This is my opinion, and I'm entitled to it. If you think it's fair to defend your beliefs, it's ok for me to as well.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 3
- Views
- 3K
