CX-9 least reliable on Consumer Reports

My experience is Consumer Reports is sometimes on and sometimes off the mark.

They recommended a Sharp vacuum 20 years ago. We still have it today, runs great.

They recommended a John Deere
L-110 riding lawn mower. That thing was the biggest POS and most expensive to maintain tractor I've ever owned.

I'll bet CR didn't have a candid conversation with Mazda service and independent mechanics like I did to check on reliability.

After research, I feel 100% confident about my CX-9.
 
Fruitwolf said:
My experience is Consumer Reports is sometimes on and sometimes off the mark.

They recommended a Sharp vacuum 20 years ago. We still have it today, runs great.

They recommended a John Deere
L-110 riding lawn mower. That thing was the biggest POS and most expensive to maintain tractor I've ever owned.

I'll bet CR didn't have a candid conversation with Mazda service and independent mechanics like I did to check on reliability.

After research, I feel 100% confident about my CX-9.
Click to expand...
They will never be right for each and every individual person's experience. If there is one defective car in 100,000 sold, that's pretty reliable--except for that one person. CR's data, in the aggregate, over time, should be very accurate.

However--they didn't do a full report on the CX-9. All they did was predict reliability based on the first 18 months of a completely revamped car. And I think they heavily weigh infotainment complaints--both slow responsiveness, and customer confusion as to how to use them. I can't imagine that suddenly Mazda has a high rate of mechanical failures on the CX-9. I'd love to see the more detailed data on reliability issues.
 
It will be better next year. But generally all cars are so good these days mechanically that they will get panned for mostly electronics. Engine and drivetrain has matured enough to be reliable.
 
CrazyBiker said:
It will be better next year. But generally all cars are so good these days mechanically that they will get panned for mostly electronics. Engine and drivetrain has matured enough to be reliable.
Click to expand...

electronic components in cars are high end low tolerance components. the infotainment system in mazda issues are more related with software and design, instead of hardware.

I agree, engine and drivetrain are incredible reliable this days with new designs and materials used.

I read an article on internet where a guy put 40,000 miles to the cx9 in few months and no issues at all.

BTW, for reliability, I check www.truedelta.com for real owner reports and statistics.
 
JPL said:
So they say it's least reliable Mazda when Mazda as a company is excellent. So what's the point?

Your headline suggests it's the least reliable vehicle out there or in it's segment.

We've got a lot of owners on here. What have been the reliability complaints? I haven't seen any.
Click to expand...

It is not as excellent. The reliability of CX-9 is bad enough to pull it down 6 places to 12th in that chart. That is telling!
 
The cx-9 hasnt sold that well, especially in the U.S (vast majority of consumer reports subscribers). I doubt their sample size is much better than this forum.

The only reliability complaints I have seen are infotainment related. As long as these reviewers weigh infotainment reliability the same as drivetrain in their scores, without making a distinction, they hold very little value, and do little to educate the consumer.

In my sample size of one (2017 cx9). We have had zero issues(infotainment or otherwise) in nearly a year and 25000 km.
 
I may have missed something but all that link said was the CX-9 is the least reliable Mazda. Is there any data to back this up?

Also, the title is misleading but that is to be expected from the poster.
 
Goldbug said:
The cx-9 hasnt sold that well, especially in the U.S(vast majority of consumer reports subscribers). I doubt their sample size is much better than this forum.

The only reliability complaints I have seen are infotainment related. As long as these reviewers weigh infotainment reliability the same as drivetrain in their scores, without making a distinction, they hold very little value, and do little to educate the consumer.

In my sample size of one(2017 cx9). We have had zero issues(infotainment or otherwise) in nearly a year and 25000 km.
Click to expand...

I don't have any issues with my cx9 2016. Purchased on June 2016, now with more than one year and 13,000 km. We are very happy with the purchase. This is a Japan design, Japan electronics and Japan mechanics, reliable for sure! I read the forum from time to time and we see no issues so far.
 
In my extensive research for a year before buying, I read about many more problems from competitors, the highest rated in reliability, with more reported problems.Large drivetrain problems too. From transmission replacements to leaking engine oil on brand new vehicles.

The only things reported from many owners on here, other Mazda forums, Edmunds buyer reviews, Cars.com buyer reviews, Motor Trend long term reports, MotorWeek long term reports, and so on was an occasional bug in infotainment, and maybe a squeak. I have experienced nothing but brilliance.

Until Consumer Reports publishes what issues people are reporting, then it's bogus.
 
tex2670 said:
They will never be right for each and every individual person's experience. If there is one defective car in 100,000 sold, that's pretty reliable--except for that one person. CR's data, in the aggregate, over time, should be very accurate.

However--they didn't do a full report on the CX-9. All they did was predict reliability based on the first 18 months of a completely revamped car. And I think they heavily weigh infotainment complaints--both slow responsiveness, and customer confusion as to how to use them. I can't imagine that suddenly Mazda has a high rate of mechanical failures on the CX-9. I'd love to see the more detailed data on reliability issues.
Click to expand...

I subscribed to CR for years. For us, their reviews and reliability were hit or miss. Mazda aside, that's our experience. Glad it's worked out for you.
 
CrazyBiker said:
https://www.consumerreports.org/car...ion/car-brands-reliability-how-they-stack-up/
Click to expand...

I have a CR subscription.

They liked the handling, agility, and quietness. They also liked the ride quality, so Mazda got the balance between handling and comfort just right, according to CR.

They also complemented the "presence" of the car, and they liked the interior materials.

What they didn't like: lack of seat adjustments, small-ish interior, "tedious and cumbersome" infotainment (that lacks android auto and apple carplay).

They gave middling reviews to the engine - it gets 1 mpg better than larger, V6 powered competitors, but isn't as smooth, which isn't a good tradeoff in their opinion.

Overall, it is ranked pretty low in midsize SUVs (ouch). Highlander, Sorento, Santa Fe, Pilot, Santa Fe Sport, Murano, Edge, Pathfinder, Atlas, 4Runner all score higher.

The "predicted reliability" is 1/5. Unfortunately, the web site does not appear to break out the specific areas and just reports overall reliability. The 2016 and 2018 both get the same score, but there is no score for the 2017 because they didn't have enough data.
 
jal142 said:
I have a CR subscription.

They liked the handling, agility, and quietness. They also liked the ride quality, so Mazda got the balance between handling and comfort just right, according to CR.

They also complemented the "presence" of the car, and they liked the interior materials.

What they didn't like: lack of seat adjustments, small-ish interior, "tedious and cumbersome" infotainment (that lacks android auto and apple carplay).

They gave middling reviews to the engine - it gets 1 mpg better than larger, V6 powered competitors, but isn't as smooth, which isn't a good tradeoff in their opinion.

Overall, it is ranked pretty low in midsize SUVs (ouch). Highlander, Sorento, Santa Fe, Pilot, Santa Fe Sport, Murano, Edge, Pathfinder, Atlas, 4Runner all score higher.

The "predicted reliability" is 1/5. Unfortunately, the web site does not appear to break out the specific areas and just reports overall reliability. The 2016 and 2018 both get the same score, but there is no score for the 2017 because they didn't have enough data.
Click to expand...

the whole car is well designed and very well built, I don't see this car being unreliable over the long-run at all.

the whole point of the turbo 4 cylinder is that it makes much more torque at a lower-RPM where you are most likely to be sitting at during your daily drive. the v6 only makes good power at a higher RPM which is less efficient and less effective for daily driving.
 
It’s not a souped up turbo so the reliability should not be an issue but not proven yet so don’t know. I prefer the smoothness of a v6 than a turbo 4. But in modern times it’s electronics is what I worry most about
 
Last edited:
Most people get lower mileage in turbo engines as they don’t map to people’s natural driving styles
 
Last edited:
Please log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
2016~2023 Consumer Reports - 2020 CX-9
Replies
14
Views
2K
sm1ke
sm1ke
V
CX-9 reliability by CR posted in CX-5 forum
Replies
0
Views
2K
Vdev
V
B
    • Wow
2007~2015 CX-9 200K miles required maintenance?
Replies
3
Views
2K
Jack Rabbit
J

Latest posts

Back