- :
- 2017 CX9 GT AWD
They said the Subaru wins (barely):
https://www.autoblog.com/2018/05/23/subaru-ascent-vs-mazda-cx-9-comparison/
https://www.autoblog.com/2018/05/23/subaru-ascent-vs-mazda-cx-9-comparison/
And now Chevy is putting a 4-banger turbo into its Silverado, a segment where owners often find a V6 to be too small.Yet most people on the internet are stuck with the old thought that these are too heavy for 4 cylinder engines and they say they can't consider the CX-9 because of it.
As Autoblog notes, convenience/practicality is what we sacrifice for a good looking, fun-to-drive 3-row CUV. It's not like the CX-9 is impractical; it's just less practical (and less interesting) than a Pilot or a Highlander. And I'm fine with that.Anyway, Autoblog names the Ascent the winner for the usual crossover reasons. More space and it's also a bit cheaper which more buyers in the segment may lean towards. They themselves as car lovers would likely go with the CX-9 everytime.
My wife's MDX has paddle shifters, and I've used them three, maybe four, times, and even then it was only to play around with the system, never with any degree of seriousness.The hilarious thing about the comparison article is the writer demotes the CX-9 because it has no paddle shifters. So large, heavy vehicles are often driven at 8/10ths on winding roads at hyper-legal speeds? Uh, no, I would bet the percentage of CX-9 or any large SUV owners who use paddle shifters every day is so tiny, it'd be laughable.
My 3 weighs less than 3100 lbs and after 4 years, I've used the paddle shifters only twice.
FWIW - I ran Blizzaks on my CX-9 and had ZERO problems dealing with snow here this past winter.I invested in set of Nokians for next winter, so i am very curious to see how the car behaves with better rubber.
The hilarious thing about the comparison article is the writer demotes the CX-9 because it has no paddle shifters. So large, heavy vehicles are often driven at 8/10ths on winding roads at hyper-legal speeds? Uh, no, I would bet the percentage of CX-9 or any large SUV owners who use paddle shifters every day is so tiny, it'd be laughable.
My 3 weighs less than 3100 lbs and after 4 years, I've used the paddle shifters only twice.
The hilarious thing about the comparison article is the writer demotes the CX-9 because it has no paddle shifters. So large, heavy vehicles are often driven at 8/10ths on winding roads at hyper-legal speeds? Uh, no, I would bet the percentage of CX-9 or any large SUV owners who use paddle shifters every day is so tiny, it'd be laughable.
My 3 weighs less than 3100 lbs and after 4 years, I've used the paddle shifters only twice.
I've had my 6GT for about 7 months now, and have never used the paddle shifters after the first week (and that was just to play around with them).
Totally a gimmick, and useless on traditional automatic transmissions.
What's even more laughable, is paddle shifters on a car with a CVT. (Honda anyone?) Really?
Pretending to shift gears in a car that has a transmission....with no gears? Puleeese.
The only other mass-market three-row SUV I’ve tested that drives this well is the Mazda CX-9, whose graceful roofline caused me to hit my head one too many times getting in and out of the vehicle and tow capacity peaked at just 3,500 pounds. It was a vastly less practical car than the Subie.
The hilarious thing about the comparison article is the writer demotes the CX-9 because it has no paddle shifters. So large, heavy vehicles are often driven at 8/10ths on winding roads at hyper-legal speeds? Uh, no, I would bet the percentage of CX-9 or any large SUV owners who use paddle shifters every day is so tiny, it'd be laughable.
My 3 weighs less than 3100 lbs and after 4 years, I've used the paddle shifters only twice.