A not-so-positive review of the 2019 CX-9 Signature

C

crikey

:
2019 Mazda CX-9 Signature, Machine Grey Metallic

I think the reviewer has some valid points, but quite a few are nit-picky. He complains about the split center storage console creaking when he puts his weight on it, and Im thinking that it might be his weight? Hes a bit of a big guy and the CX-9 might not be suitable for people of his built. Its laughable when he tries to sit in the 3rd row too. 😁
 
Seems like he reviews it without any thought of the inferior competition. Many of his complaints are based on it just being large and therefore not having typical Mazda dynamics while failing to realize it blows all competitors out of the water in dynamics. There's only so much you can do with a 3-row. Also his expectations he admits are set high by Mazda's luxurious interior that he becomes disappointed in a few elements that don't quite live up to a luxury SUV. Weird logic. Would he rather that the whole interior be cheap like the competition in order to be consistent?
 
Last edited:
I agree. It seems like that context is lost on him. He sees a luxurious interior and is disappointed that it isn*t as good as an SUV which costs $15k more, instead of being pleased that it*s so much better than an SUV at the same price point.

And yes, he compares driving dynamics to smaller Mazda*s instead of other 3-row SUVs. I think he just was really on a fault-finding mission for this review.
 
His negative review was primarily because he couldn't get comfortable in the drivers seat. He's a big guy and I could see the drivers seat feeling a little tight if I were not 5'8" 160 lbs. He says the seats are uncomfortable and I find the seats in my GT very comfortable. Yes they are on the firm side but thats what you want when/if you are doing long highway miles. I doubt I'll ever put my full weight onto the center arm rest like he did so that was meaningless. He talks about some of the cabin materials being cheap. Compared to what in this class? The Highlander has much more hard plastic than the CX-9. You can call the interior out on other things but "cheap materials" is not one of them.

We've all heard the negatives on this car. Most of them have been addressed through the last 3 years including the all important Car Play/infotainment upgrade. Other than a Pano-roof (which I would never want) the CX-9 offers everything the others do and more at the same price point. Usually less because Mazda dealers have to be motivated to sell their cars. To me its a different vehicle than the others in it's class. It's more of a sport/luxury/crossover that has interior room more similar to a car and drives more like one as well. If you don't need 100 cu ft of cargo space, occasionally tow light loads and want a SUV that handles and is actually fun to drive this is the one.
 
I'm 6'1" 260 lbs and I find the seats to be great. A little more lumbar and they'd be perfect. Not sure what this guy's problem is. He seems to have an average frame, should be comfortable.
 
JPL said:
I'm 6'1" 260 lbs and I find the seats to be great. A little more lumbar and they'd be perfect.
Click to expand...

Same height, ten pounds lighter. I would prefer the seats be about half an inch wider, and having more adjustments wouldn't hurt, but I have done 400km trips with no problems at all. But interestingly, my wife -- much shorter and considerably lighter than me -- has a problem with the small horizontal accent halfway up the seat back: it cuts into her back, and she has to use a thin cushion behind her to get comfortable.


seats.jpg
 
roadrutz said:
Same height, ten pounds lighter. I would prefer the seats be about half an inch wider, and having more adjustments wouldn't hurt, but I have done 400km trips with no problems at all. But interestingly, my wife -- much shorter and considerably lighter than me -- has a problem with the small horizontal accent halfway up the seat back: it cuts into her back, and she has to use a thin cushion behind her to get comfortable.


seats.jpg
Click to expand...

Does changing the tilt of the seat help at all? I would think that if it's closer to vertical the pressure on her back would be less.
 
roadrutz said:
Same height, ten pounds lighter. I would prefer the seats be about half an inch wider, and having more adjustments wouldn't hurt, but I have done 400km trips with no problems at all. But interestingly, my wife -- much shorter and considerably lighter than me -- has a problem with the small horizontal accent halfway up the seat back: it cuts into her back, and she has to use a thin cushion behind her to get comfortable.


seats.jpg
Click to expand...

Interesting. I don't feel those at all. In a Mazda 6 Signature, there's actually metal (might be chromed plastic) accents in those spots.
 
Unfortunately, as someone who has been looking at the CX-9 over the past couple of months, I am in agreement with most of his comments. Mazda seems to be trying to create the sporty Japanese version of a European car, but they're not quite hitting the mark.

The seat bottoms are short and slightly narrow, and the bolsters, adjustments, and lumbar support are sub-par. Some claim that they are fine, but when compared with high-line cars (and even other cars in the same class), they fall short. The seats are rather firm, though I consider that more a matter of personal preference.

I am not a fan of the BMW-esque split top design of the center armrest, though I'm not sure that many/most designs would silently support the weight of a large individual.

The side of the center console is too wide at the front, impacting a tall driver's leg. It's awkward, and something that I noticed on both of my test drives. I am not sure if this would be a literal pain on long drives, or something that I would just get used to.

Some of the leather stitching is poorly done, especially on the corner radii of the front seat backs. Again, exactly no European car that I looked at had this problem.

I was surprised at his positive comments on the third row seat and floor space of the cargo area, and thought that they were uncharacteristically fair when compared with those of other professional reviewers.

I am grateful for the traditional HVAC controls and the commander knob for infotainment navigation (vs. "touchscreen everything"), but I keep hearing complaints that the performance of both is marginal. My one experience with the heated seats in the cold weather was not impressive, as they took way too long to actually generate significant heat.

I am thankful for the LACK of rear captain's chairs. I don't get the advantage of rear captain's chairs in these mid-sized crossovers--you give up one seating position, and because most of them have armrests on the sides, you also get almost no space to maneuver between the two chairs. I thought that I wanted rear captain's chairs until I actually looked at some competing vehicles which had them.

Overall, I still think that the CX-9 is a good value for someone looking for luxury features without the luxury price, but it's disappointing that the finish quality isn't better. For someone who has never owned a Mazda, the misses on the interior make me question the build and materials quality of the rest of the car.
 
NoCarFan said:
Unfortunately, as someone who has been looking at the CX-9 over the past couple of months, I am in agreement with most of his comments. Mazda seems to be trying to create the sporty Japanese version of a European car, but they're not quite hitting the mark.

The seat bottoms are short and slightly narrow, and the bolsters, adjustments, and lumbar support are sub-par. Some claim that they are fine, but when compared with high-line cars (and even other cars in the same class), they fall short. The seats are rather firm, though I consider that more a matter of personal preference.

I am not a fan of the BMW-esque split top design of the center armrest, though I'm not sure that many/most designs would silently support the weight of a large individual.

The side of the center console is too wide at the front, impacting a tall driver's leg. It's awkward, and something that I noticed on both of my test drives. I am not sure if this would be a literal pain on long drives, or something that I would just get used to.

Some of the leather stitching is poorly done, especially on the corner radii of the front seat backs. Again, exactly no European car that I looked at had this problem.

I was surprised at his positive comments on the third row seat and floor space of the cargo area, and thought that they were uncharacteristically fair when compared with those of other professional reviewers.

I am grateful for the traditional HVAC controls and the commander knob for infotainment navigation (vs. "touchscreen everything"), but I keep hearing complaints that the performance of both is marginal. My one experience with the heated seats in the cold weather was not impressive, as they took way too long to actually generate significant heat.

I am thankful for the LACK of rear captain's chairs. I don't get the advantage of rear captain's chairs in these mid-sized crossovers--you give up one seating position, and because most of them have armrests on the sides, you also get almost no space to maneuver between the two chairs. I thought that I wanted rear captain's chairs until I actually looked at some competing vehicles which had them.

Overall, I still think that the CX-9 is a good value for someone looking for luxury features without the luxury price, but it's disappointing that the finish quality isn't better. For someone who has never owned a Mazda, the misses on the interior make me question the build and materials quality of the rest of the car.
Click to expand...

In response to your last paragraph, there's no quality issues with the interior aside from the one section of stitching that doesn't live up to the great leather and stitching throughout. The issues you bring up are a design issue. Everything is built rock solid with the best materials in class. Seat shape and other elements are just a matter of personal preference.
 
It's funny, everyone that has nitpicks about the interior fit and finish of this car always compares to more expensive, upper tier luxury vehicles. I think it's a matter of managing expectations.

For example, I share the same sentiment regarding the quality of leather stitching on the sides and rear of the seats. That said, the stitching is excellent where it matters most (where it would see the most wear).

The split-lid on the armrest looks nice, but I do not like it at all. For a company that prides itself on ergonomics, I find that accessing the compartment is a little more awkward than it needs to be because of the split-lid.

These are things that I'm more than happy living with because the rest of the car as a whole, and the price I paid for the car, far outweigh any minor design flaws I don't like. That's not to say that these things shouldn't be addressed or improved, it's just that I'm willing to accept them because they're just a drop in the bucket.


For all of the CX-9's few shortcomings, the tradeoffs in driveability and money saved is well worth it. Imagine what kind of CX-9 we'd get with an extra 10k for Mazda to play with..
 
Last edited:
sm1ke said:
For all of the CX-9's few shortcomings, the tradeoffs in driveability and money saved is well worth it. Imagine what kind of CX-9 we'd get with an extra 10k for Mazda to play with..
Click to expand...

That's exactly it, and what gets frustrating with all car reviews these days. It seems like reviewers are constantly comparing everything against a luxury alternative, which is not comparing apples to apples.

Does the CX-9 have some shortcomings? Sure. Show me a car that doesn't. However, for the price I find it hard to beat.

Yes, the seats are not as good as our Lexus NX and neither is the quality of interior materials. However, that little NX cost almost $10k more than what I paid for my 18 CX-9 and is a hell of lot smaller.
 
tke711 said:
That's exactly it, and what gets frustrating with all car reviews these days. It seems like reviewers are constantly comparing everything against a luxury alternative, which is not comparing apples to apples.

Does the CX-9 have some shortcomings? Sure. Show me a car that doesn't. However, for the price I find it hard to beat.

Yes, the seats are not as good as our Lexus NX and neither is the quality of interior materials. However, that little NX cost almost $10k more than what I paid for my 18 CX-9 and is a hell of lot smaller.
Click to expand...

Thing with reviewers is that they go back and forth between classes of cars and get accustomed to luxury brands so they are quick to notice the slightest compromise.
 
I keep reading owner comments that the CX-9 is best in class, but what exactly is the class to which you all refer?

If the class is defined by high-line car features, which Mazda seems to be targeting with the CX-9, then it is in no way best in class with respect to materials and workmanship (at least with much of the interior). There is a certain consistency in this regard among high-line car brands, whether it is design of the seats or quality of workmanship, and the CX-9 struggles to match most of them. For high-line car buyers, I suspect that the finer details matter.

If the class is defined by price, I dare say that it still isn*t best in class over, say, Honda or Toyota, when it comes to quality of materials and workmanship. Hot heat and cold A/C, or even heated seats which take less than 15 minutes to warm up, are basic features these days that Mazda can*t seem to get right in the CX-9. Our old Subaru Outback from the early 2000s had heated seats, mirrors, and wipers, all of which worked quickly and effectively to get you moving on cold and snowy mornings. It also had full tilt seat bottom (driver*s side) and a lumbar adjustment which could really poke you in the back. Yes, it only had cloth seats and no HUD, but who cares? I*d rather have a limited number of features that are complete and work well than have a larger number of half-baked ones (like auto side mirrors which apparently don*t adjust with seat memory.)

It seems that the problem with the CX-9 is that Mazda has cut corners on the details in order to provide high-line features at a mass-market price. I*m not sure that there*s a very large market for that kind of car, as sales figures appear to reflect. Most of the folks who want high-line features also want high-line quality (including the dealership experience). Most of the folks who are shopping mass-market cars are looking for features other than Nappa leather and HUDs*like cargo space, captain*s chairs, third-row vents, etc.

I understand that this is a Mazda forum and that critiques are not well received. I still like the CX-9 and may still buy one, but I am trying to be honest about the shortcomings, most of which are not issues of preference but are legitimate design, quality, or workmanship issues. It seems to me that the CX-9 really isn*t best at anything, but tries to be too many things to too many people. It might be best at being a poor-man*s luxury car, but I*m not sure that*s much of a compliment.
 
Last edited:
I think "best in class" is pretty subjective. What I might find as best in class, others probably won't. For instance, I drove the Pilot and Highland before buying my CX-9, and to me, the CX-9 was most definitely the best of that class of like-priced vehicles of the same size. Other people would probably disagree with me.

The entire Mazda lineup could never be classified as "luxury cars". They simply don't compete with Lexus, Infiniti, BWM, MB, etc., in craftsmanship or price. I would say that Mazda's are main-line cars with a higher end feel.
 
NoCarFan said:
I keep reading owner comments that the CX-9 is best in class, but what exactly is the class to which you all refer?

If the class is defined by high-line car features, which Mazda seems to be targeting with the CX-9, then it is in no way best in class with respect to materials and workmanship (at least with much of the interior). There is a certain consistency in this regard among high-line car brands, whether it is design of the seats or quality of workmanship, and the CX-9 struggles to match most of them. For high-line car buyers, I suspect that the finer details matter.

If the class is defined by price, I dare say that it still isn*t best in class over, say, Honda or Toyota, when it comes to quality of materials and workmanship. Hot heat and cold A/C, or even heated seats which take less than 15 minutes to warm up, are basic features these days that Mazda can*t seem to get right in the CX-9. Our old Subaru Outback from the early 2000s had heated seats, mirrors, and wipers, all of which worked quickly and effectively to get you moving on cold and snowy mornings. It also had full tilt seat bottom (driver*s side) and a lumbar adjustment which could really poke you in the back. Yes, it only had cloth seats and no HUD, but who cares? I*d rather have a limited number of features that are complete and work well than have a larger number of half-baked ones (like auto side mirrors which apparently don*t adjust with seat memory.)

It seems that the problem with the CX-9 is that Mazda has cut corners on the details in order to provide high-line features at a mass-market price. I*m not sure that there*s a very large market for that kind of car, as sales figures appear to reflect. Most of the folks who want high-line features also want high-line quality (including the dealership experience). Most of the folks who are shopping mass-market cars are looking for features other than Nappa leather and HUDs*like cargo space, captain*s chairs, third-row vents, etc.

I understand that this is a Mazda forum and that critiques are not well received. I still like the CX-9 and may still buy one, but I am trying to be honest about the shortcomings, most of which are not issues of preference but are legitimate design, quality, or workmanship issues. It seems to me that the CX-9 really isn*t best at anything, but tries to be too many things to too many people. It might be best at being a poor-man*s luxury car, but I*m not sure that*s much of a compliment.
Click to expand...

The class is defined by the vehicle's size (midsize 3-row SUV) and price. Thus, the CX-9 is meant to compete with the likes of the Pilot, Sorento, Highlander, Santa Fe XL, etc.

It's quite obvious that nobody here thinks the CX-9 is perfect, as you'll find that even the most staunch defenders of the CX-9 are quite comfortable in admitting its weak points. However, many consider it best in class because of it's overall package. There's plenty to improve as I and others have said time and time again, but considering what I get for the price I pay, the CX-9 offers much more to me than Honda or Toyota's offerings.

Sales figures have also been discussed at length. The CX-9 definitely can't compete with Honda and Toyota for example, and there are plenty of reasons for this (assumed brand image, brand loyalty, smaller dealer presence, etc.). I think a more important metric is the consistent increase in sales of the CX-9 since 2016. This is dated information, but Mazda Canada reported almost 2,500 CX-9s sold in 2016. In 2017, they reported almost 4,000 sold. By September 2018, they reported almost 3,400 sold. All while much of the competition experiences declines in sales. https://canada.autonews.com/article...sales-surge-as-its-closest-competition-slides

I think it really depends on how you choose to look through the viewfinder. In your words, "Most of the folks who are shopping mass-market cars are looking for features other than Nappa leather and HUDs*like cargo space, captain*s chairs, third-row vents, etc". I think those shopping mass-market cars are attracted to the CX-9 because it offers things like nappa leather and HUD at an attractive, competitive price point. Of course, we could both be right.


On a somewhat unrelated note, based on your handle I'm not sure anything in this price bracket would appeal to you. Nothing at this price is perfect.
 
NoCarFan said:
.... I*d rather have a limited number of features that are complete and work well than have a larger number of half-baked ones (like auto side mirrors which apparently don*t adjust with seat memory.)

It seems that the problem with the CX-9 is that Mazda has cut corners on the details in order to provide high-line features at a mass-market price. ...... It might be best at being a poor-man*s luxury car, but I*m not sure that*s much of a compliment.
Click to expand...

I fully agree with the above ...and I am an overall pretty happy '17 CX-9 Signature owner.

I picked my CX-9 because i got a GREAT deal on it. It came down to having a new, loaded, non-luxury car for the price of a 3 yr old "certified" real luxury car.
Do i have any regrets? Not really, especially after i solved the poor AWD system performance in the snow with some good dedicated snow tires.
The car gets the job done and i enjoy driving it. Simple as that. With 3 little kids it is big enough for us, decent MPG, decent power and handles great for an SUV of this size. Interior is nice, yes, but some of the 'high end' features are half baked.
Biggest issue i have is seats having very limited adjustment options (especially passenger side), no cooled seats in 2017, no front parking sensors in 2017, seats are not too deep and lack some padding, memory feature is a joke (my 2007 Sienna has better seat memory features and seat comfort).... Leather is nice, but i see some poor stitching/fitment on the front passenger seat.
I installed Apple Car Play ($185 out of pocket and 1 hr of my time) so this took care of the basic infotainment system. I am happy now.
Of course, i always want more engine power, but the little 2.5T has very decent torque where it's needed the most. 50-60hp extra would be nice...but it will kill the MPG.
Bigger/better brakes will be also nice, but OEM setup is adequate for day to day driving. Just don't push the car too hard.


I have 27k miles on the car, and so far, no issues reported. Some suspension squeaks, likely some bushings will have to be replaced soon, but nothing really critical.
My cars is mostly serviced by me (oil changes, etc) but the couple of times i had to take it to the local dealer, the service was OK. Same experience i get at the Toyota or Ford dealers down the street. Nothing close to the service i get at the Lexus or Benz dealer, but the my Mazda also costs a lot less. ;) :)

Long story short, in my opinion at least, if you want a true luxury car with all the right materials and all the bells and whistles.... spend the money and get a true luxury car. Do not buy the CX-9.
If you want a well built car, with great handling, decent size, good set of features (even if some are not fully baked) at a great price ... the CX-9 Signature is a pretty good buy, especially if you get a deal on it. You won't regret it. It's a fun and easy to drive daily car.
 
Last edited:
The good news is the CX-9 is getting compared at all with some of the luxury offerings ( MDX, RX350 etc) the bad news is it will fall a little short in direct comparison with interior finishes in those vehicles (but those are $10-20k more). That said when compared to the other brands non luxury mid size SUV's the CX-9 in the top 3 trims is far more special inside. I had my new 2018 CX-9 at the dealer getting the Car Play installed and I went next door to the Toyota dealer and sat in a new Highlander (top trim) and there is no comparison as far as interior feel, fit, finish and materials involved. I felt the same way about the new Santa Fe. Both are nice SUV's and will most likely be durable and economical to own but for roughly the same money the CX-9 feels like its in a different class. Sure there are a few things I would change about it but it suits our needs, gets decent fuel economy, looks great inside and out and is fairly rewarding to drive. If it proves to be long term reliable than it's going to be tough to beat for the money.
 
I do not understand where all this seats are slow to warm up criticism is coming from. Its as if it has become urban myth. I find that the seats and steering wheel heat up just fine. In fact, I cant leave the seat on the high setting past the first few minutes before I switch it down to medium. My wife on the other hand, likes all three lights lit in the very cold weather.

As for so much discussion about seat stitching, Im sorry to say, but my eyes just glaze over; does anyone have seats that are coming apart at the seams? I suspect not. So apparently more handsome stitching can be had for a few thousand dollars more... I sleep fine at night already, so to each his own.

Although Im not accustomed to a split opening console, I really like the height from an armrest perspective and if it did open up from the front as is common, it would likely be an awkward lift.

Personally Im focused more on the operation of the ACC and dynamic braking idiosyncrasies, and trying to learn the best way to adapt and identify optimum circumstances for engaging and disengaging the auto controls.
 
NoCarFan said:
I keep reading owner comments that the CX-9 is best in class, but what exactly is the class to which you all refer?

If the class is defined by high-line car features, which Mazda seems to be targeting with the CX-9, then it is in no way best in class with respect to materials and workmanship (at least with much of the interior). There is a certain consistency in this regard among high-line car brands, whether it is design of the seats or quality of workmanship, and the CX-9 struggles to match most of them. For high-line car buyers, I suspect that the finer details matter.

If the class is defined by price, I dare say that it still isn*t best in class over, say, Honda or Toyota, when it comes to quality of materials and workmanship. Hot heat and cold A/C, or even heated seats which take less than 15 minutes to warm up, are basic features these days that Mazda can*t seem to get right in the CX-9. Our old Subaru Outback from the early 2000s had heated seats, mirrors, and wipers, all of which worked quickly and effectively to get you moving on cold and snowy mornings. It also had full tilt seat bottom (driver*s side) and a lumbar adjustment which could really poke you in the back. Yes, it only had cloth seats and no HUD, but who cares? I*d rather have a limited number of features that are complete and work well than have a larger number of half-baked ones (like auto side mirrors which apparently don*t adjust with seat memory.)

It seems that the problem with the CX-9 is that Mazda has cut corners on the details in order to provide high-line features at a mass-market price. I*m not sure that there*s a very large market for that kind of car, as sales figures appear to reflect. Most of the folks who want high-line features also want high-line quality (including the dealership experience). Most of the folks who are shopping mass-market cars are looking for features other than Nappa leather and HUDs*like cargo space, captain*s chairs, third-row vents, etc.

I understand that this is a Mazda forum and that critiques are not well received. I still like the CX-9 and may still buy one, but I am trying to be honest about the shortcomings, most of which are not issues of preference but are legitimate design, quality, or workmanship issues. It seems to me that the CX-9 really isn*t best at anything, but tries to be too many things to too many people. It might be best at being a poor-man*s luxury car, but I*m not sure that*s much of a compliment.
Click to expand...


It should be a compliment to CX-9 and other Mazda's that they are now being compared to higher end cars, shouldn't it? Reviewers often end up comparing it to vehicles like the MDX, etc. So how can it fall short if it rises above the competition and is compared to luxury brands at $10K more?

To make it clear, CX-9 competes with Highlander, Pilot, Sorento, Explorer, Acadia, Traverse, Santa Fe, Ascent, Atlas, & Durango. Go sit in and drive any of these and say that the CX-9 cuts corners and has quality issues. That just isn't the reality. CX-9 makes all these feel cheap even though almost all top out higher in price.

It's not for the person who needs big box space, for those that do, buy the box on wheels. it's for those that are passionate about cars but wants 3-rows. So they're buying inspired design, luxurious interior, and best driving dynamics. Those 3 elements alone are core to a great car even if that's all the CX-9 had, it would be a winner.

You say the CX-9 tries to be too many things which is the exact opposite. That describes most of the rest of the field. The CX-9 has a focused mission and that's fulfilling the wants of car lovers who love driving and see cars as art. Other's focused on space, gadgets, and cup holders. That's fine for a lot of people but doesn't stir the soul.

BTW, mine has hot heat, cold AC, and hot heated seats very quickly. Everything functions great.
 
Please log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
A few questions about the 2023 CX-9
Replies
4
Views
2K
MichalP
M
J
2021 Vs. 2019-2020 CX-9
5 6 7
Replies
120
Views
19K
zzzhe1990
Z
T
  • Question
New Owner of 2018 CX-9...Odd noise, any ideas?
Replies
1
Views
1K
The ManLaw
The ManLaw

Latest posts

Back