CX-9 Is It Good? How do you like it?

GMC XL Denali · Mar 10, 2016

Looking into eventually replacing my Yukon XL Denali with something a little smaller but still need three rows. The CX-9 looks like a good vehicle. I haven't sat in or driven one yet. Just a little bit of Internet research.
How do you like yours? What do you like/dislike? What kind of mpgs are you seeing? AWD or FWD? How is the durability? I have 248,000 on my Yukon and I love it. Will I love the CX-9?
Sorry for all the questions. Just looking for some real-world input.
Thanks in advance!

tex2670 · Mar 10, 2016

The "2016" version isn't in dealers yet--it's going to be an enormous upgrade from the 1st generation.

I have a '12, and I love it. But if I had to replace it today, I wouldn't get another CX-9. The '15 leftovers in dealer lots now are just not competitive with the Pilot, Highlander, Santa Fe and Sorento as to available features or technology. The current generation has not changed significantly since '07.

And when the '16s (probably '17s) hit dealers, it will be with a brand new engine. I don't want to be the guinea pig for a new engine, etc.

GMC XL Denali · Mar 10, 2016

Thanks for the info. I would probably buy a used one that is a few years old anyway. How would they compare then?

tex2670 · Mar 10, 2016

GMC XL Denali said:
Thanks for the info. I would probably buy a used one that is a few years old anyway. How would they compare then?

Like I said--I love mine. I looked at the '12 Pilot, CX-9, Highlander and Veracruz. I quickly ruled out the Veracruz because it was being discontinued. The Pilot had a very bland interior, had a lot of road noise, and was disappointing (I was coming out of an '04 Pilot, which was great).

It came down to the CX-9 Grand Touring and the Highlander Limited. Either one, I wasn't going to go wrong. The CX-9 drives great, even with 20" wheels, and doesn't seem as big as it is. I also got a better deal than I could have on the Highlander, and the Mazda came with HID headlights and blind spot monitoring, which were not available on the Toyota.

You may want to look at used MDX's too--if the price was similar, I think I'd rather have that over the CX-9.

Coming out of a Yukon, the Pilot or Highlander may be a little small in comparison. In West MI, if you find a CX-9 you like, find out if the lower control arms recall has been performed; and if not, get it checked out right away.

eskimo0101 · Mar 10, 2016

You're going to love how the CX-9 handles compared to your Yukon, going from a body on frame to a much sportier and smoother unibody setup. Even though the CX-9 will be smaller outside it will probably feel bigger inside because the unibody allows much better interior packaging.

We've had our 2012 CX-9 about 1.5 years now and really like it. It's my wife's car and she came from a Nissan Murano. Prior to that she had a Ford Expedition. We got rid of the Expedition because of age and decided since we almost never used the 3rd row we'd like the Murano. Half of that was right. We loved the Murano but shortly after getting it we kept going places with friends/family where we'd need 2 cars due to the lack of 3rd row. After 2 years we dumped it and picked up the CX-9.

It's quiet on the highway, smooth and handles surprisingly well for an SUV tipping the scales over 4k lbs. Gas mileage isn't great but people shopping 3 row SUV's generally aren't expecting great efficiency. It pulls our 3000 lb boat just fine, though I do miss having an OD lockout like the Expedition had. Instead I have to lock out 6th gear using the manual mode of the trans but then you have to manually shift for all gear changes when passing or going up hills. That's my only issue with it and that's pretty minor.

strmrdr23 · Mar 10, 2016

so far, i'm pretty happy with my 2014 CX-9 GT. it's a little noisy (might be tires?) but i'm coming from a 2000 Lexus RX300 which was so quiet i've tried to start the car again after i had already started it and it was running on more than one occassion (!).

going into 2014 from a 2000 model year car is a HUGE jump, tech and safety features wise - hahaha! bluetooth, nav, HIDs, touch screen. none of that was available as an option when i bought my Lexus back then. beyond that, the handling (especially the turning radius) is much, much better in the Mazda. the functional 3rd row seats offer good utility for us when we have to squeeze more than 4 folks in (my adult daughter is skinny like a rail, though). also, the HP/TQ are adequate for my purposes (no towing, no drag racing, etc...). not sure if this would be an improvement vs a Yukon, however. i went from a smaller 2 row suv to a longer 3 row.

bottom line, while i'm satisfied with my vehicle thus far, i'm already eyeing that 2017 (more than likely in 2018 at the earliest for me). i want that better gas mileage!

Scott91370 · Mar 10, 2016

We've had ours 2.5 years, 76,700 miles, and have had no issues. The third row obviously won't be as big as the Yukon but it works. MPGs pretty much bite. We've never gotten anywhere near the 24hwy. I'm not a fan of the traction control, when it kicks in you're a sitting duck. It cuts power way too much for too long. The GT has some of the most comfortable seats I've ever sat in though and on long trips that pays off. I've done 800 mile trips and only stopped for gas and didn't feel fatigued at the end.
I hope it lasts as long as out Mazda Tribute - 12 years and 296k miles. And still going.

sjg · Mar 15, 2016

In short, the CX-9 is great. I just traded mine in for a new Dodge Durango but that's nothing against the CX-9. Since they're phasing out the current model it's not easy to find new ones with the equipment I wanted and I struggled to find a low mileage used one. I think the Touring is the sweet spot for features and price but you can check them out for the trim you want/need. The CX-9 is essentially a 10 year old design at this point and it is still competitive in the class. Tech and some comfort features are out of date but the car simply drives better than anything out there. Coming from a Yukon XL there is simply no comparison. The CX-9 drives smaller than it is. Handling remains top of the class and power is adequate. Fuel efficiency isn't a strong suit but will beat the Yukon. It's not the quietest interior. You might find the 3rd row more useful than the Yukon. It's not incredibly spacious but legroom is better than most. The Yukon 3rd row sits on the floor so it's strictly for kids. I'm 6' tall and I've fit in the 3rd row of the CX-9 for short trips in relative comfort.

GMC XL Denali · Mar 16, 2016

sjg said:
In short, the CX-9 is great. I just traded mine in for a new Dodge Durango but that's nothing against the CX-9. Since they're phasing out the current model it's not easy to find new ones with the equipment I wanted and I struggled to find a low mileage used one. I think the Touring is the sweet spot for features and price but you can check them out for the trim you want/need. The CX-9 is essentially a 10 year old design at this point and it is still competitive in the class. Tech and some comfort features are out of date but the car simply drives better than anything out there. Coming from a Yukon XL there is simply no comparison. The CX-9 drives smaller than it is. Handling remains top of the class and power is adequate. Fuel efficiency isn't a strong suit but will beat the Yukon. It's not the quietest interior. You might find the 3rd row more useful than the Yukon. It's not incredibly spacious but legroom is better than most. The Yukon 3rd row sits on the floor so it's strictly for kids. I'm 6' tall and I've fit in the 3rd row of the CX-9 for short trips in relative comfort.

Interesting. I appreciate your input. I'd love to hear how you like your Durango as that's on my radar also. Which engine did you get and mpgs?
Thanks again!

sjg · Mar 16, 2016

GMC XL Denali said:
Interesting. I appreciate your input. I'd love to hear how you like your Durango as that's on my radar also. Which engine did you get and mpgs?
Thanks again!

I've only had the Durango for about 48 hours and my CX-9 was a 2009 Touring AWD. Here are some perspectives but keep in mind that I still have very little experience with the Durango and my Mazda was 7 years old and 2 refreshes behind the ones on the lot today.

I love the way the CX-9 drives. I was coming from a much smaller car and dreaded moving up to a 3 row CUV. It is no sports car but it is easily the sportiest driver in the class. It handles well and the steering feel is fantastic. The ride can get a little choppy (I recommend avoiding the GT and it's 20" wheels but others have no problem) but it's not unpleasant. I honestly don't know what 3 row CUV matches the CX-9 in the handling department. Maybe the Acura MDX? Beyond that you're probably looking at X5s and Cayennes. I know that sounds crazy but I just find all the others to be less connected to the road. I'm not going to get carried away though. It's still a car-based, FWD-biased 3 row CUV. It just drives better than the you'd expect. The Durango does not match the CX-9 in this area. The ride is a little less stiff but I don't find it any more comfortable. It's steering feel is non-existent on-center. There is zero communication until you start to really turn the wheel and I miss the connection with the road. Note that the Durango is by no means bad in this department and I'd say it's better than a lot of the competition in this regard...just not better than the CX-9.

I'd say the engines are comparable. Same with the transmissions. The Durango has 2 more gears but both shift smoothly and intelligently. I kept detailed records of each fill up in the CX-9 and calculated mpg at 18 mpg for most tanks in mixed driving with a relatively light foot. Never below 16 and never above 20 for a tank. I don't have my own data on the Durango yet but the car's computer has me over 20 mpg much of the time. We will see.

The Durango is much quieter. Part of it was my CX-9's age but it always let in a fair amount of road/wind noise and the Durango seals those sounds out much better.

I liked the front seats better in the Mazda as they offer more support where the seat bottoms on the Durango are flatter. The CX-9 headrests always bothered me as they angle forward (for safety) in a way that is annoying and probably bad for posture as well. The Durango's headrests are much more comfortable. 2nd row comfort seems comparable. 3rd row in the Durango offers more headroom and legroom although when the 2nd row is slid forward in the CX-9 then there's more legroom (at the expense of 2nd row legroom). The 2nd row of the Durango doesn't slide.

Both have useful interiors although I don't think either is class leading. The floor height for the Durango's cargo area is a little higher. The Mazda's cargo area is a bit wider and the Durango's is longer and taller. The Mazda's cargo door opens to just the height where 6 footers will hit their heads while the Durango offers more clearance. The Mazda has a flat floor across the 2nd row where the Durango has a small hump. (I've only seen pictures of the next generation CX-9 and it appears to have a pretty high hump which is unfortunate and hard to explain.)

The CX-9 interior is aging and was never highly regarded but I like it. I think it's fairly clean, durable and very well screwed together. The car was rattle-free until about 80,000 miles. The Durango's interior is much more current and luxurious but I doubt that it will be as durable.

Either car will be more efficient than your Tahoe but will offer less space (not the case if you didn't have the XL). They will both drive better IMO but the Durango's road feel is probably closer to what you're used to while the CX-9 is closer to driving like a car.

Happy to answer any questions. Good luck in your search.

squidly · Mar 16, 2016

I'm in the same situation as sjg. I owned a 2008 CX-9 until 2 weeks ago and then I bought a Santa Fe.
Sjg is spot on in his description. The diving confidence it inspires is unmatched. You can really push it hard into corners and know exactly what it's going to do. I don't have that AT ALL with my Santa Fe. I miss my 9.

tnburban · Mar 16, 2016

tex2670 said:
The "2016" version isn't in dealers yet--it's going to be an enormous upgrade from the 1st generation.

I have a '12, and I love it. But if I had to replace it today, I wouldn't get another CX-9. The '15 leftovers in dealer lots now are just not competitive with the Pilot, Highlander, Santa Fe and Sorento as to available features or technology. The current generation has not changed significantly since '07.

And when the '16s (probably '17s) hit dealers, it will be with a brand new engine. I don't want to be the guinea pig for a new engine, etc.

I disagree. We have a '14 CX-9 GT FWD and liked it much better than the Honda Pilot. There was something about the Pilot that just felt odd to us. The Highlander was nice, but priced a lot more for same features, at least for us (we bought a used CPO with less than 1k miles on it so tough to compare pricing, but what we paid was pretty much what used Highlanders with 25k miles or more were going for).

Santa Fe and Sorrento were not on our list so we never test drove them.

We did look at the Acura MDX and really really really liked it. Almost pulled the trigger on one 2-3 times but there was just a little less interior room and storage room behind the third row was a bit smaller, which is important for us. Looking back I kind of regret it only because I am very confident in the Acura going 200k with little to no problems.

I can add though that we also have a Suburban and used that as a baseline for comparison. They are in are completely different classes so you really can't compare. Roominess of interior, ride comfort, all way better in the Suburban. But everyday use, versatility, and handling all go to the CX-9.

I will say the new Ford Explorer is right between the Suburban/Yukon and CX-9 in size and that combo of roominess and being nimble. Might want to check it out.

I'll also say that we have some friends that are on the larger side and I notice them having difficulty getting in and out of the CX-9 vs the Suburban we have. If you or your family are on the larger side of the people size spectrum, you may want to look at something bigger. One of the nice things about the CX-9 is the second row leg room, especially when the third row is not being used. You can slide the 2nd row back probably 4-6 inches which can make a huge deal for taller people.

IgoZoom · Mar 16, 2016

I have a 2012 CX-9 Grand Touring FWD with 55k miles on it and I love it. It handles great, excellent acceleration, rides comfortably and quietly (not so great on the factory Bridgestones, but the new Michelin Premier LTX are a dream). The only issue Ive had was a failed brake booster last May, around 45k miles. It is a common problem and Mazda extended the warranty on the brake booster and any related parts to 7yrs or 90k miles. Mine was fixed in two days and I had a loaner during the repair.

The CX-9 was significantly revised for 2013, including a new front-end design and the addition of new features. I would suggest a 2013-2015 model as a used car because of the changes.

The changes for 2013 include-
Updated front fascia (including headlamps, grille, bumper & fog lights)
Updated rear design (tail lights, rear bumper and tail pipes)
Satin-chrome finish added to 20 GT wheels
New 5.8 Color Multi-Information Display
Door mirror memory and tilt-in-reverse on GT
Rear backup sensors (Touring/GT)
New rearview camera (Touring/GT)
Bi-Xenon HID headlights replace Xenon HIDs on GT
Upgraded interior trim
Perforated leather seats w/ suede trim

For 2013, Blind Spot Monitoring was also added to the Touring (only available on GT previously).

The closest thing I have to a complaint I have about the CX-9 is the limited selection of colors. Heres a rundown of what was/is available for 2013-2015-

2013
Zeal Red Mica
Dolphin Gray Mica
Meteor Gray Mica
Brilliant Black Clearcoat
(above colors available w/ Black or Sand interior)
Liquid Silver w/ Black interior
Crystal White Pearl Mica w/ Sand interior

2014
Dolphin Gray and Brilliant Black Clearcoat dropped
Jet Black Mica & Blue Reflex Mica (blue-gray) added (either interior color)
Minor feature changes- New GT 20 wheel design & Rear cross-traffic alert added on Touring/GT

2015
Titanium Flash Mica w/ Sand interior added

I would recommend the Grand Touring model, especially since youre used to the GMC Denali. The Grand Touring has the following exclusive features-
20" alloy wheels (replace 18") (and they look MUCH better, IMO)
Bright (chrome) finish door handles
Side mirrors- memory function integrated w/ seat memory & tilt in reverse
Auto on/off Bi-Xenon High Intensity Discharge (HID) headlights
LED Daytime running lights
Rain-sensing wipers
Auto-dimming rearview mirror
3-position memory setting for driver's seat (and mirrors)
Programmable garage door opener
2nd row center armrest w/ cupholders & storage compartment
Premium finish trim accents

The following items are also standard on the GT and optional on the Touring (as part of the Touring Technology Package)-
Mazda Advanced Keyless Entry & Start System
Power Liftgate
Fog lights

The primary option package for the GT is the Grand Touring Technology Package, which I also recommend for the audio system alone. It includes-
10-speaker Bose Centerpoint Surround Sound audio
Navigation system w/ real-time traffic
Power moonroof
SIRIUS satellite radio

The Touring Technology Package has the features in the GT Tech Package and the Advanced Keyless Entry/Start, Power Liftgate and Fog lights mentioned above.

The 2015 CX-9 may not be the most competitive new vehicle in the segment (but its amazingly competitive for an SUV/CUV that is largely unchanged since it was introduced in 2006 as a 2007 model). But a slightly used 2013-2015 CX-9 is an excellent value as a used car!

My final suggestion would be to skip All-Wheel-Drive (AWD) unless you actually need it! It adds unnecessary cost, weight and mechanical complexity if you really just need FWD.
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w

unctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w

ontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]-->

tex2670 · Mar 18, 2016

tnburban said:
I disagree. We have a '14 CX-9 GT FWD and liked it much better than the Honda Pilot. There was something about the Pilot that just felt odd to us. The Highlander was nice, but priced a lot more for same features, at least for us (we bought a used CPO with less than 1k miles on it so tough to compare pricing, but what we paid was pretty much what used Highlanders with 25k miles or more were going for).

I'm not sure what you are disagreeing with. I also said I didn't like the '12 Pilot--are you comparing the new '16 Pilot to the '14 CX-9, or to a '14 Pilot?

table5511 · Mar 21, 2016

Mine is a 2008 90k miles. Nothing has broken ever. Hid lamp adjusters are going out but thats expected. But if I were to go new right now I'd get a new pilot. They are kinda awesome plus for awd variants you dont have to worry about a crappy ford transfer case failing.

kornholio · Mar 22, 2016

I am with you on the pilot. That was the one I was originally thinking about buying in 2007. The only thing was the 3rd row was too small. I would have gotten an EX-L for around 27 at that time. I paid a lot more than that for my cx-9

eskimo0101 · Mar 22, 2016

The 2016 Pilot is finally a decent looking vehicle.

When we bought our 2012 CX-9 we cross shopped the 12, 13 Pilots too but that was such a homely SUV. It was the epitome of the appliance vehicle... engineered to get you from A-B reliably with the least amount of soul as possible.

BMXDAD · Mar 25, 2016

Went directly from 2008 Grand Touring to a 2015 Grand Touring. 'nuf said.........

mpvue · Mar 25, 2016

when my '12 is worn out, the new CX-9's will have been out for a while, and that would be my next car.

no rush, I'd like to see how the new turbo 4 does in the real world.

scm44236 · Mar 25, 2016

helbigtw said:
Mine is a 2008 90k miles....But if I were to go new right now I'd get a new pilot. They are kinda awesome plus for awd variants you dont have to worry about a crappy ford transfer case failing.

Pilots may not have transfer case issues like the CX-9 but they do have Variable Cylinder Management which destroys the hydraulic motor mounts and creates an annoying cabin vibration - at least Mazda covers the transfer case failures. I had a 2012 Odyssey (which uses the same VCM technology) and the motor mounts failed - 3 different Honda dealers said "we don't cover worn motor mounts - that's just normal wear & tear Dude." Each dealer also said the cabin vibration is a normal characteristic of VCM operation.

They did however tip their hands somewhat by admiting that replacing the motor mounts would reduce the cabin vibration. Then they hit me with the kill shot - each of the 3 worn (aka failed) motor mounts were over $500 apiece plus $500+ in labor. As much as I was in love with the Odyssey's class-leading design and style, I dumped the money pit and bought my 2012 CX-9 GT.

I change my transfer case oil when I change my engine oil - no big deal. This beautiful, sporty-handling multi-purpose vehicle should last until I decide to replace it - crappy Ford components and all...

CX-9 Is It Good? How do you like it?

GMC XL Denali

Member

tex2670

Grand Poobah

GMC XL Denali

Member

tex2670

Grand Poobah

eskimo0101

Member

strmrdr23

Member

Scott91370

sjg

Member

GMC XL Denali

Member

sjg

Member

squidly

Member

tnburban

Member

IgoZoom

Member

tex2670

Grand Poobah

table5511

kornholio

eskimo0101

Member

BMXDAD

2019 CX5 GT

mpvue

Member

scm44236

Member

Similar threads

Latest posts