By William C Montgomery
October 29, 2007 -
I’ve spent countless hours rolling down serpentine highways through the deserts and mountains of the West’s big sky country. Hundreds of times my knuckles have whitened, pupils dilated and pulse quickened as I got up my gumption to pass a velocity-challenged vehicle. In my younger years, this TED (Time Exposed to Danger) was delivered courtesy of a wheezing four-banger struggling to crank out double-digit horse power. This week I put Mazda’s modern incarnation of the family hauler, the CX-9 Grand Touring AWD, to the test. Yup, it’s déjà vu all over again.
“If the bland, cookie-cutter styling of other Crossover SUVs doesn’t suit your taste, feast your eyes on the Mazda CX-9 Grand Touring.” Contrary to Mazda’s marketing misegos, there’s a new cookie-cutter shape in town. Viewed in profile, only a learned pistonhead could distinguish the CX-9 from the host of other “sporty” CUVs; what with their pointy proboscises, apostrophe-shaped headlight clusters, steeply raked windshields, blackened B and C-pillars, oversized bling-bling wheels and fastback-styled sloping rear hatch. If the CX-9 didn’t have a dinner plate-sized boot badge, you'd easily mistake it for any number of transplanted cute-utes.
Of course, it IS a lot edgier than the Ford Edge, its sister-under-the-skin. And there’s a reason all CUVs look alike; the buyer has spoken.
Once ensconced, the CX-9 coddles today's blended families with three rows of comfortable, supportive seating. Second row legroom eclipses the Enclave’s, and the CX-9’s third row is both accessible and roomy enough for junior team members. As for larger folks, the rearmost leg and head room is, in MythBusters parlance, plausible. As a two-plus-three seater carting recidivist members of LPA (Light Packers Anonymous), skid-addling with 3500 lbs. of Ski-Doology, the CX-9’s a peach.
Aside from the too-far-forward door-mounted window switches, the CX-9’s controls are an ergonomic Zen garden. Normally, we’re amused– and not in a good way– by cowled gauges in anything other than an old Alfa or new Miata. But the CX-9’s designers carefully blended sports car cues with oversized, Volvo-esque minimalism, creating a handsome, tasteful atmos. Details have been sweated, from sensible buttonology to indirect blue lighting.
Mazda’s mavens left no stone unturned in the family pleasing techno-bauble department. But you gotta pay to play. The CX-9’s obligatory iPod-ready rear seat DVD system– complete with 11-speaker surround sound, videogame hook-ups and wireless headphones– will set you back $2560. And that’s not all. You’ve got to cough up another $2500 for the nav system and power hatch. Ouch.
For 2008, the CX-9 gets a 3.7-liter engine. The all-new six-cylinder mill puts out 273hp and stumps-up 270 ft.-lbs. of torque. In front wheel-drive configuration, Mazda’s full-sized CUV now jogs from zero to sixty in an entirely acceptable eight-ish seconds. While the sound blatting-out the CX-9’s twin pipes under hard acceleration is nowhere near as addictive as the Infiniti FX' moaning motor, the Mazda's mechanical mellifluousness is appropriately zoomy.
Yes, well, our tester's all wheel-drive system added heft (up to 4633 lbs.) and subtracted speed. I’d be surprised if a Colorado-compliant CX-9 made it from rest to sixty in less than ten seconds. Torque, schmorque; two-lane passing maneuvers still elicit sufficient butt puckering to press coal into diamonds. The CX-9’s intelligent six-speed transmission doesn’t help matters; it’s either a very slow learner or fundamentally dim-witted. But the steering does; it’s perfectly weighted and centers nicely.
According to the Mazda website, “the CX-9 delivers a driving experience like no other SUV.” Anyone who’s attempted to fling one of these lumbering behemoths down a country road knows the copywriters set the handling bar limbo low. Relatively speaking, the CX-9 is competent corner carver; the big rig stays flat. Lean and pitch motions are well controlled. But gravity (inertia?) sucks. A two-and-a-quarter ton trucklette that’s 16’8” long, 5’8” tall and 6’4” wide ain’t gonna rewrite the rules of physics (just ask Porsche).
On the positive side, ignore the advertising come-on, cool your jets and all’s well that ends well. The CX-9’s dynamics strike a satisfying compromise between perky and plush, delivering a well-refined driving experience. And accelerative challenged kiddie schleppers can cool their jets safe in the knowledge that Mazda’s deployed their safety knowledge throughout, including a full complement of Nannies, airbags aplenty and the government’s highest side and frontal impact ratings.
Although SUV refugees can get into a CX-9 for around $30k, the mpg “savings” involved are marginal (FWD EPA 16/22). And it’s easy enough to option-up to 40 large. For a Mazda? Considering the fact that sliding behind the wheel of a minivan emasculates the domesticated North American Homo sapiens male faster than a ranch hand de-testicularizing a calf, the CX-9 has got to be the pistonhead’s sprog hauler alternative of choice. As long as you’re willing to wait your turn on the turnpike, you’re good to go.
4 / 5 Stars | Mazda CX-9 rating summary and performance review
Subscribe to Newsletter
Back to Top
End of Comments
More Reviews

BlinkList
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Furl
Google
Live
NewsVine
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Technorati
YahooMyWeb
POWERED
October 29th, 2007 at 7:49 am
It looks like every other Murano-Caravan descendent of a AMC Pacer. Mazda could fill it to the luggage rack with options yet it can’t put any style to its exterior. Just another pod in the vast parking lot of clones.
October 29th, 2007 at 7:59 am
Safety is a good thing, but the weight of all these large unibody SUVs is stunningly high. It’s almost like they are packing the rocker panels with lead (a la Nascar).
October 29th, 2007 at 8:13 am
On one hand, it might be cool to have a job reviewing cars. On the other hand, it might be a Mazda CX9. I’ve seen them, i think, or maybe not, i dunno. I like Mazda, sometimes. Yawn. Now im sleepy.
Good review, as usual. “Torque, schmorque; two-lane passing maneuvers still elicit sufficient butt puckering to press coal into diamonds”.
“pistonhead’s sprog hauler”
HAHAHA excellent!
October 29th, 2007 at 9:04 am
Great review. I still think this thing is ugly as all get-out…at least the Edge has some uniqueness with its slabby angularity. I think this particular CUV design school is going to go the way of the ’90s “Dustbuster Minivans” pretty quickly.
My only gripe on paper–keeping the target market in mind here–is that I fear a Honda Odyssey or Nissan Quest could outclass this thing in every area (I’ve driven those, but not the CX-9). If that’s indeed the case, then Mazda is not really offering anything over an SUV…it’s still just an image thing for people in minivan/wagon denial. As long as “style” remains the #1 factor in people’s car-buying decisions (as much as they may hate to admit it), then I can’t fault Mazda’s marketing and R&D one bit.
October 29th, 2007 at 9:10 am
Nice review, I always wondered how well the crossovers held up Mazda’s well-deserved Zoom-Zoom street cred. But, man, $40k for a Mazda? Just get a couple of optioned-up 3s and caravan!
p.s. why we gotta end by bashing the venerated minivan? I love the minivan…
October 29th, 2007 at 9:21 am
Thanks very much for the review. I have been looking forward to TTACs take on the CX-9. After all is said and done, you still gave it four stars.
I love the looks of this vehicle. At present I have a Taurus wagon and there are no other large wagon replacements out there. As such, the CX-9 makes a damn fine replacement and it’s way nicer than the Edge. Am I the only one that hates the new Gillette Mach 3 grills? No, I’m not in “wagon denial” I would love to get another one, there just aren’t any.
October 29th, 2007 at 9:38 am
Can someone please translate this into English?
October 29th, 2007 at 9:45 am
92camrywagon :
The CX-9 is an appropriate vehicle for five passengers (two in the front and three in the middle row) who tried and failed to learn the art of packing light, and wish to tow 3500 lbs. worth of Ski-Doo-branded personal watercraft.
October 29th, 2007 at 9:51 am
I must say that it seems like you are reviewing the CX-9 too far out of the context of the 3 row CUV segment.
Regardless of marketing, even the most uneducated consumer knows this aint no sports car. Taken for what it is, the CX-9 is very stylish for the segment, performs admirably for the segment and even optioned up to $40K, still represents a solid value in this segment. Mazda has created something with great appeal in a pretty bland sea of Crossover Utes.
I would agree with the poster above in that the manufacturers have pulled the wool over our eyes with the Crossover tag as these large crossovers are no less the urban tank than the midsized SUVs of only a few years ago they replace. Somehow the CUV tag makes them more acceptable. Anyway, thanks for the review.
October 29th, 2007 at 10:04 am
Great review, Bill. Thanks for writing it.
I was looking at this and the GMC Acadia on the road the other day. They’re both attractive vehicles, but I realized what a good job carmakers have done figuring out a new way to sell minivans. And the buyers don’t even realize they’re buying a minivan.
Yes yes, definitions change lines blur and so on.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 » Show All
You must be logged in to post a comment.