INSIDE? –TERRIBLE!

The second row (main) back seat was ridiculously low to the floor. I am a mere 5′7″ and sitting in the back seat, with my feet comfortably on the floor had the knees of my short legs popped up to chest level. It felt like many of those crammed-in third row seats! This has nothing to do with foot space; there is plenty. It has to do with the seat sitting so low to the floor! So, it should be no surprise that the third-row seats felt just he same as the wider second row seats.

Then there is the cockpit. Yes, I mean the driver’s seat. But if you simply see this area in person, you will notice it really is a cockpit! The driver is surrounded up do his chest or higher on all sides. That is, the center column (where the gear shift of this automatic resides) feels about has high as as the low edge of the window. Thus, you get a cramped feeling of a fighter jet’s cockpit.

Better seat to floor distance (and lack of crammed driver’s area) can be found in the Toyota Highlander and the GMC Acadia, not to mention better gas mileage in both.

I don’t like old junk, and would rather have a car that has attitude and is fun to drive within its intended market. The CX9 is such a vehicle. compare it to most of the competition and it has something that pragmatics don’t understand, emotion, and that is worth the price of admission. Less than 40 grand for top notch lexus quality with room and fun to drive handling and safety. I do not see the need for Lexus or Acura pricing when for less (without the status of course) the Mazda has been able to break into new territory.

If you want to bash the Mazda, you probably already hate the rotary engine as well. When someone takes shots at any company for making something different work, well then that person is exactly one of the reasons I strive to be different. The CX9 is not boring in its segment, just drive the acadia and edge if you want appliance like handling and feel. Explain why the Asin transmission is in all vehicles (Acadia, Edge, and the Mazda) and Mazda engineers understand how it should shift and feel, the others did not get it right (Motor trend review).

I see it as zoom with room because it is fun to drive and hauls plenty.

Different is good.

The Edge: was just mushy. The brakes in particular were alarming. As you applied them you wondered just when they would start doing something. The handling was non descript as if the Edge was taking your intput under advisement and may or may not comply with your request to change direction. The interior was fine, Spartan and fucntional ithy ample center console storage. The Sync feature is easily the best gadget integration solution I’ve seen, from an OEM or after market. The audio system sounded better than average for OEM. The ride was OK, and the seats were comfy. Oddly the power memory seats lacked power recline adjustment, negating much of the draw of memory seats. The motor and 6 speed gear box were adequate, with the motor being a bit noisy at high revs. Good low end pull. Reasonbly smooth shifts.

The CX9: while based on the same platfrom you’d never know it from driving it. Steering input is well weighted and precise. Brakes are very good with an outstanding feel. Ride quality is very nice as well as quiet on most surfaces. The Aisin 6 speed gear box is buttery smooth with almost undetectable shifts, superior in every way to the GM/Ford unit in the Edge. The interior is well appointed and does not have the cheap parts bin feel of the Edge. The CX9 is big, so there of course is no “zoom.” But it handles like no other vehicle of this size I’ve ever driven. It’s real competiotors are the Pilot and Highlander and it just trouces both of them. The audio/nav system was poretty weak. The NAV is OK, but Bose sucks.

So, it’s the CX9 for me. I would prefer a Subaru legacy GT wagon with a manual gear box but Subaru quit selling them here in the states and I don’t want an outback. I love my LGT sedan but need more room. I refuse to pay for a Euro wagon, as by the time it is well equipped you are way past $40K. And like most men I refuse to buy a minivan.

If I could I’d buy a Holden Commodore Sportwagon.

I have no doubt that the CX-9 will sell much better than any legitimate revamping of the MPV Mazda might have come up with, but it’s still sad to think what might have been had Mazda decided to stick with the MPV.

Mazda didn’t give up on the MPV. They did a major freshening for 2007, and the new version is selling well in the Far East. Unfortunately the company looked at North American market trends and decided to offer crossovers here rather than bringing the new MPV over.

I agree with you that the MPV was competent and well-packaged, and the ones that I leased were the most fun to drive of any minivan that I’ve piloted. I also agree that the Mazda5 is no substitute for the MPV; the thing is too small, only seats six and doesn’t have enough power. Aside from that, I guess it’s great. :-(

Me no buy.

Me know what me likes.

Thank you. I LOLd. You even mis-spelled “booger” appropriately.

I need to buy a car, and at this point it’s basically a contest between a subie wagon and a Mazda3-5door, or a 5 year old audi. There’s just no other wagons worth it in my price range, and I live in a city, so SUV/CUV/Trucks are dumb, even this putatively fantastic Mazda.

Yes, apples and oranges with this particular discussion, but I always saw Mazda as the “people’s car” of Japan–small, sporty and affordable (which most of the product lines still maintain). The pricing and segmentation here seems like more of a “brand betrayal” than the physical characteristics of the vehicle, IMHO.

Even Ford knows that ain’t a wagon, that’s why they had to call it “X”.

# ireallylovemangoes:
October 29th, 2007 at 9:21 am
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.

you know they still make a taurus wagon, right? :-P

http://ford.com/vehicles/vehicle-showroom#/ford/ford-taurus-x-2008

Let me go over your points real quick:

“at that price point the engine/tranny/suspension have already been rebuilt,”

Maybe. Maybe they haven’t been. When did “rebuilt” become a synonym for reliability anyway? I’ve seen rebuilt engines explode after a few thousand miles. It all depends on who’s been rebuilding them, and let’s face it – when you get a 50 year old car, you don’t exactly know how good of a job that someone did, and there’s nothing to assure you of quality of those repairs (you know, like a factory warranty.)

If your old wagon does break down, parts may be hard to come by (since it’s, you know, old) and you will be paying for them out of your own pocket. No one will provide you a loaner, either.

Combine that with a multitude of possible electrical and interior issues, such as rattles (since a $10K wagon can’t possibly be completely rebuilt with brand new parts) and you’ll see why a new car is far better

“and it’s pollution is both offset by not requiring the manufacture of another new vehicle”

Uh, no. You’ll be extending the life of that old car instead of driving a new one, and that will not only cancel out any emissions a new car would have made but will actually far surpass them, since old cars were much worse pollutants. So you’re not offsetting squat

“and can be minimized by installing catalytic convertors.”

Catalytic converters would also cripple the car’s power in a major way, so I doubt anyone would do that voluntarily. It wouldn’t help all that much with emissions, either – you’d go from “bad” to “slightly less bad”

“Why are we debating the merits of a 4400 pound vehicle for $40,000 when you can spend $10,000 and get more functionality in a classic wagon?”

Such as AWD? I don’t think you can, actually. Nice seats? Nice sound? DVD for kids? Unlikely, unless you enroll your wagon in a Pimp My Ride MTV special and end up looking like a douchebag every time you get behind the wheel

There’s much more to it than that, actually. Safety is very important. Most people don’t want their kids to splatter all over the interior of their 60’s wagon in an accident because said wagon doesn’t have airbags or crumple zones. It’s a pretty good deterrent for parents.

Old wagons also have pretty terrible road characteristics – they aren’t fast and they handle like a Titanic.

I didn’t realize the current wagons were so small, or that the last Taurus wagon was so big relative to those cars. I always thought of the Taurus wagon as mid-sized, not full-sized – but then, I grew up in a series of big wagons like the ‘78 LTD Country Squire that was my first car (in the mid-90s.)

I have no doubt that the CX-9 will sell much better than any legitimate revamping of the MPV Mazda might have come up with, but it’s still sad to think what might have been had Mazda decided to stick with the MPV.

For that same ten grand, the careful shopper can get a used Dodge minivan with plenty of life left that will be much safer and easier on the environment than the vintage station wagon. It will also seat seven in comfort and get better gas mileage than the Mazda CX-9.

The CX-9 is a cross between a minivan and an SUV, combining the minivan’s lack of off-roadability and its unsporting handling with the SUV’s appetite for fuel, cramped interior and limited cargo space, all at a higher price than either one. The fact that the CX-9 and its brethren are selling so well just proves that Keats and P.T. Barnum were both right. I’ll take a minivan over any crossover on the road including this one, thank you very much.

Every time I see one I ask myself, “Why would anyone think the Aztek is uglier than this creature?”

The floor’s too far off the ground; the roof too close to the floor, it weighs about 500lbs more than an AWD Aztek or 800 lbs more than my FWD model (which has never yet gotten stuck in snow, so what would I do with a heavy and complicated AWD system?).

The overall height is similar to an Aztek’s, but the Aztek’s gotta handle better as its center of gravity is much lower.