2017 Mazda CX-9 is looking pretty good

[Kaido]

you're thinking of the mazda5 i bet. mildlyinteresting: the mazda5 is pretty much the same dimensions as the original dodge caravan.

L: 175.9 v. 180.3
W: 69.5 v 68.9
H: 64.4 v 63.6

while the mazda is longer i think the driver sits further back as well.

Oh yeah, that might be it. It's like almost a van but not:

 

[ScottFern]

The Fast Lane did a sneak peak of the new CX-9 with a Mazda product engineer who was intimately familiar with the new CX-9. Lot of good technical information from him. Basically said from a stop it should have 310ft/lb of torque which should be enough at the low end to pull it from a dead stop.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrY4g9EAveg

I am hoping real world MPG is somewhere close to 24mpg mixed driving.

Oh, and by the way its being released as a 2016 model this spring not a 2017.

 

[Ketchup]

Some good pics:
http://www.2016mazdacx9.com/#overview
http://www.caranddriver.com/news/2016-mazda-cx-9-official-photos-and-info-news

 

[vi edit]

That CAD link above was interesting. Mazda basically figured out what GM did 20 years ago with their stumpy, low tech V6 engines. Average Joe doesn't like winding out their car for power. They just want to hit the go pedal and have it shove you back. That's what those low tech SOHC small V6's that GM put in their midsize cars did. Great initial pull and then fell flat on it's face after that.

This thing is tuned more like a diesel in the way it performs. Will be interesting to see how that translates to overall driving fun.

Also, CAD article said to expect around 20/28 MPG for AWD version. 21/29 for the FWD.

 

[JimKiler]

you're thinking of the mazda5 i bet. mildlyinteresting: the mazda5 is pretty much the same dimensions as the original dodge caravan.

L: 175.9 v. 180.3
W: 69.5 v 68.9
H: 64.4 v 63.6

while the mazda is longer i think the driver sits further back as well.

It is interesting to think the 5 was the size of original minivans. There is nothing mini about today's minivans.

 

[lsd]

The new CX-9 looks great. I've been eyeing the Pilot (boring) and Murano (odd exterior styling) but this blows them away.

 

[A5]

Oh yeah, that might be it. It's like almost a van but not:

Yeah, it was a great car for people who needed a bit more room for kids but lived in areas that are bit too dense to be comfortable for a modern van. I wish it had sold better, because I would totally get one now that I have a kid.

 

[NutBucket]

It needed about 50 more hp and it would have been perfect.

 

[ElFenix]

It needed about 50 more hp and it would have been perfect.

You can say that about almost anything

 

[gorcorps]

The new CX-9 looks great. I've been eyeing the Pilot (boring) and Murano (odd exterior styling) but this blows them away.

I love the exterior design of the new Murano, looks quite slick to me (at least the sides). First time I saw it in person (in a parking lot) I drove around again because I didn't know what it was at the time, plus it had a dark orange paint color that was unique as well. Really the only thing that swung me away from it was Nissan's absolutely abysmal head unit interface... it seemed like it went backwards from when I had my Rogue. I went with a Highlander instead, but every time I see a new Murano I have just a little regret because it looks really good in person.

 

[NAC]

Yeah, it was a great car for people who needed a bit more room for kids but lived in areas that are bit too dense to be comfortable for a modern van. I wish it had sold better, because I would totally get one now that I have a kid.

Wow. I didn't know they stopped selling it! I have a 2012. Great car - just the right size and nice handling. My wife wants to get a bigger SUV

 

[lsd]

I love the exterior design of the new Murano, looks quite slick to me (at least the sides). First time I saw it in person (in a parking lot) I drove around again because I didn't know what it was at the time, plus it had a dark orange paint color that was unique as well. Really the only thing that swung me away from it was Nissan's absolutely abysmal head unit interface... it seemed like it went backwards from when I had my Rogue. I went with a Highlander instead, but every time I see a new Murano I have just a little regret because it looks really good in person.

I think nissan tried a bit too hard on the Murano and Maxima to make them stand out. The exterior styling has grown on me but there's no denying it's a a bit different. If I do some how decide on the Murano I will definitely wait a model year or two. I think the vq engine is due for replacement and I think next model year may get the new vr30 engine. The oil consumption the vq is known for makes me a bit leary about buying another vq based car.

 

[richardycc]

this is nice, but the jaguar F-pace is nicer. you can get a nicely equipped one for under $50k.

 

[KentState]

It needed about 50 more hp and it would have been perfect.

310lb/ft of torque is more than sufficient, especially compared to other's in the class.

For example:

2016 Pilot
280 hp / 262 ft/lb

2016 Acadia
281 hp / 266 ft/lb

Now if this was a family sedan engine, I'd agree that it should be tuned for HP.

 

[NutBucket]

I meant for the Mazda 5 mentioned earlier. The CX-9 should be fine.

 

[Demo24]

I wonder when first drive reviews are going to hit for this. It shouldn't be too much longer before it's on the dealer lots of they are targeting "spring".

 

[monkeydelmagico]

I meant for the Mazda 5 mentioned earlier. The CX-9 should be fine.

310lb/ft of torque in a Mazda5 would have been a hoot. Car and Driver actually tried to put a mazdaspeed3 engine into a Mazda5. Did not work out IIRC.

As for the CX-9 it looks decent and similar to several other SUV's. The difference will be in the handling (hopefully). Mazda knows how to tune a chassis. The mazda interiors have been top notch lately too.

Previous Gen CX-9 one of the best 7 passenger suv's for the past 10 years.

 

[A5]

this is nice, but the jaguar F-pace is nicer. you can get a nicely equipped one for under $50k.

Totally different size class. The F-Pace would be where the CX-7 used to live, it is 186 inches long to the CX-9's ~200 inches.

 

[bigi]

this is nice, but the jaguar F-pace is nicer. you can get a nicely equipped one for under $50k.

Apparently they copied Mazda's styling, made it more expensive with narrow windows that are crap.

I'd put my $ on CX9 for sure.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Comparing a Pilot to a CX-9?

Really? I was just looking at these yesterday and they are no where near the same price or size.

The more I look at he CX-9, the more I think it is in a class of it's own.

 

[NutBucket]

Wtf are you talking about. The Pilot and CX-9 are direct competitors!

 

[SithSolo1]

Pricing released:

http://www.motortrend.com/news/2016-mazda-cx-9-priced-32420/

EPA numbers at the end of the article.

AWD $1800 option on everything below Signature.

 

[Kaido]

Pricing released:

http://www.motortrend.com/news/2016-mazda-cx-9-priced-32420/

EPA numbers at the end of the article.

AWD $1800 option on everything below Signature.

I am a sucker for brown leather interiors. They did a great job with this one :thumbsup:

 

[thesmokingman]

I've always liked the Mazda's interior design. I just wasn't so sure of their mechanicals when we were looking.

 

[Vdubchaos]

Not a fan of wanna be BMW/Mercedes interior....what were they thinking? BMW/MB interiors are horrid. NOT what you want to copy.

BLEH