2008 Mazda CX-9: Stick With The 18s

I don't know, Josh.
The ride might be harsher with the 20-inch wheels, but the CX-9 looks absoloutely stunning with those wheels, and a nice color, like the Black Cherry Mica.

Motor Trend said that the Veracruz has interior quality "almost equal" to that of the Lexus RX, which is a huge compliment to Hyundai. I do love Mazdas, but the Veracruz' interior is a big step ahead in the materials department from the CX9's.

Build quality with the two is pretty much equal, having sat in both. There's something about the CX9's interior though - the driving position, comfy and supportive seat, gauges, sporty look and feel - that make you WANT to drive the car. The Hyundai's interior is very nice, but that's it. No emotion whatsoever...that's why the Mazda wins.

carfreak8394, I'd be willing to sacrifice ride quality for those stunning wheels (especially in black cherry!). The ride is still compliant, but quite firm. Oh, the drawbacks of looking good...

I look at opinions like I do camry's; though everyone has one, I do my best to ignore them. That said, sometimes I run across one thats so ridiculous that I have to comment. Having cross-shopped the hyundai and the cx-9 when we were looking, I know firsthand that the former is hardly 'leaps and bounds' ahead of the latter.

Leaps and bounds...I really dont know where some of you bloggers come up with this nonsense.

Scorp,

Thanks for that. What did you think of my actual comment -- "the Hyundai's interior materials quality was leaps and bounds ahead of the Mazda's"?

-Sadlier

Blue LEDs and back lighting kill the Hyundai interior for me. I haven't sat in a Veracruz, but I've never seen an application of blue LEDs where they weren't distracting. They throw too much light and tire my eyes out. They're horrible on DVD players too. I can't wait till this trend is over. I find red or amber back lighting much more pleasing.

The only place where it's better is the upper dash, the Veracruz has some nice soft plastic, Most of the switchgear in the CX-9 feels more substantial (especially the HVAC controls). Other than that they're only some other few other places that the Veracruz is better. I can't say what else exactly without sitting in one again.

i like my 20"s, yes it's harsh on some roads,
but that's not a problem for me, i like the sporty ride

for old ppl, 40+, go with 18"s and stop complaining

i like my 20"s, yes it's harsh on some roads,
but that's not a problem for me, i like the sporty ride

for old ppl, 40+, go with 18"s and stop complaining

blue_omg, "old ppl, 40+"? Seriously, go somewhere and play. The first part of your post -- cool -- the second part is where I have a problem. The only things I complain about, at 44, are young people who don't know their place, and their lack of skills, whether it's driving, spelling ("ppl" -- uhhh ... spell it out, you're not texting) or punctuation (20"s). Let's try to not turn this blog into what some others have become -- a place where the immature can practice their particular brand of noobism.

Verazcruz's interior definitely looks and feels higher grade than the CX-9. Not that the CX-9 is bad but it doesnt feel like a luxury vehcile. I was very impressed with the Veracruz's interior. Unfortunately it's quite unsightly.

Looking at the picture reminds me of a major complaint I have with newer SUVs/crossovers. Look at the vehicle in front of hte CX9. Is that an Explorer?

Ok, now imagine having to drive in reverse down a long driveway (I do this every morning). I'd much rather do it in the Explorer. You can see out the back! The modern swooping up of the rear windows on the CX9 might look cool, but it's highly impractical.

I can't imagine reading something like this ten years ago without so much as a second glance, let alone a movie-style spit take - "Slap some Hyundai-style soft-touch materials on the dash and I'd be sold." It really is impressive what they've done with the brand.

CX-9's styling still doesn't quite to it for me. The side profile is okay but the front overhang is very long and the boxy rear quarter window doens't match the curvy theme displayed in the rest of the vehicle. The stepped beltline does not work on this car or the CX-7. The pinched front snout is also a turn off but overall, it's the second most desirable 7 passenger crossover behind the Enclave/Acadia. I don't like the Veracruz's blue lit interior color at night but the materials and layout are very nice and friendly. The exterior is bad though- looks very weird and ugly.

Mazda doesn't believe in soft touch materials. The layouts are nice, just don't try and touch anything or your hands will be bruised. I went to go look at the 6 yesterday since my car was in for an oil change but they didn't have any in the showroom. The 5 cars they had were all getting prep'd in the service bay so I'll have to wait to get my first hand impression.

Hopefully the ride quality is improved over other Mazda vehicles since most family sedan buyers aren't looking for a Buck'em Bronco driving experience.

When will people get this.

The CX-9 is not a luxury crossover.

-And, wherever you rest your arm, it's padded. The center console box, the door, the door armrest, padded. You should stop talking about a car you clearly know little about.
-The stepped beltline is why this car looks smaller than it is. Both the CX-7/9 look great to most people.
-The old 6 was not refined but it didn't have a "buck'em bronco" driving experience. If anything it was too floaty over some surfaces with the 16 inch steel wheels. "over other Mazda vehicles" clearly show that you're trying to compare it with the 3, and not with the 6's predecessor. Not a great way to find out about an IMPROVED 6.

When will you get this: stop making excuses for poor ride quality. Mazda released a car that rides harsh with 20" wheels, not me, so redirect your aggression. Last time I checked, the CX-9 can cross the $40k barrier so if that isn't considered a "luxurious" price, then I am indeed as stupid as you say. I wasn't aware the CX-9 exists it its own private sub-category of entry level luxo 7 passenger crossovers. I drove a previous generation 6 rental (and almost got a used one) and the ride was choppy, loud and lacked any isolation whatsoever. It rode WORSE than the 3.

"The old 6 was not refined but it didn't have a "buck'em bronco" driving experience."

The attempt at alliteration used aboved was meant to imply the ride was not smooth.

"And, wherever you rest your arm, it's padded. The center console box, the door, the door armrest, padded. You should stop talking about a car you clearly know little about"

How about where your arm doesn't rest? Yeah, brick hard buddy. Tap on that dash a few times. Other companies use soft touch materials, Mazda does NOT. I'm just delivering facts, go take up your concerns with Mazda.

" over other Mazda vehicles" clearly show that you're trying to compare it with the 3, and not with the 6's predecessor"

The 3, CX-7 and CX-9 have all been criticized for having rides that might be too stiff for average consumers (by professional publications mind you, including Edmunds) yet you continue to try and defend a pointless stance.

PS: Most dealerships will be very reluctant to swap out wheels from differing models. Even if you convince them, be prepared to pay full price for the new set of rims.

"When will you get this: stop making excuses for poor ride quality. Mazda released a car that rides harsh with 20" wheels, not me, so redirect your aggression. Last time I checked, the CX-9 can cross the $40k barrier so if that isn't considered a "luxurious" price, then I am indeed as stupid as you say. I wasn't aware the CX-9 exists it its own private sub-category of entry level luxo 7 passenger crossovers. I drove a previous generation 6 rental (and almost got a used one) and the ride was choppy, loud and lacked any isolation whatsoever. It rode WORSE than the 3."

Yeah because ALL vehicles ride so smoothly on 20" wheels right? And since when did price make a car "luxurious"? STI? Evo? Ring a bell? How about Corvette? Lotus? Those HAVE to be luxurious because of it's price? The CX-9 is not marketed as a Luxurious crossover nor does it try to be one. To even try and justify that it is or should be because of it's price with ALL of the options is ludicrous.

MY door armrest? PADDED! Yeah, you really don't know.

We're talking about the CX-9 and yet you can't keep on that topic because you can't stand Mazda.

And this -
"I wasn't aware the CX-9 exists it its own private sub-category of entry level luxo 7 passenger crossovers"

Wow? So you did know that Mazda was a Niche car manufacture, RIGHT????

"PS: Most dealerships will be very reluctant to swap out wheels from differing models. Even if you convince them, be prepared to pay full price for the new set of rims."

Go to a different dealer, all the dealers I talked to would have swapped the 18's out in a heartbeat.

"The 3, CX-7 and CX-9 have all been criticized for having rides that might be too stiff for average consumers (by professional publications mind you, including Edmunds) yet you continue to try and defend a pointless stance."

I wasn't talking about those other Mazda's, the rides are firm, I was talking about you trying to get away with comparing the 09 06's ride to ANOTHER Mazda that was NOT the previous 6, which does not ride harshly. It was however lacking in refinement which could a number of things.

Here is a "professional" review that ECHOS what I said, not to mention, NOTE THE SCORE!

i Sport Value sedan - 6 automatic- 6
i Sport Value hatchback manual- 6
s Sport Value sedan manual- 6
Class Average- 6
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The ride is taut but generally absorbent. At highway speeds, all show some sharp reaction to pavement seams and slight float over dips and humps.

Icing on the ignorant argument you're trying to put past
"(and almost got a used one)" wow.

I've looked at the CX-9 for awhile now, and while there are features I'd like in the GT package, I'd definitely look into swapping out those 20" rims. I know people that have them and don't mind, but I would prefer the increased compliance and lower costs that come with the 18's. They sure do look pretty, though...

I haven't been inside a Vercruz yet, but after sitting in the new Sonata, I wouldn't haven't a hard time believing anyone that said the interior was top-notch. I always liked the Sonata, but the new layout and design was really impressive.

I hate to get too close to the cx7lover/chavis10 debate, but to play the middle of the road...

I personally like the looks of the CX-9, and the CX-7 isn't bad, but it's certainly my personal opinion.

When it comes to the interiors, I think the middle-ground is still applicable here. I didn't go touching every surface in the CX-9, but it certainly looked nice enough. The last-generation 6 interior certainly wasn't class-leading, but the dash is not "brick hard", or any harder than the last-generation Accord my friend had. Same went for most of the paneling on the center console and doors. Now, the RX-8's dash is more of a look-but-don't-really-touch domain, which seemed cheap, until I sat in a 350Z; then it didn't stand out so much. Both are still great cars, by the way.

As far as cost, all these big SUVs cost too flippin' much. That goes for the CX-9, Veracruz, Highlander, Flex, you name it. I know someone that was cross-shopping fully-loaded CX-9s and Highlanders along with the MDX, RX350, and ML350 with low to moderate feature levels, and it just seemed crazy that when it came to price, they weren't that far off.

From the looks of Edmunds's hot-off-the-presses Mazda6 GT review, it looks like Mazda toned down the suspension tuning by a decent margin. I hope it helps it sell, since more competition is always welcome; right now, with the Altima/Aura/Accord/Camry/Legacy/Malibu/Sonata/6 out there, all of which have great strengths, it's a great time to want or need a practical sedan.

Just my $0.02.

"Yeah because ALL vehicles ride so smoothly on 20" wheels right? And since when did price make a car "luxurious"? STI? Evo? Ring a bell? How about Corvette? Lotus? Those HAVE to be luxurious because of it's price?"

Again, more excuses. Again, Mazda decided to offer the 20" rims, not me. Their job is to ensure the proper ride handling compromise and they chose to keep it on the firmer side of the fence and the results are less than impressive from those who appreciate a little road isolation.

The STi, and Evo are overpriced econoboxes. The CX-9 is price competitive upscale SUV that is considered an luxury crossover by many- except you. Nobody accepts the CX-9 is a sports car that so happens to look like an SUV while seating seven passengers and cargo, but you.

"I was talking about you trying to get away with comparing the 09 06's ride to ANOTHER Mazda that was NOT the previous 6, which does not ride harshly. It was however lacking in refinement which could a number of things."

You are a complete moron. I just said- "I drove a previous generation 6 rental (and almost got a used one) and the ride was choppy, loud and lacked any isolation whatsoever. It rode WORSE than the 3." Can you read that? You of all people should know Mazda's universal philosophy are firm riding vehicles, everyone knows this yet you are the main one trying to justify it. Like it or not, they compete with cars that have better ride quality so Mazda does not exist is some vacuum. On top of that, you are the only person here who would try to separate the previous 6's lack of refinement from it's noisy busy ride. They are tied in together.

"We're talking about the CX-9 and yet you can't keep on that topic because you can't stand Mazda."

Did I ever say that? No. My beef with Mazdas are their lack of road isolation- a complaint shared by many. Fix that and my mouth will shut. Judging from the IL's review of the 6, it seems Mazda is agreement with me and has toned down the brittle quality of the previous car.

"Go to a different dealer, all the dealers I talked to would have swapped the 18's out in a heartbeat."

Hasn't been my experience. Both wanted to charge for the rims AND the labor to switch.

"You are a complete moron. I just said- "I drove a previous generation 6 rental (and almost got a used one) and the ride was choppy, loud and lacked any isolation whatsoever. It rode WORSE than the 3." Can you read that? You of all people should know Mazda's universal philosophy are firm riding vehicles, everyone knows this yet you are the main one trying to justify it. Like it or not, they compete with cars that have better ride quality so Mazda does not exist is some vacuum. On top of that, you are the only person here who would try to separate the previous 6's lack of refinement from it's noisy busy ride. They are tied in together."

The "philosophy" that Mazda goes by VARIES from segment to segment. The philosophy they used for their crossovers was to bring comfort, sportiness in drive and design with utility together in one affordable package, with no compromise(that's a lie, there is some).

What was WRONG with "(and almost got a used one)"
Shows that you put little, ok NO research into your buying decisions, thoughts, or conclusions. and that you thought the ride was acceptable enough to "almost" buy one, who in their right mind would buy a car that rides poorly? You? 2 times over? Regardless if they didn't want to buy back your Mazda 3, you sound SO unhappy with it, you could have sold it for little loss, because MAZDA3's have great resale value. But, I believe you're just whining about the ride because you don't like Mazda in general. The CX-9 still has consistent sales even with the price of gas, so people are just fine with the ride, ask anyone WITH one, not someone like you with a general bias that "Mazda's ride like Bronco trucks".

Did you read the post in this blog? That said the 18's make the ride compliant? Wouldn't that have to do with the TIRES? And sidewall travel?

The MAZDA6 was PERFECTLY fine when it was released, now it's long in the tooth and lacking the same level of refinement as the top runners in that segment.
This is a review taken from a while back, with the MS6 added in.
http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com/2007-mazda-6-1.htm
Contradicts your claims of how horribly it rode and how unquiet it was compared to the competition.

++The RS-A's that come with the MAZDA3 are horrible tires, and they also come on the CX-7, MAZDA doesn't engineer tires, but they do choose the cheapest all-seasons they can get, I've replaced the tires in MY CX-7 and they transformed it into a MUCH better vehicle, same can go for our A4 which has crappy continental tires.

The STi, and Evo are overpriced econoboxes. The CX-9 is price competitive upscale SUV that is considered an luxury crossover by many- except you. Nobody accepts the CX-9 is a sports car that so happens to look like an SUV while seating seven passengers and cargo, but you.

Overpriced says you? Who ARE you? The Evo can be optioned near 40K, but they don't sell for that much unless you're not car buying smart. For the performance that they offer, where exactly can they be beat by something cheaper?

The CX-9 is NOT a luxury crossover, MAZDA never EVER markets it as one NOR is it one. Just because you and other people have it backwards doesn't make it true.

"The CX-9 is not a luxury crossover."

Yes but it is priced similarly to the Veracruz so the interiors can be compared. The CX-9's interior looks like an upsized version of the 3's interior while the Veracruz's interior actually seems like an entry level luxury vehicle.

"Go to a different dealer, all the dealers I talked to would have swapped the 18's out in a heartbeat."

dealers generally do not swap rims. I asked about that on my previous car. Unless you have specifically asked about this and know that you dealer would do it for FREE I wouldnt go around telling people it's easy to swap rims on a new vehicle.

A harsh riding crossover makes no sense to me. Crossovers are purchased by family types and those types want a comfortable and quiet ride. This isn't a sports package equipped BMW, its a 7 passenger vehicle that weighs 4600lbs and it should have adequat ride compliance.

So because the 09 A4 is priced similarly (give and take a few K) to the G8, and Accord. So the interiors can be compared as if they we're equals? No, it doesn't work like that. They obviously fill wants for different buyers.

TOAKS MAZDA/SUBARU would've swapped them for me, so would have Galpin MAZDA in Van nuys. It is easy to get done when you're buying a car and you're not a push over, tell them what you want and if they don't want to do it for you go to some other place that will.

The Veracruz is smaller and softer than the CX-9 and is meant to go head-to-head with the RX.

What you said is what people we're looking for the answer to, something that feels agile and sporty, with utility. A firm ride comes with the territory. It fills that void without slipping into a Q7 or X5. You don't understand it but the people buying them do.

1487, I think that's why a lot of people like the CX9...because its interior looks like an upscale Mazda3 interior.

I know that Mazda doesn't use a lot of soft touch surfaces, but tap the dash in my 6 and its soft touch...very good soft touch. The ENTIRE upper half and door panels are soft touch, and it all molds together seamlessly. So they obviously believe in them.

I think that soft touch surfaces are on the decline, anyways...there are practically none in the new Civic, Forester, Accord, RAV4, etc. I wonder why.

"What was WRONG with "(and almost got a used one)"
Shows that you put little, ok NO research into your buying decisions, thoughts, or conclusions. and that you thought the ride was acceptable enough to "almost" buy one, who in their right mind would buy a car that rides poorly? You? 2 times over? Regardless if they didn't want to buy back your Mazda 3, you sound SO unhappy with it, you could have sold it for little loss, because MAZDA3's have great resale value."

When you makes assumptions, are appear even more foolish than usual. I love how are you trying to analyze my vehicular decisions with a few trace details you've gathered over these blogs. Mind your damn business, how about that? Do you know my financial situation? I don't think so. I really don't have to explain anything to you but see if you can swallow this- I got the 2nd 3 to get a CTS in a few years. Sacrifice now to benefit in the future. I don't even drive that much so I could care less about what I'm driving now, it's all about the future. For the record, please quote where I said I don't like my car? I'd love to see you find that one because it doesn't exist. Fact #1, fuel economy sucks and Fact #2, the ride is a bit rough. THOSE ARE MY ONLY TWO COMPLAINTS. CAN YOU UNDERSTAND THE WORDS THAT ARE COMING OUT MY MOUTH?

I love how you try to defend your tired old position when it's quite obvious that other people besides myself have similar issues with Mazda. My two issues with Mazda are a) harsh rides and b) interiors with tons of black hard plastic. Other than that, I like their cars. Because you have trouble sticking to what I have actually said versus what you perceive my thoughts to be, you have taken my two main criticisms of Mazda vehicles and tried to extrapolate that I hate Mazda as much as you hate GM. You simply cannot except anyone having any issues with any Mazda vehicle, period. Never once did I even infer the CX-9 was a bad vehicle. Styling is subjective so I don't expect anyone to agree with my opinion on that end but the ride with the 20"s is simply too firm for many people and various reports have all confirmed that. My old dealership service manager even said that many people were disappointed in the ride quality of all the Mazda models. He said a lot people liked the cool looks but weren't ready for the ride that comes with it. I'll give you the service center's phone number so you can call and tell him why all of those REAL customers are stupid and are just jaded GM fanboys.

"Did you read the post in this blog? That said the 18's make the ride compliant? Wouldn't that have to do with the TIRES? And sidewall travel?"

Do your excuses ever end? It's Mazda's job to pick the right tires and design the chassis so the car still maintains comfort for the wheel/tire options offered. In case you don't know, many car makers work with tire manufacturers to develope all new tires or modify existing models specifically for their application (GM did this for the Lambdas- Enclave even has it's own 18" and 19" versions). Again, you are effectively trying to shoot the preverbial messenger (me) when you should take this issue up with Mazda.

PS- the Goodyear RS-As for my car were $186 apiece. The ContiProContacts I replaced them with were only $112 and road slightly softer and quieter. That throws out your hypothesis regarding Mazda choosing the, "the cheapest all-seasons they can get"

"The MAZDA6 was PERFECTLY fine when it was released, now it's long in the tooth and lacking the same level of refinement as the top runners in that segment."

Was it really? I wonder why it appears they have taken the edge off the 6? Hmmm... must've just been bored and decided they should tinker with the suspension tuning because they had nothing better to do. Oh wait, there is the pesky little stat known as SALES. I know I'm stretching here but, maybe, just MAYBE they've actually listened to the responses they've received and want to broaden the audience of the car so more people will spend their hard earned cash on it. Your problem is that you think you speak for Mazda and you clearly do NOT. Mazda doesn't want the same mistake to happen with the previous 6 so they likely have softened it up and made it bigger to appeal to what the buying public wants as opposed to appeasing Car & Driver editors would won't ever spend a penny on the car. The automobile mags loved the old 6 because it was small, cramped and had an aggressive ride just like a FWD 3 series. However, they do not live in the real world and would give their first born for better steering feel. My butt told me the old 6 rode too firm (for a family sedan) and many have confirmed that. Anything firmer/noiser than the Accord of the time was just a step too far in my opinion.

"What you said is what people we're looking for the answer to, something that feels agile and sporty, with utility. A firm ride comes with the territory. It fills that void without slipping into a Q7 or X5. You don't understand it but the people buying them do."

Entirely speculative. You haven't even a fraction of a shred of evidence to back any of this up. This is how YOU feel- you cannot speak for thousands of people buying these cars. This is not some esoteric cult where the people buying Mazdas "get it" and nobody does. Some people buy based on styling, comfort, price, reputation, brand, safety or a myriad of other criteria that can be sole factor to sway a purchase. Trying to convince yourself otherwise is utter lunacy.

"I wonder why."

I don't- it's called cost cutting. Everyone seems to be doing it with Toyota spear heading the dive into the toilet. Meanwhile, the old bottom feeders are ascending from the depths to make more aesthetically pleasing interior environments.

"

HAHA,
If you knew anything, you would know that MAZDA realized the MAZDA6 was too UNDERSIZED to deal with the Accord and Camry, and THAT'S why it didn't sell well. THAT'S why get the supersized MAZDA6 and the rest of the world gets the smaller and lighter MAZDA6.

Prices for the RS-A's RETAIL are NOT the same price as MAZDA would get buying direct from GOODYEAR, ANYONE with common sense KNOWS this and KNOWS that the RS-A is an OLD piss poor CHEAP design.

The 20's are what you get with the GT, you don't like it, GET THE TOURING! The ride and handling balance in YOUR opinion isn't comfortable enough for YOU. NOT for everyone else. The size of the wheels has NOTHING to do with their inability to make a car with a good handling and ride balance, nearly ALL manufactures as of late are putting CHEAP tires on most of their stuff. Just like the RS-A's on the G8 V6.

I can't stand when someone that OWNS a MAZDA, hates the ride, comes on here and complains about it as if EVERYONE has the same complaint as you and that MAZDA themselves don't like soft interior plastic, and that they're all filled with hard black plastic, NEWS FLASH, do I need to bring it up again, THEY HAVE SAND INTERIORS!!

YOU don't like the ride, THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE THE MAZDA6 DO! OR they love the other aspects of the car that they decide to live with it because it's not as bad as you make it seem! MAZDA is not mainstream trying to be the best Camry, and failing with a ride that is too firm, THEY KNOW that their cars ride firmer, the trade off is a damn good handling car for the money.

You keep crying about how horrible the rides are, and they aren't. You don't like the MAZDA3's ride, why would you even consider one in the first place?! You make no sense, you don't like MAZDA because of their "harsh" suspension setup in the MAZDA3, and then you make general assumptions on other MAZDA's that don't have the level of suspension tuning the 3 has, and you also BELIEVE that they don't have padded armrests, and that ALL of their dashes are unpadded because you're biased to think so based on your 3! You didn't check the facts, you just thought so and ran with it, which is why you seriously lack any sort of respectable opinion. YES they ride firmly, but guess what, that's what THEIR customer base wants! Of course it would be a negative in any car, it's something to complain about.

you like MAZDA so much that you find any reason to b****, moan and complain on how they don't know how to balance a ride, build a powerful FWD car, or build an interior with good materials FOR the money.

Entirely speculative. You haven't even a fraction of a shred of evidence to back any of this up. This is how YOU feel- you cannot speak for thousands of people buying these cars. This is not some esoteric cult where the people buying Mazdas "get it" and nobody does. Some people buy based on styling, comfort, price, reputation, brand, safety or a myriad of other criteria that can be sole factor to sway a purchase. Trying to convince yourself otherwise is utter lunacy.

Speculative? READ THE CONSUMER REVIEWS! They clearly WOULDN'T buy a car that they HATE to ride in unless they're poor shoppers. The sales of the CX-9 indicate that they're doing something right, all of the AWARDS one, all of the GLOWING reviews it's gotten from MOMS(motherproof) EVEN the comments on that very same motherproof article! MOTORTRENDS LONG TERM GT, THEY LOVE IT!

I'm done, entirely, with talking to you

/over

I tap on my dashboard all the time, don't you guys?

Regarding the 20" wheels, I'd probably skip them too and wish they were optional. This fad will pass eventually. In the meantime, I bet you could get a dealer to swap your 20's for 18's, or find someone on the internet to trade with.

So then we all agree Hyundai has leapfrogged Mazda in interior materials.

I must admit I thought my dad's Sante Fe to be a bit spartan.

"So then we all agree Hyundai has leapfrogged Mazda in interior materials."

I guess you're right, BUT I'll take my CX-9 Grand Touring in the Black Cherry Mica WITH the 20-inch wheels, please.
(;

This was intresting to come across (they also have an LT CX-9, but it's the 2007)

http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com/2007-midsize-suv-showdown.htm

Different strokes indeed

"While Veracruz clearly won in terms of interior materials and drivetrain refinement, it came up short of the CX-9 in ride/handling composure. "Veracruz made an impressive showing in this comparison. The interior is fabulous, the drivetrain refined, and the price, though high, feels modest when compared to luxury vehicles in this class," one editor summated."

"Despite its high sticker price, CX-9 very narrowly edged out Veracruz for the win. It was lauded as a roomy, fun-to-drive, refined, and competent midsize SUV. One tester summed it up by saying "CX-9 is the Edge that went to finishing school.""

"Another con mentioned by most was that Veracruz's ride was a bit rough and even jarring over bigger bumps. "Veracruz's ride lacks the composure of CX-9, rebounding more over big bumps and lacking the big Mazda's precise steering feel. Like the make's Sonata, concessions to handling were made in the name of isolation," one tester said."

Actually I forgot, there was an editor that complained about the same thing for the Veracruz's ride. Someone else also complained that the CX-9 crashed over expansion joints.

"YES they ride firmly, but guess what, that's what THEIR customer base wants! "

Call 215-877-1800- ask for Pat the service manager. He will tell you what Mazda customers want as he deals with their complaints on a daily basis. Again, you have ZERO facts to support you claims, you are just an overhyped fanboy. You are a Mazda fanatic and pretend to speak for every Mazda driver when you have no clue what other Mazda owners want or prefer. Everything you write is 100% speculative and cannot be supported with any truth.

"The sales of the CX-9 indicate that they're doing something right, all of the AWARDS one, all of the GLOWING reviews it's gotten from MOMS(motherproof) EVEN the comments on that very same motherproof article!"

Again, you fool, did anyone say the CX-9 was a bad car? No, if you could deal with what was said instead of overreacting every time someone points out a flaw, your blood pressure wouldn't be so high. You keep introducing my car trying to pluck a nerve when I didn't even bring it up. The car rides too firm with the 20"s period. This is a simple opinion shared by many- grasp it and embrace it. The Camry sales more than any other sedan, indicating that they're doing something right, correct? I doubt you would agree but sales are sales, are they not? You also are a fool if you think Mazda isn't trying to increase sales and trying to become mainstream. They are not some small specialty sports car company, they need high volume to stay a float and want every potential sale that can get.

"MOTORTRENDS LONG TERM GT, THEY LOVE IT!"

The hard/firmer a car rides, the better for automags. These are the same people who can claim a Porsche GT3 is a comfortable daily driver- take with a grain of salt. I must say, you are the biggest brand worshipping loyalist I've ever encountered and I've been using the forums since '99. Unless you work for Mazda, I suggest you relax. Go dust off your Mazda posters and be happy.

"I'm done, entirely, with talking to you"

Finally. Amen.

"I'm done, entirely, with talking to you "

Thank God. If only we could get you to stop commenting in general we'd really be getting somewhere.

the most amusing aspect of your online persona is that you believe Mazda has ZERO faults and then you go around labelling other people fanboys. It's nice that you love your CX-7 but its hard to respect anyone who cant find any legitimate areas for improvement in their vehicle or their favorate brand.

"THEY HAVE SAND INTERIORS!!"

Hard plastic is hard regardless of color.

"This fad will pass eventually."

No it wont. Do you know how long people have been saying that? If people didn't want bigger wheels the automakers wouldnt be offering them. Face it, an SUV riding on 16" or 17" wheels looks silly these days. The Pilot is an example.

"THEY HAVE SAND INTERIORS!!"

Hard plastic is hard regardless of color.

Yeah, so? He was wrong about that too. He kept complaining about how MAZDA's have black hard interior plastic, as if that's the only color.

++ I NEVER said that they didn't have room for improvement, the only point I made was that they are good for the money, where else are you going to find a 244HP CUV with a base price of 24K? With the features it has, and the handling? Answer? And the reasoning behind is entire "MAZDA's are filled with hard plastic" is based off of his entry level 3. He also thinks they ride poorly, and that all other MAZDA's have the same interior build, well guess what? They don't. My A4 with base suspension and 16 inch wheels rides rougher than my CX-7. But there is quite a bit more sound damping.

Incase you didn't know my favorite brand is Audi.
Assumptions R us huh?

The new MAZDA6 for example. the plastic around the gauges is hard, because you would never touch around there, the passenger side area where the airbag cover is however soft. The only cheap areas in that interior was the handbrake and below the window shifter was a little too rough other than that The leather was soft and the build was excellent.

Thank God. If only we could get you to stop commenting in general we'd really be getting somewhere.

Good luck with that. XD I'm here to stay.

Window switches***

"And the reasoning behind is entire "MAZDA's are filled with hard plastic" is based off of his entry level 3."

The 3, CX-7 and CX-9 have hard plastics. I've been in all of them. Not saying they are unique but they do have hard plastic. Period. It's not really open to debate.

Just because you like Audi doesnt mean you believe Mazda is flawed. Mazda is your 2nd fave brand. Whats your point?

While the CX-7 is the only 244hp SUV you can buy for $24k its barely faster than key competitors and gets worst in class fuel economy. I think its even worse than the Vue V6. The power is impressive on paper but it comes at a price. Based on the sales of the RAV4 and CR-v I am willing to bet most compact SUV owners are looking for less power and more efficiency. And they arent looking to use premium gas either.