waymondospiff Posted September 22, 2006 Share Posted September 22, 2006 Edmunds.com, First Drive: Mazda CX-9 So, was the topic heading vague enough? Edmunds.com published their review of the Mazda CX-9 and came away largely impressed with the ride, handling, and power. Knocks include the 20" wheels, too-light steering, and not much else. Base price for the CX-9 Sport model is $29,035, Touring model goes for $31,135, and the Grand Touring starts at $32,675. Add $1200 for AWD. A couple of observations, since it's been awhile since I looked up details on the CX-9: 1. It's a big mutha, at 199.8" long it's every bit as big as the Freestyle. 2. HUGE interior...cargo room is 100.8 cu ft, the Pilot has 88, Explorer 85, and Expedition only has 108. 3. Beautiful interior for the vehicle and price. Mazda has really done a nice job giving the "Mazda feel" an upscale finish on this model. 4. Pricey, but it definetely stands apart from the smaller, cheaper CX-7 and I think most observer were more worried about there being little difference between the two. Any other comments? Scott Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goingincirclez Posted September 22, 2006 Share Posted September 22, 2006 (edited) Good stuff. Asuuming the drivetrain in the Edge isn't much different, hopefully Ford will reap some kudos when it debuts. I like how Mazdas go for a nimbler, sportier feel in general, and I hope that Ford didn't dumb it down too much for their whip. Most reviews of the Fusion were impressed with its handling compared to the competition... and if Ford wants to maintain an "Edge" (sorry) they'd be wise to keep that trait. As a higher-priced alternative, it looks like Mazda nailed this one. If the Edge is truly close to this I'll definitely check it out. I wonder how the MKX will improve on it? (Hmm... the scale perfectly goes from Ford to Madza to Lincoln... wherefore art thou Mercury?) But this isn't about the Edge, it's about the CX9. I'll say like everything about it... but the center console threw me off a bit. Looks like a bridge or something; I don't care for how it juts into the wood trim on the center stack sides, and looks like it's floating for no reason. However, this design cue is repeated to better effect on the door panels, so I'm willing to overlook that on the basis of consistency. (My one true nitpick is the shifter seems awfully close to the stack, but I suppose that doesn't matter once it's in gear). Edited September 22, 2006 by goingincirclez Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bystander Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 Wow. That's an impressive vehicle. The 2008 Freestyle just got a stiff competitor--from within the Ford fold no less! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 Wow. That's an impressive vehicle. The 2008 Freestyle just got a stiff competitor--from within the Ford fold no less! It's nice to see praise of a Ford engine too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mettech Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 I agree about the good review on the new 3.5L.... Sounds very positive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZanatWork Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 I liked this review, although it had the same effect their MKZ article did: make me wonder how the new motor will impact the (unfairly) maligned D3 cars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xr7g428 Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 I cannot help but wonder what the 500 would be selling right now if they had said the same things about the drive train. Is it possible that the car might take off now that they have a motor to put in the thing? It seems that the Mazda DNA includes "fun to drive". Car guys get this at such a basic level, that they don't know how to leave it out. When I say that Ford needs more car guys, This is why. I can say from personal experience that Ford lost a Freestyle sale to my wife based on weak performance (It just did not compare to the Honda Odyssey she had been driving, She felt like it would be unsafe merging into 75mph traffic). After reading this review, I want to go drive one of these new Mazda's. Has anybody heard if there will be a Mazda Speed version? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kyle Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 I love what mazda is doing right now....think they are one of the hottest car companies in the world. You cannot tell me if that shot of the interior had a ford badge on it that you would be stoked. It seems like ford is almost hesitant about competing with mazda and seems to hold back on the finer details. Why do they get a 7 seat version? Their 6 speed transmission has manual shift capibility-why not the edge? I really think ford just seems to "dumb" down their vehicles to what they perceive what american's care for and don't value as important. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
630land Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 (edited) Why no 7 seat? Answer: Freestyle OTOH Why is there an overlap now? Edited September 25, 2006 by 630land Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kyle Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 who cares about freestyle? the customer who is buying a freestyle is not the same customer who is buying a cx9. And besides why not give them both? I am convinced that there should be several versions to satisfy the customer-why do you think there is more than vanilla and chocoalate? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igor Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 (edited) Why no 7 seat? Answer: Freestyle OTOH Why is there an overlap now? some but very little. the CX-7 is cheaper than Edge, but has exotic engine that will scare off many buyers. It is also QUITE small - epsecially in the rear. The Edge is $2 extra, offers more space and mainstream engine. The CX-9 offers a car that is Edge's size, just a bit longer, and has 3 rows of seats, for another $3 extra. It still offers the sporty ride, that might be too rough for some. The Freestyle (will with the 08 update) offers the same engine, but larger (longer, wider) vehicle. The car is also quite a bit lighter, and the 3 rows have much more space. the styling is conservative, and rde is much less sporty. The Fairlane vehicle will be the size of Freestyle, but quite a bit taller, to move from the wagon feel of the Freestyle to more spacious SUV look and feel - like Lambdas from GM. It is possible the Fairlane will provide londer sheelbase or some other size adjustment. They are quite close by, but not directly overlapping. Of course there are the Volvos XC70 and XC90 and the Lincolns MKX and the Fiarlane companion, but those are more expensive. Igor Edited September 25, 2006 by igor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waymondospiff Posted September 26, 2006 Author Share Posted September 26, 2006 They are quite close by, but not directly overlapping. Here's the stats: Car......length...width...height..whlbse...cargo vol.....pass vol CX-7....184.0"...73.7"...64.8"...108.3"...58.6 cu.ft.....101.7 cu.ft Edge....185.6"...75.7"...68.7"...111.2"...68.7 cu.ft.....106.6 cu.ft CX-9....199.6"...76.2"...68.1"...113.2"...100.7 cu.ft...??? Fstyle...199.8"...74.4"...65.9"...112.9"...86.1 cu.ft.....107.0 cu.ft So, if the CD3 stretches right past the D3...what again is the reason for the odd Volvo chassis that can't accept V8s? I've thought the Freestyle was a great vehicle with a unique package, but it really looks like Mazda took it a step further with the CX-9. I wasn't expecting the CX-9 to be such a competitive vehicle (Mazda's generally run on the smaller side of the scale) but I think the CX-9 could really be a breakthrough vehicle for Mazda. Just one more reason to close down Dearborn and turn all of the engineering over to Mazda! (snark) Scott Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted September 26, 2006 Share Posted September 26, 2006 (edited) A big difference, I believe, is that the CD3 under the Edge/CX-9 uses a ladder subframe, which might have been problematic with the Freestyle's packaging (I believe the Freestyle's overall height includes the standard roof rack, which might knock off about 3" more--Freestyle has the same front headroom as the Five Hundred, which means it's probably got close to the same roof height: 61.9"). Ford studied CD3 for the Fairlane, and opted to use a modified D3 instead, which--given that the Fairlane will be assembled at a CD3 plant, means that there was likely a compelling reason for using D3. If CD3 can expand to minivan lengths only if it has a rather deep subframe (raising the floor of the vehicle), that would explain why Ford went the D3 route. Edited September 26, 2006 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bri719 Posted September 26, 2006 Share Posted September 26, 2006 Why no 7 seat? Answer: Freestyle OTOH Why is there an overlap now? there is always going to be overlap with any full-line manufacturer. it's giving the people what they want. there is a significant difference between an Escape and a Freestyle just like there is a significant difference between a Freestyle and the Edge. why does Toyota have like 4 small/medium SUV's? I'm having a much harder time telling the difference between the current CRV and a Highlander, or a 4Runner and a FJ Cruiser. the same could be said for Camry/Avalon, and to a lesser degree with their small cars. many different flavors of the same thing. I think Ford exhibits better range in their variety of vehicles, frankly. where can someone go out and buy a Toyota Edge?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waymondospiff Posted September 26, 2006 Author Share Posted September 26, 2006 A big difference, I believe, is that the CD3 under the Edge/CX-9 uses a ladder subframe, which might have been problematic with the Freestyle's packaging (I believe the Freestyle's overall height includes the standard roof rack, which might knock off about 3" more--Freestyle has the same front headroom as the Five Hundred, which means it's probably got close to the same roof height: 61.9"). Nope - 65.9" without rack, 68.2" with rack What does the D3 use if *not* a ladder subframe? Scott Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted September 26, 2006 Share Posted September 26, 2006 Nope - 65.9" without rack, 68.2" with rack What does the D3 use if *not* a ladder subframe? Scott A perimeter type subframe, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.