- #169 of 208
-
Re: Apples and oranges [vbbuilt]
by aviboy97
-
May 01, 2007 (11:01 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: vbbuilt (May 01, 2007 10:43 am)
True, but, we all knew about it. Mazda announced it in April of 06 I think. Heck, it was at the 2006 NY Auto Show, but, just as a shell.
|
- #170 of 208
-
Re: Apples and oranges [hpgator]
by d_hyper
-
May 01, 2007 (3:13 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: hpgator (May 01, 2007 4:33 am)
As you perhaps know, people cross-shop different market segments all the time in the search for a vehicle that fits them best. Minivans vs SUVs. Even economy cars vs motorcycles. So what you've been doing in the previous posts is comparing how CX-7 differs from Murano, which means they compare well! There are no 2 vehicles that are 100% matched in all characteristics. People just need to know what are the pros/cons of each and how it may fit their lifestyles.
I never had a problem comparing apples and oranges for that matter.
|
- #171 of 208
-
Re: Apples and oranges [d_hyper]
by mike1111
-
May 01, 2007 (3:24 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: d_hyper (May 01, 2007 3:13 pm)
That seems pretty simple then.If you want to have cargo space and be able to tow something AND be comfortable get a Murano or something like that.If you want something smaller that has tighter steering and you don't need to tow or don't need cargo space then get the CX-7.They both get similar mpg with the Murano not needing premium gas.
|
- #172 of 208
-
Re: Apples and oranges [mike1111]
by maltb
-
May 01, 2007 (4:02 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: mike1111 (May 01, 2007 3:24 pm)
Hmmm, I just don't need as much cargo space, nor tow more than 2k pounds but I enjoy the comfort of a car that handles almost as well as a sports sedan and has very good brakes.
|
- #173 of 208
-
Re: Apples and oranges [aviboy97]
by ctx
-
May 01, 2007 (5:49 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: aviboy97 (May 01, 2007 10:24 am)
I don't consider 3rd row seating a benefit. For my tastes that is too close to a minivan. Murano works great with it's "Luxury seating for five" and I think that is part of the draw.
Now before you all jump my sorry a$$ I think both the CX-7 and CX-9 are beautifully styled vehicles and yes, Mazda does have a lot to offer.
Murano is also a beautiful vehicle.. I think, though (and I've said it before) that a comparison between it and the CX-7 is a bit silly as they are (other than great looks) completely different vehicles. I will say the same for the CX-9.
I own a Murano and will forever be biased but I will not forget my Mazda days.. especially those free loaners!!! 
|
- #174 of 208
-
Re: Apples and oranges [ctx]
by aviboy97
-
May 02, 2007 (6:38 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: ctx (May 01, 2007 5:49 pm)
Now before you all jump my sorry a$$ I think both the CX-7 and CX-9 are beautifully styled vehicles and yes, Mazda does have a lot to offer.
No jumping here! Just asking how the Murano compared to the CX-9.
All three are great vehicles, all offering something different. However, this is where we all come to disagree with each other 
|
- #175 of 208
-
Re: Apples and oranges [maltb]
by mike1111
-
May 02, 2007 (6:57 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: maltb (May 01, 2007 4:02 pm)
Seems like a easy choice then huh?If i didn't need cargo space or didn't have to tow something i would have got a car not a crossover but thats just me.Why buy a thirsty 4 banger that handles ALMOST like a sports car when you could have just bought the sports car?
|
- #176 of 208
-
Re: Apples and oranges [mike1111]
by maltb
-
May 02, 2007 (7:14 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: mike1111 (May 02, 2007 6:57 am)
Maybe you need to re-read the post a few times to fully understand. Look for key words like "as much" and "more than".
I frequently tow my bikes to the dessert, use the roof racks for home depot stops and flip the back seats down (effortlessly) for my side work. Monday through Friday, the CX-7's sporty attributes make my 15 mile commute a joy to drive. When I hit 60, in 24 years, I'll likely be up for something more cushy.
|
- #177 of 208
-
Re: Apples and oranges [aviboy97]
by hpgator
-
May 02, 2007 (7:58 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: aviboy97 (May 01, 2007 10:24 am)
LOL you're joking right? The Murano was specifically designed without a 3rd row seat to give people far more interior space and comfort. If you want a 3rd row, go for something else. However, I guarantee that the CX-9 doesn't have the back seat room of the Murano. It's an "adult" car while the CX-9 was made for families (only small children ever fit in 3rd rows anyway). I sat in the back of a Murano and was able to cross my legs with still about 6" of room to go (and I'm 6'1").
The murano takes 87 octane. It does not require premium.
CX-9 has a more powerful engine, yes, but all that gets you is less efficient fuel mileage and a half-second faster on the 0-60 speed. I guess if you like that, go ahead.
Btw, a fully loaded CX-9 is more expensive than a loaded Murano SL (FWD w/ touring and navigation).
|
- #178 of 208
-
Re: Apples and oranges [maltb]
by mike1111
-
May 02, 2007 (8:23 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: maltb (May 02, 2007 7:14 am)
Hey thanks for making my point for me.I do need to tow something over 2,000 pounds.I do need the extra cargo space.I do like to have my front seat all the way back and still have leg room for my adult rear pasanger.Thats why i have said the CX-7 and the Murano are differnt cars for diffent people.You don't need to tow and you don't need the space so why buy something big?I needed more space and to tow so why would i buy a turbo 4 banger?It's just a diffenrt car for differnt things.To compare the two side by side isn't fair to either cause they do diffent things.
|
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
SUVs 
