Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
SUVs Acura MDX Acura MDX vs Mazda CX-9
27 messages, Last post on Nov 10, 2009 at 8:36 PM
You are in the Acura MDX Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: magesh (Dec 03, 2007 12:42 pm) A few notable corrections to some of the earlier posts: (1) As mentioned, the 2nd row seatbelt in the CX-9 *can* be retracted and hidden. (2) The CX-9 does share the same platform as the Ford Edge but is substantially longer. There are some other big differences. It uses an Aisin transmission, which is also used by Toyota I believe. The engine is also Japanese-made. (3) Like the MDX, Mazda does have Roadside assistance (for the 3-year warranty period). (4) There are two buttons for the heated seats, not just one for both seats (?) as wtliao32 suggested. Maybe I misunderstood him? It is true there is only one heat setting (no high/low). Our past three vehicles were 2004 Acura TL, 2003 4Runner and 2008 Acura TSX. We were looking mainly at the Highlander and MDX (and Explorer, Acadia and Expedition) before "stumbling" across the CX-9, which we eventually went with. On a 3-year lease, a loaded CX-9 is still about $70 cheaper per month than a base MDX (without Nav/backup camera, etc). This was one factor, among many, in our decision. |
|
| I found this thread while researching the CX-9, which we just bought. I looked at the MDX as well, and while I think there are some things I liked about the MDX a little better, the fact that the CX-9 is compared to the much more expensive MDX and not a loaded Honda Pilot, which is priced similarly to the CX-9, is a win for the CX-9. We traded in an Infiniti FX45 for the Mazda, very very powerful and sporty, and have no regrets. If you can afford the MDX, want the status of an Acura, need a sunroof and a DVD player, or want the sportiest handling, go for it the MDX. But the CX-9 is truly a beautifully designed and executed vehicle. They are much rarer than the MDX's. If you want the best 3rd row access and comfort, get the CX-9. If you want the most bang for your buck, its the Mazda again. Good Luck. | |
|
Replying to: waverley (Dec 19, 2007 1:19 pm) CX-9: 33K + TTL (with Navigation package, bose/moonroof) Grand Touring. No special financing ... cash or 6 to 7% 60 months Acura: 38.7 + TTL (Tech package) + some freebies. As you can see the difference was about 5.5 grand. I test drove both vehicles on the day of purchase twice each. It basically came to driving and handling --> The MDX was more confident on the road even though it wasn't as smooth as the CX-9. CX-9 had some good points- blind spot monitoring, 20 inch wheels. However I guess it was the driving of MDX, Extra Warranty, Reliability and Label / Brand status that drove me to that conclusion. Also I had been at three Mazda dealers before hitting the lowest price ... all 3 were bad experiences in terms of customer service. The same at Acura was more pleasant, even though there were a few unpleasant moments. But overall very courteous at Acura. Also the Bose sound system in CX-9 sucked whereas the Acura one is excellent. I do some surround encoding and CX-9 couldn't even recognize the files, but Acura played them! Whereas I had initially thought that MDX had 3rd row seats for namesake, I actually found out that they were more comfortable than those of CX-9. My wife is only 5 ft 1" and the CX-9 seat didn't go up that much as did the Acura. I wish I had money to buy both! It was truly a difficult one. I think you can't go wrong with either. If you don't have that 40K (but have 30K) don't think of MDX, but if you have it, don't think about CX-9. Hope this helps someone if in the same quandary!!! |
|
|
Replying to: suharsh (Nov 07, 2009 6:12 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: suharsh (Nov 07, 2009 6:12 pm) They charge you "luxuriously" at Acura/Lexus. Your 1st oil change will wake you up. At Lexus, that will be about $187!!! compared to what I got for my Mazda $25. Including tire rotation, that is still less than $45. For a typical Lexus, the 60K service runs about $1000. For a Mazda, it costs about $4-500 at most. Anyway, it costs to carry a badge, which I personally do not care as much as you do. > My wife is only 5 ft 1" and the CX-9 seat didn't go up that much as did the Acura This is one legit reason for choosing MDX over CX9. No doubt. You got to make the wife happy. Acura's audio system has been one of the best. The one on CX9 is good but can't compare. I did not choose MDX because of - styling - roominess I am a big fan of SH-AWD, but most people probably don't care at all, or don't get to use it enough to appreciate its value. Anyway, I am sure MDX will also have better resale value. I own my vehicles for 7-8 years, therefore, resale value does not concern me that much. Reliability? My CX9 has been trouble-free (other than 1 assembly defect inside window mechanism and 2 TSBs). Overall, depending how people value their $5.5K dollars, I would say that Mazda CX9 still have the best "bang for the buck" value in this class. It desires a test-drive, at least. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ceric (Nov 08, 2009 5:50 pm) I've been going back and forth since between the CX-9, MDX, Venza, Pilot, Highlander, Q7, X5, and now throw the Outback into the mix. This is the toughest segment to shop, IMO. If it were going to be my driver I'd pull the trigger on a CX-9 but as it's for the wife she likes the Pilot best but can't get over its looks and marginal price difference between it and the MDX. Every vehicle in this class is excellent for a specific group of people but has a serious flaw for everyone else. The X5 is great but hard to justify the price. The Highlander meets all needs but doesn't really excel in any area (IMO). The Venza is too expensive for where it should compete (for a V6 AWD) and has terrible blind spots. The Pilot is just butt ugly and lacks some of the more luxury quality in the Venza and CX-9. The Q5 and Q7 lack cargo space (surprisingly) and the Q7 has quality issues from what I've heard. The MDX is at the top of my list for a car I hope to have in time to lug the family on a long thanksgiving trip but it's hard to buy knowing people were able to get 08 MDXs this time last year at around 32k for a base and 34-35k for a Tech. To keep this on topic I wish there was another way to distinguish the CX-9 and MDX other than making it do you want to pay for the Acura badge and resale value. Decisions decisions!
|
|
|
Replying to: tastycakes55 (Nov 08, 2009 6:46 pm) It uses a very very special tire size (for the V6 models) 245/55R19 http://www.tirerack.com/tires/TireSearchResults.jsp?skipOver=true&width=245%2F&r- atio=55&diameter=19&x=12&y=8 As you can see from tirerack.com, there is only ONE choice, which is the OE tire. The OE Bridgestone Dueler is very bad for its price. It sucks on snow (see tirerack.com's review). Yes, CX9 also uses the same Dueler, but with 245/50R20 or 245/60R18. Both tire sizes have many other alternatives. Just some things to ponder on before you commit to buy. |
|
|
Replying to: ceric (Nov 08, 2009 5:50 pm) Good points ... it was a very tough decision I have made, after many difficult weekends. CX-9 has many features that MDX doesn't. If I had bought CX-9 I would still have thought about MDX and wondering if I made the correct decision and ofcourse vice-versa! I still miss two cars, I had eliminated earlier --> Ford Flex and Buick Enclave .... an oh I forgot to mention the mini vans  Even the insurance on Acura is more than CX-9 ... but I knew this before the purchase. I know a guy who makes boat loads of money ... he changes his cars very frequently ... he doesn't even do any research or no after thoughts ... right? But for me (and probably for you) ... we just have sufficient money to buy one of these ... that is what makes the decision the most difficult! So ... let's enjoy our cars ... yours is great too ... probably as good as MDX. |
|
|
Just to add, the 5.5K difference is in a way not accurate. The mazda dealer was asking for me to forego $3K in incentives, if I wanted to avail the special financing from Mazda - I believe 2.9% for 5 years. So really the difference would have been 2.5K! |
|
|
Replying to: ceric (Nov 08, 2009 5:50 pm) The first disappointment came when the CX9 faced the second snowy winter. It was so absolutely horrendous in snow that it was shocking! We have had cars and minivans before, but none this bad. And this in fact was our first AWD utility vehicle and we thought we are all set for winters and boy were we wrong! We realized that this was because of the factory tires that the CX9 came with, though we had put on less than 20K miles on these tires and found out many CX9 users were complaining about the same issue from many forums. So half-way thru this second winter we replaced the tires and I put on Yokohama Parada spec-x's. The Paradas were a huge improvement over the original Bridgeston Duelers in snow. But to my disappointment gone was the edge in the communicative steering, it's not bad but it no more had the difference to me that made it stand out compared to other SUV/CUV's in this class. Of course may be if I have one set of summer tires and one set of winter tires may be I will be able to enjoy this vehicle more, but I don't want to deal with all that with an AWD SUV (I already do that with my car). Other than that CX9 overall is ok, but I also feel it's not aging well, I feel that the engine has become louder and hear engine whines which weren't there before. And finally in general the service dealership experience isn't great with Mazda (I have tried 2 different dealerships) compared to the kind of service two of my friends get with their Acuras. May be this is a co-incidence and not to be generalized, but may be this has to do with the premium (especially Acura) vs non-premium brand. In fact once it was ridiculous that the dealership told me that to address a service bulletin I may have to leave the car with them for 2 days because they may have to order parts once they start working on my car and find out that it needs some parts, but as the overall time take actually spent on my car will be less than 4 hours they can't give me a loaner car! I know my friends that have Acura get a loaner car every time even when they just go for basic service. So some of the money you pay upfront for a brand like Acura you get back indirectly by this kind of better service and of course the better resale value. So the actual difference may not be 5K but something less. So overall, though we are not totally disappointed with the CX9, we are definitely not as excited as before. Our CX9 lease is getting over next year and it's decision time one more time but I would definitely lean towards Acura much more this time. Let's see. Of course I understand that these are our experiences and yours and others' may be different. |
|
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2009 Acura MDX
2010 Mazda CX-9
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
