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
36 messages, Last post on Dec 02, 2009 at 7:35 AM
You are in the Acura MDX Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester
|
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.
|
|
|
Replying to: sedmund (Nov 10, 2009 8:36 pm) Is that correct? Not by the vehcile itself. Tires can be replaced. One can always find another dealer. My dealer is very nice. Actually much better than my old BMW dealer, which was basically outright arrogant. I don't know about how much Acura charge for basic oil service to allow a loaner car for you. As far as I know, even for Lexus, you need repairs or major services (15K/30K/45K/60K) to get a free loaners. That is the experiences from my co-worker. i.e. the 5,000 mile service which costs $187 does not include a loaner car. Seriously, a loaner car probably costs dealer only $50 or less. My local Mazda dealer provides loaner for repairs and TSB fixes. For loaner, they send you to a nearby Hertz, which charge about $50 for a Camry. The so-called "free-loaner" is out of your own pocket. Nothing to celebrate about. P.S. people over-maintain their vehicles. The so-call 15K/30K/45K/60K services are scams if you ask me. Other than typical oil changes (motor, transmission), modern vehicles do not require lots of maintenances until 100K. One can always change filters by themselves for costs of parts only....  BTW, CX9 has life-time transmission fluid which is not required to be changed by intervals. Is that the same with Acura MDX? |
|
|
Replying to: sedmund (Nov 10, 2009 8:36 pm) !
|
|
|
Replying to: ceric (Nov 09, 2009 11:41 am)
|
|
|
|
|
This has been the most exhaustive car decision I've ever had to make. It's taken nearly 9 months and at different points I was within hairs of buying a Q5, X5, CX-9, and Venza. Lots of long holiday car rides over the next couple months forced me to make a decision. I loved the Q5 best but eliminated it for not having as much cargo space as I need. I didn't love the X5 enough to warrant paying the 10k more (how I wanted equipped) over a MDX w/Tech + Ent. The Venza did not appeal at all to my spouse. So it came down to the CX-9 or the MDX. For me it came down to personal preference. Since it would be my wife's daily driver, I let her decide. I wanted to get a loaded 2010 CX-9...it was where the value was strongest and I prefer the styling and drive. She preferred the badge, residual value, and SH-AWD on the MDX. So, we bought an MDX. I'm happy that she's happy, but still a bit disappointed I won't get to drive the CX-9 on the weekends when I'm running the errands!
|
|
|
Replying to: tastycakes55 (Nov 24, 2009 5:56 am) Be glad you didn't go with the BMW X5. After owning 2 of them I will never buy another BMW as long as I live unless I hit the Lotto. The up-keep for repairs gets out of control and they are constantly broken. My 2007 MDX (first year of this build) had really loose steering when going down a road or highway over 45 MPH. I was always adjusting. Did they solve this problem? The MDX was flawless...never anything but oil changes in the 3 years I owned it!
|
|
|
Replying to: koho955 (Nov 17, 2009 3:35 pm) The bad reviews from tirerack.com on the Bridgestone Dueler was not all done by me. The score of 4.x vs 8.x is shocking to say the least. |
|
|
Replying to: koho955 (Nov 24, 2009 6:55 am) I owned one ('98 BMW 540iA) and that was enough for me. BMW = Break My Wallet. I lost count of the amount of problems I had with my 540iA. After owning it for 9 years, I finally got rid of it. I estimated that I spent about $4000 on repairs AFTER OE warranty. That is not a lie. No major issues, just a bunch of smaller ones (except for the entire cooling system needed to be replaced). Early models of CX9 have some minor annoying issues (mainly electronics integration and noises in suspension, etc.) The transmission is as solid as Lexus (same supplier), the engine drinks 87 octane and yet it is responsive, powerful and torquey. My 2008 CX9 with 23K miles had only 1 small assembly issue inside the rear doors. Other than that solid still, no rattling, noises, in the cabin. Can't say the same thing about my wife's Toyota Prius... (lots of rattling, but 0 problem). |
|
|
I visited SF Autoshow this past weekend, and I own a 2008 CX9. I have to admit that the interior quality of MDX is one-step ahead of CX9 (though 2010 CX9 comes with a much nicer leather - softer). I guess that is where you spend the money on. I am sure the stereo system is better also. However, the 3rd room remains pretty tight for MDX. I hope the new MDX had better transmission that the infamous ones on '01-05 MDX (and many other Hondas). I had a '01 Odyssey. At 80K, the transmission started to show slow engagement. I traded it in within days. I heard that the new 2010 MDX has the new Honda 6-speed transmission. Hopefully, Honda has learned their lesson from the transmission failure before. MDX is really nice, but I needed the extra space of a CX9. I was also disappointed that some features I like such as the SmartKey remains unavailable on Acura MDX (only RL and ZDX). The ZDX when fully loaded costs about $57K. I don't know what Acura has been drinking, but for a luxury "wagon" with 3.7L V6, who is going to pay that much $$$ for it. We will see.... Compared with ZDX, MDX certainly is a much better value.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ceric (Dec 01, 2009 4:34 pm) ...not to mention that the ZDX is: 1) not in the same class as the MDX or CX-9 because Honda/Acura considers it a sports sedan with a hatch crossover (which in my opinion is a big mix of uncertainy to define WHAT that thing really is). 2) ZDX only seat five versus 7 like the MDX and CX-9 and, 3) (subjective) that thing they call ZDX is by the far the ugliest creation yet by Honda/Acura also trailed by the "Accord Crosstour" which is essentially a badging engineering. No thanks...I will kepp my CX-9 anyday, anytime!! |
|
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
