Honda Pilot vs Mazda CX-9 vs Toyota Highlander

472 messages, Last post on Nov 21, 2009 at 5:09 PM

You are in the Mazda CX-9 Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester

What is this discussion about? Mazda CX-9, Honda Pilot, Toyota Highlander, Car Comparisons, SUV

2009 Honda Pilot vs. 2008 Mazda CX-9 vs. 2008 Toyota Highlander - Although we've been hearing about a mad dash to get out of sport-utility vehicles and into fuel-efficient compacts, the reality is that seven- and eight-passenger crossover SUVs like the 2008 Mazda CX-9, 2008 Toyota Highlander and 2009 Honda Pilot aren't going away anytime soon. (more)

Outline

Messages Page 12 of 48: 1; ...; 9; 10; 11; 12; 13; 14; 15; ...; 48; Prev; Next; Last

#106 of 472 Re: Self conflicting statements [ch1rravu] by aviboy97 Jul 26, 2008 (8:27 am)
Replying to: ch1rravu (Jul 25, 2008 7:46 pm) The CX-9 is reality is not selling "3,000 below invoice". There is a $3000 dealer engagement money on the car, that makes it appear "$3000" below invoice. The CX-9 is not on a stretched Ford Edge platform. The Ford Edge is on Mazda's platform. Any educated automotive person know that the platform does not make the vehicle what it is, but rather what is placed on it. While CR had red dots for every catagorie on the CX-9 except for the audio system controls, it appears that CR based their reliability on that alone. Makes no sense. Besides, Toyota is not CR's favorite anymore with constant issues in quality and reliability as of late. We all know CR is not perfect, and you are nieve if you think they are. The CX-9 is not a "one trick pony". It happens to do everything better then the Highlander, except straight line acceleration and a slim FE average. To me, Toyota's are highly over rated. Yes, they are good mechanically, however, they have some of the cheapest materials I have ever seen on the interior. Styling makes me want to hang my self. And the drive....it the most slushy, non responsive vehicles on the market. While they get good remarks for dependability (which has taken a HUGE hit lately) they consistently rate near the bottom in comparison tests.
#107 of 472 Re: You can ZOOM ZOOM better [baggs32] by qs933 Jul 26, 2008 (1:37 pm)
Replying to: baggs32 (Jul 26, 2008 7:12 am) I also don't like the center seating position's ceiling-mounted seat belt. I hope that's for the 3rd row! Right? If I remember correctly, both the second and third row in the Pilot use a ceiling-mounted seatbelt. It's actually fairly common. Both the Nissan Murano (a two-row CUV) and the Mazda CX-9 use roof-mounted belts for the center position in the second row. As I mentioned, the Highlander has a seat-mounted center belt for the second row. Keep in mind: I'm sure the ceiling-mounted belt is just as safe as a seat-mounted belt. and it's far better than just a lap belt only that used to be common in center seating position. Replies to this message: baggs32 (Jul 26, 2008 5:30 pm) qs933 (Jul 26, 2008 6:41 pm)
#108 of 472 Re: Self conflicting statements [ch1rravu] by nxs138 Jul 26, 2008 (2:12 pm)
Replying to: ch1rravu (Jul 25, 2008 7:46 pm) Mazda is offering more discount (over $3K-4K under invoice!!), if CX-9 roped in that many awards, why does it need that /rebate/ push ? All we are hearing is one is lucky if Highlander can be had for under 1K below invoice. Let me illuminate you on why the Highlander might sell only $1k below invoice: MSRP Highlander Limited AWD: $34,350 Invoice Price: $30,571 Difference: $3779 MSRP CX-9 GT AWD: $34,655 Invoice Price: $32,041 Difference: $2614 Basically, the Highlander has a much lower invoice price than the CX-9. That's why dealers would likely not sell for thousands below invoice, since invoice is already low! So you're making fun of the CX-9 by saying you can get it $3000 below invoice, which would be $29,041. Yet you're somewhat proud to say that you can get the Highlander $1000 below invoice, which would be $29,571...IT'S THE SAME PRICE AS THE CX-9! You obviously have a bias against the Mazda, that's fine, but come on, at least do a bit of research before spouting off.
#109 of 472 No Bias by ch1rravu Jul 26, 2008 (2:58 pm)
No bias here, letting the cars speak about themselves and their sales/volume/appreciation/safety/better-value-proposition sell themselves. Obviously, I have no incentive to sell a highlader or a Pilot or a CX-9. Since you did not make it clear earlier, I don't know about you though! Aviboy - time to finish your education, fast! Recession coming .. "So let me explain more gently: genetically speaking, the CX-9 is actually a closer relation to the Ford Edge" NYTIMES: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/08/automobiles/autoreviews/08AUTO.html "It looks like a longer version of the CX-7 but is based on the stretched platform of the Ford Edge" -- consum' 'rports Good choice award from consum' 'rports, Highlander TOPS all competitors, CX-9 lower mid-pack 4th. You like CX-9, please go ahead put your money in one, but first-drive alone is not what you should plunk your money over. No need to explain pricing - be your own judge on what people paid experiences rigbht here on TownHall for all three models. And we are not even pricing low-maintenance and resale values into the equation. // MSAM // Highlander beat every other SUV/CUV either loaded/unloaded in every category., and it also brakes/stops better! Mebbe to some v4 still a viable option., obviously, until last model year V4 sold in decent volume, its not like every AMERICAN grew larger and grew their families in just one year to make V4 a history !! Some folks need more volume doesn't necessarily haul 7 folks all at the same time! Let the better, well-rounded vehicle take the category, and sales., just not a one-trickeroo Replies to this message: nxs138 (Jul 26, 2008 3:33 pm) msam (Jul 26, 2008 5:37 pm) aviboy97 (Jul 27, 2008 6:31 pm)
#110 of 472 Re: No Bias [ch1rravu] by nxs138 Jul 26, 2008 (3:33 pm)
Replying to: ch1rravu (Jul 26, 2008 2:58 pm) So why are Highlander sales volumes down 31% over last year, and CX-9 sales down only 6%? And remember, as you like to repeat, this is a top-rated Consumer Reports recommended vehicle, and it still loss 31% in sales! I guess the people are voting with their wallets and figuring out that the new Highlander doesn't really bring that much new stuff to the table as compared to the outgoing version. To show you how well the CX-9 is doing, the GMC Acadia is down 40% in sales as compared to last year. Even the Pilot is down 20%. So the CX-9 is not really the one-trick pony you think it is, sales remain steady as other CUVs are tanking. That kinda blows your argument, doesn't it? And as for myself, I'm just a guy that did a lot of research before buying the CX-9. The Highlander would have been our 2nd choice, but we thought the CX-9 drove more like a car, which is what we wanted.
#111 of 472 Re: You can ZOOM ZOOM better [qs933] by baggs32 Jul 26, 2008 (5:30 pm)
Replying to: qs933 (Jul 26, 2008 1:37 pm) I've seen ceiling mounted shoulder belts before. What was it you meant by having to install it in the Pilot though? I've been in the back seat of the CX-9 a few times and never noticed a ceiling mounted shoulder belt. That's not to say it isn't there. I just didn't pay attention to it I guess. Do you just pull it down from the headliner or what? Replies to this message: qs933 (Jul 26, 2008 6:41 pm)
#112 of 472 Re: No Bias [ch1rravu] by msam Jul 26, 2008 (5:37 pm)
Replying to: ch1rravu (Jul 26, 2008 2:58 pm) Remember between 2007 to 2008 the curb weight of the Highlander increased close to 400 lbs. This may have made a V4 not a viable option. At least it seems like Toyota thought so. In any case, it is my personal opinion. I agree that some folks don't necessarily need to haul 7 all the time, but some may need to. So, it still comes down to individual needs. "Highlander beat every other SUV/CUV either loaded/unloaded in every category" I am not sure that this statement is completely true. It just depends on where you look.
#113 of 472 Re: You can ZOOM ZOOM better [baggs32] by qs933 Jul 26, 2008 (6:41 pm)
Replying to: baggs32 (Jul 26, 2008 5:30 pm) What was it you meant by having to install it in the Pilot though? "Install" was the wrong word. You don't have to "install" the actual seatbelt hardware. You do have to connect the belt to the buckle on the seat before it's usable. Either you leave it connected all the time, or you could leave it stowed on the ceiling so it's out of the way. If you do the latter, someone will need to connect it whenever the center position is used.
#114 of 472 Point already made by ch1rravu Jul 26, 2008 (7:39 pm)
Like /nxs138/ said, Pilots are down, so are Acadias. Obviously, general trend in this category is 20+ percent down. As earlier pointed out, niche-market (sidelined, may I say?) models play to different market-forces as compared to broader markets. As said again, discontinuing V4 certainly took away some Highlander sales with raising gas prices. Anybody got break-out of V4 to V6 model split sales figures among Highlanders prior to model year change ? If Highlander had V4 engine, it woulda reduced the weight compared to current V6 model, hence increased weight wouldn't be as much as 400 pounds between model years., yet it will still be higher than previous year model though, agree. But, for whatever's worth 'yota folks figured V4 Highlander isn't worth spending their design time, and cut that configuration out, and left that segment to RAV4 play. What general public fully understand is Highlander's real-world fuel economy/MPG under many conditions TOPs "Monroney" sticker posted numbers (lets say easy, EPA MPG figures). Where as other CUVs/SUVs struggle hard to reach their-own already low MPG-figures under /ideal/ conditions. Its clear and evident from /real/ people experiences and postings right here, that Highlander gives very good MPG., where as that is not the case with other CUVs. Surprising thing is - Pilot with that wonderful Cylender Deactivation thingie (I used to get a kick when GM used to refer it as DoD, displacement on demand), doesn't match Highlander's numbers close enough. Thats so un-typical of Honda, which usually does fairly competent with V4 engines performance and their MPG. Highlander one-upped Pilot in MPG category, and Toyota in general one-upped Honda in V6 performance/MPG. Mebbe next round goes to Honda., lets wait.. Somebody said, some of Highlander's interior materials visually are not upto Toyota level, I see in some areas they could possibly increase material quality. But, they wouldn't want to make it too luxurious, if they would, what is the incentive to buy them Lexus models? It may be somewhat well-thought idear. But, I see those materials are durable though, hence quality wise, surmise it won't be an issue. Visually, some of the trim-pieces may not be as much appealing, got a point. A neighbor complains about her CX-9's visibility, and rather-stiff driving. Anybody else felt the same way? Replies to this message: nxs138 (Jul 28, 2008 8:58 am) ceric (Jul 28, 2008 9:47 am)
#115 of 472 Re: No Bias [ch1rravu] by aviboy97 Jul 27, 2008 (6:31 pm)
Replying to: ch1rravu (Jul 26, 2008 2:58 pm) "It looks like a longer version of the CX-7 but is based on the stretched platform of the Ford Edge" -- consum' 'rports Yes, same platform, CD3, which Ford borrowed from Mazda (GG/GY platform). I don't need an education from you. Thanks for the offer. The overall sales figures do not speak for themselves, Toyota is the worlds largest automaker. Mazda is 4th in Japan. I have owned a Toyota before, and I believe they are over rated. Until they build a product that is actually fun to drive (IMO), I will not step foot in any of their show rooms.