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 Mazda CX-9 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
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)
|
Replying to: citivas (Sep 04, 2008 7:40 pm) If there is one thing Toyota good about doing -- it brings Lexus engines/transmissions to common folks vehicles (Toyota) real fast. Talk about VVT-i, variable intake, variable exhaust, direct-injection, 6-speed transmissions, electric-steering, 50-state strict emissions, excellent MPG, and Hybrids. These are buzzwords talked-about by any other Luxo-makers, where as, Toyota brings'em to low-priced models real fast., more importantly, makes'em real affordable to you-and-me folks !! By the way, all these features work now, and will work 12 years from now (its not like a pricey 5-transistor radio is necessarily better than 1 transistor radio, 60's lore  ) What it can't offer is free/cheap-priced third-party/suppliers sourced parts., because real money goes-out for each such feature !! If all you want is more bang-for-buck, but have questionable reliability/resale/warranty-support/dealer-network/reputation., try a korean-make/korean-sourced-vehicle or something .. |
|
|
Replying to: ch1rravu (Sep 05, 2008 6:09 am) But to me you're responses seem unnecessarily defensive of them. My point is not that they don't make great cars, overall, or aren't a great engineering and marketing company. My point was that they have made a choice to consciously hold back features that would cost them virtually nothing to offer (due to the fact that they have already developed them and are already basically reusing previously designed parts) and generate a profit as user options on high end trims, for the sole purpose of being able to add it later. I have and still reject your notion that they left it out year one simply to prioritize what they develop or save money on the trim or because they didn’t believe their customer’s wanted it until they got feedback from the first couple years of production. None of these make logical sense given the facts (they have already developed it and are re-using seat designs that include it in other vehicles; it would only improve the profit margin of a Limited trim since it could be an option so the economic argument makes no sense; and they do this consistently with most of their higher-end vehicles in year 2-4, so the idea that each time they didn’t perceive a customer demand for it and only responded after the fact is ludicrous, especially given the lead time for development – they had to already have the memory sat in the ’09 plan before the re-designed ’08 even hit the showroom). Now we may disagree on whether Toyota consciously holding it back from customers for a couple years to introduce as a model upgrade later is cynical. I think it is but that’s just my opinion. But I am stumped that you can cling to the ideas that they held it back for economic, design priority or customer demand reasons. Again, I have no expectation of changing your opinion so I’m just moving on…
|
|
|
Replying to: citivas (Sep 05, 2008 6:42 am) 1. Every feature costs something to offer. 2. None of the Toyota press documents regarding the 2009 Highlander mention the addition of a memory seat option for 2009. 3. Still waiting to find out which model shares the same seats as the Highlander. 4. This is all basic product management. There are trade-offs in every product that's developed; you simply can't offer every feature to satisfy every individual need. 5. If basic product management is considered a "cynical" way of doing business, then virtually every for-profit company doing business today is a "cynic." I'll leave it at that. We can pick up this debate in 2011, when I'd expect the mid-cycle refresh to occur and those memory seats to become available. 
|
|
|
Replying to: qs933 (Sep 06, 2008 2:27 am) |
|
|
Replying to: ceric (Sep 03, 2008 12:28 pm) So Mazda has to be happy with the numbers, probably not as happy with the incentives they have to give, but hey, they have to keep the lines working near capacity, I guess. The Highlander and Pilot, while nice cars, were too "trucky" for my wife's taste. She loves the CX-9, so I guess I have no choice but to be happy... |
|
|
Replying to: qs933 (Sep 01, 2008 11:41 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: cx7lover (Sep 08, 2008 9:43 pm) My daughter who often sits in the 3rd row was not shy to inform me that there is no A/C vent for the 3rd passengers.  As an ex-minivan owner, I am very surprised by it. I hope Mazda fix that over-sight soon.
|
|
|
Replying to: ceric (Sep 08, 2008 11:36 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: ch1rravu (Sep 05, 2008 6:09 am) Toyota is not the only company with variable intake, variable exhaust, direct-injection, 6-speed transmissions, electric-steering, 50-state strict emissions, excellent MPG. I can think of a half dozen other mfgr's that offer that same technology. |
|
|
Replying to: elibruno (Sep 09, 2008 4:05 am) I need to go check if they are blocked by the all-weather mats I installed.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
SUVs Mazda CX-9 Honda Pilot vs Mazda CX-9 vs Toyota Highlander
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Mazda CX-9
2010 Honda Pilot
2010 Toyota Highlander
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
