Honda Pilot vs Mazda CX-9 vs Toyota Highlander

444 messages, Last post on Nov 10, 2009 at 12:41 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 25 of 45: 1; ...; 22; 23; 24; 25; 26; 27; 28; ...; 45; Prev; Next; Last

#235 of 444 Re: [citivas] Who pays for new model-year's development costs? [ch1rravu] by citivas Sep 05, 2008 (6:42 am)
Replying to: ch1rravu (Sep 05, 2008 6:09 am) This back and forth is getting nowhere. We will just have to agree to disagree and let others decide for themselves. Nothing I say will change your mind about how great Toyota is and so far nothing you have written has changed mine about why they hold back the memory seat features (among others). BTW, I think Toyota is, overall, the best car company in the world. So I'm no hater. I own a Toyota now and have had several Toyota/Lexus' in the past. I'm confident I will again. 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… Replies to this message: qs933 (Sep 06, 2008 2:27 am) badself (Sep 06, 2008 4:04 am)
#236 of 444 Re: [citivas] Who pays for new model-year's development costs? [ch1rravu] by qs933 Sep 06, 2008 (2:27 am)
Replying to: citivas (Sep 05, 2008 6:42 am) My point was that they have made a choice to consciously hold back features that would cost them virtually nothing to offer... 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. Replies to this message: badself (Sep 06, 2008 4:04 am)
#237 of 444 Re: [citivas] Who pays for new model-year's development costs? [ch1rravu] by badself Sep 06, 2008 (4:04 am)
Replying to: qs933 (Sep 06, 2008 2:27 am) Enough already, to the both of you!
#238 of 444 Re: August sales [ceric] by nxs138 Sep 06, 2008 (3:47 pm)
Replying to: ceric (Sep 03, 2008 12:28 pm) That's not bad at all for the CX-9. If you compare sales as opposed to 2007, the CX-9 does very well in terms of not dropping off sharply month after month. And those 3000 plus CX-9 sales make up a substantial percentage of total Mazda sales--and total Mazda sales have never been anywhere near Honda and Toyota. 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...
#239 of 444 Re: [qs933] by cx7lover Sep 08, 2008 (9:43 pm)
Replying to: qs933 (Sep 01, 2008 11:41 pm) The reason why Mazda adds in things is because owners complain about it, inorder to get people to upgrade. They did it with the CX-7, Mazda3, Mazda5, etc. They wait 2-3 years then introduce small upgrades owners requested. Replies to this message: ceric (Sep 08, 2008 11:36 pm) elibruno (Sep 09, 2008 4:05 am) ceric (Sep 09, 2008 9:43 am)
#240 of 444 Re: [cx7lover] by ceric Sep 08, 2008 (11:36 pm)
Replying to: cx7lover (Sep 08, 2008 9:43 pm) The mid-model change (MMC) usually involves face-lift and more significant upgrade. 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. Replies to this message: elibruno (Sep 09, 2008 4:05 am) ceric (Sep 09, 2008 9:43 am)
#241 of 444 Re: [ceric] by elibruno Sep 09, 2008 (4:05 am)
Replying to: ceric (Sep 08, 2008 11:36 pm) look under the second row seats and you will see two large vents that supply the air/heat to the third row. Replies to this message: ceric (Sep 09, 2008 9:43 am)
#242 of 444 Re: [citivas] Who pays for new model-year's development costs? [ch1rravu] by aviboy97 Sep 09, 2008 (6:22 am)
Replying to: ch1rravu (Sep 05, 2008 6:09 am) Let's not get crazy here and say Toyota's offers Lexus features in their vehicles and makes them "real affordable". When you get a Toyota with any kind of equipment, they are usually very expensive. Toyota is not a bargain company. Have you ever seen what they charge for the many stupid packages they put in their cars like their stupid $500 arm rest package they are known for doing 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.
#243 of 444 Re: [elibruno] by ceric Sep 09, 2008 (9:43 am)
Replying to: elibruno (Sep 09, 2008 4:05 am) Thanks. I seem to remember seeing that in the manual. I need to go check if they are blocked by the all-weather mats I installed.
#244 of 444 2009 Honda Pilot vs. 2008 Mazda CX-9 vs. 2008 Toyota Highlander by sleepybubba Sep 09, 2008 (10:45 am)
I ended up buying the 2008 CX-9 GT. On my initial list also were Acura MDX, Highlander and Pilot. I excluded the 2009 Pilot for the bus-like look and ride. Also '09 interior looked more like a bus rather than a family CUV. LOL, even 2008 Pilot interior looked much better than 2009, but when I was ready to buy most of the '08 Pilots were gone. Highlander didn't excite me for the following reasons: a) Everyone and their mother drives one. Certain color combinations were sold at a premium( don't believe me? go find Pearl Highlander with Black leather). The 2nd and 3d row seats didn't pass a test with my 2 boys. They complained that the seats are not very comfortable and the third row space is joke. I hated the non-split 3d row bench too. And finally, the styling of Highlander didn't talk to me. It reminded me a Nissan Maxima 2002-2004: decent car with no character. So in final running there were Acura MDX and CX-9. Given I was not looking for a Navi package, they came very close and I might've ended up with Acura if I was not offered a great deal for CX-9 Grand Touring that basically had exactly the options/ext color/interior color I wanted. I absolutely like the handling of CX-9, the silky smooth transmission (although would prefer the 1st gear a bit longer). The manual override on CX-9 is absolute best IMHO. The ebony interior looks fantastic with grey leather accents (much better than ebony interior on Acura). And of course, the exterior style is astonishing. If you end up getting a CX-9, get Liquid Platinum Metallic Crystal White. IMHO the best colors for this car. Use this link compare CX-9 with Highander or Pilot. Replies to this message: maltb (Sep 10, 2008 7:35 am) sleepybubba (Sep 11, 2008 11:28 am)