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
478 messages, Last post on Nov 27, 2009 at 7:13 AM
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: aviboy97 (Oct 15, 2008 9:06 am) Since you asked, though I thought it was obvious, the above quote is assigning your view to others You are declaring broadly on behalf of "people" your opinion, rather than just stating it as your own, or even providing some factual reference for why this is the universal view "people" or even just the vast majority of "people." BTW, I totally agree one of the key benefits of a CUV is it drives more like a car. I stated as much. Where we disagree is whether that automatically translates to "people" having no interest in a vehicle that can go off-road when needed or desired too. My point is SOME "people" (I would never try to "overstate" all people for anything as that's my point...) want to have it both ways, a car-live drive and suspension, with some off-road and towing ability. Those "people" don't want to have to chose between a truck-like SUV or a strictly on-road vehicle. As a class, it is a "crossover utility vehicle" not just a car with a vaguely SUV-like shell. In terms of your posts, they speak for themselves. It's easy for anyone to do a search and see how often you chime in specifically to support the CX-9. Everyone's going to have their favorite in the end. I just don't see why a few people need to redundantly hammer home anything perceived as favorable to their choice if it doesn't add to the discussion. What exactly was new about your CR remarks that hadn't already been posted in the two previous pages of comments? What was the point of responding to new infomation about a C&R review by repeating the still fresh CR information as if to imply it automatically trumps the C&R review. Why not just let the information stand on its own and let people decide for themselves?
|
|
|
If you don't wish to read certain postings then simply scroll past them. tidester, host SUVs and Smart Shopper |
|
|
Replying to: citivas (Oct 15, 2008 9:28 am) Listen, do some people want a blend of off road and on road utility? Of course! I never said the contrary. However, it is fact that the majority do not go off road. My point about CR was to show you that every publication has their favorite. You mentioned C&D, which already has been mentioned here before as well. So, because CR has been discussed already, that means it cannot be talked about again? We talk about these different comparo's to show you that there is no clear and concise winner. All that matters is if a vehicle suits your specific needs. I never hammered you about the C&D article. I just mentioned that while it came in first with them, it came in 11th with CR. Where is my few posts with you back and forth today here have I once supported the CX-9 as you claim? Have I supported it in recent history? Yes, but not during this current conversation in which you claim I have been "pushing it on others" That is just not true. I never have, and never will "push" my views on anyone. I simply state my opinion, which is clearly allowed here. Am I right? In fact, I actually pride my self with some objectivity and often praise other vehicles, for which I do not favor, for what they happen to do well. I have done it over and over with Honda, Toyota and other makes.
|
|
|
Replying to: aviboy97 (Oct 15, 2008 10:15 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: lucky_777 (Oct 15, 2008 11:25 am) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: lucky_777 (Oct 15, 2008 11:25 am)  , haha. We have a family at church with 3 boys, but they refuse to get a minivan simply because "I won't be seen driving a minivan." They got a Nissan Armada instead. The SUV/CUV craze is something I don't claim to understand, but a whole lot of it lies on owning what is most "hip." To me, now when I see a 3-row Crossover, I see THOSE as the mommy-mobiles. They cost more, use more fuel, and offer less space and flexibility than a minivan of the same price. Perhaps I'm just too practical.
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (Oct 27, 2008 9:37 am) 
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (Oct 27, 2008 9:37 am)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: citivas (Oct 27, 2008 11:23 am) That said, it's a free-market - buy what ya want!  It make the prices on the more practical cars a little lower!
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: aviboy97 (Oct 27, 2008 9:47 am)  
|
|
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
