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
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
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: guy1974 (Nov 24, 2008 5:01 pm) You can fold down half the seat in vehicles like the Pilot. Do the GM sisters not have a split-fold rear seat?
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (Nov 24, 2008 8:53 pm) But you still lose half the expanded trunk if you have someon ein the third row - just a fact. The lambdas have 64cu ft with the third row folded down, 24 cu ft with them up, so I expect somewhere in the middle (say 45 cuf t) with one seat up. Just stating the obvious, no need to argue.
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (Nov 24, 2008 8:53 pm) You can fold down half the seat in vehicles like the Pilot. Do the GM sisters not have a split-fold rear seat? Actually, its even better. You can chose to fold down either 60% or 40% of the third row in the Pilot, rather than just 50/50 like the CX-9 and others with 7 seat capacity. This has two advantages over 50/50: 1) If you only need one person in the third row you end up with more storage capacity; 2) It mirrors the second row, which is less awkward and more efficient than the 60/40-50/50 fold-down combo. I believe the GM line is like the Pilot in this regard. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: guy1974 (Nov 25, 2008 7:26 am) Not all the vehicles in this discussion offer that feature (Toyota doesn't, for one). Why don't they? Ask the manufacturers, not me! 
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (Nov 25, 2008 9:14 am)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: guy1974 (Nov 25, 2008 4:43 pm) Personally, I don't have a horse in this race - I drive a Honda Accord, and wanted to like the Pilot a lot, but found it slow and feeling a bit too big. I started monitoring this thread when my folks were car shopping and had no idea what they wanted (looking at vehicles like the Hyundai VeraCruz); they've since ended up in the new Ford Taurus, with Sync. Neat car!
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (Nov 25, 2008 9:28 pm) |
|
|
I ended up with the Pilot despite the look and my initial lack of enthusiasm for the drive, so I sympathize. I test drive it early and walked away pretty sure I wouldn't get it. But the more I test drove other cars (Toyota, Mazda, Acura, BMW, Audi, Volvo, GM models, Ford’s Flex), the more I was amazed that none of them, even the luxury models, had the same range of features as the Pilot (only the Ford with MS Sync came close on features). The luxury lines all had nearly useless third rows and uncomfortable middles seats in the second rows. And even most of them didn’t have the same degree of cabin tech the Honda did. Even its Acura cousin doesn’t have fully-integrated iPod control from the nav screen or voice command. That may be a trivial feature to some but our family LOVES it. We use it every day, more than radio. So in the end we went with the model that had all the features we wanted. Everyone is different – we prioritized features and space in the end over look or drive. I still don’t like the look, but interestingly I completely changed my mind about the drive and really like it now. I think the problem was I was used to the 6-gear cars that just have a different feel for acceleration. When I test drove it, it seems sluggish on acceleration; it felt “heavy.” But once I drove it enough after buying it I found its groove (i.e. the right way to accelerate) and now find it quite responsive. In fact I have tested its 0-60 times and done well better than what was reported in numerous reviews, so I wonder if the testers needed a similar learning curve. And while I have not tried the emergency braking test, I definitely find its typical use braking superior in feel to the Toyota Sienna we own or the Highlander my in-laws own… For what its worth, the Pilot has sold itself to my friends, without even trying. I have had two people so far who spent time driving with me in mine who subsequently got one. I wasn’t trying to sell them on it and in fact pointed out that their situations were different than mine (in terms of family size, etc.). But they were both in the SUV market and became so impressed with it after spending long drives in it that they changed their minds. One of them was about to get the Volvo and could have leased it for exactly the same terms (actually slightly better terms) as the Pilot and went with the Pilot. They hadn’t even had it on their radar prior to driving with me.
|
|
|
Replying to: citivas (Nov 26, 2008 7:15 am) Such as?? |
|
|
At the time (in August) there were no other CUV's with 8 seat capacity, integrated iPod (as in you control it through the car, not just an aux port), a great nav system that could be programmed (by a passenger) while driving, integrated sat radio, integrated Bluetooth, the ability to control the radio, sat, iPod and climate control through voice commands in addition to nav and phone control, etc. Various vehicles had some of these things but not all. The Flex came close but was 7 seat, had limited tow capacity and was not useful off-road (and I didn’t like how low it sat or the drive). I loved the CX-9 but for the inability to have integrated iPod and sat radio in a workable solution, lack of a trip computer, lack of control of rear climate from the front and the smaller third row. I've read the '09 addresses some of this. The GM's amazingly didn't have Bluetooth even as an option at the time (though they do for '09), which was a non-starter for me – I use it every day. The Toyota isn't even in the ballpark with no split-third row, no memory seat, a useless nav while driving, and a limited second row. The Acura, BMW and Audi all had uselessly small third rows (even my 7 and 10 years olds didn’t like how cramped there were) and poor middle seats in the second rows, and all had worse mileage and required premium fuel to boot. Etc. Again, these were my criteria. Others value different things. If I was picking primarily on the best drive or look, I would have ended up with the Pilot. In the end, only the CX-9 seriously tempted me other than the Pilot and if the ’09 had been out and really fixed full iPod integrated with sat radio and a decent trip computer I might have gone for it, though I would have missed the 8th seat which we’ve had to use surprisingly often.
|
|
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
