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

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 37 of 49: 1; ...; 34; 35; 36; 37; 38; 39; 40; ...; 49; Prev; Next; Last

#353 of 478 by citivas Feb 06, 2009 (9:43 pm)
You can still charge without the touring by using the lighter port... I love the Touring for a few reasons. I love the NAV and use it all the time. With our last car I had the same thought as you and figured I would get an after-market nav. I got the top of the line Garmin. But there is no substitute for an integrated nav and the Honda has one of the best factory navs on the market. It is night-and-day better than our portable nav and much more convenient. We also use the iPod integration all the time, more than over-the-air radio. Charging is nice but the real benefit is the intergation with the nav screen -- being able to use the joystick or voice command to navigate playlists, etc. without having to mess with the iPod itself or take your eyes off the road. The nav screen is also great for getting much more data on audio and radio in general and has a nice, big rear view camera. But everyone has different priorities. These were just ours.
#354 of 478 Re: [lithnights] by golic Feb 07, 2009 (6:57 am)
Replying to: lithnights (Feb 06, 2009 7:58 pm) Yes, we utitlize the 3rd row for both car seats and boosters. When they were younger, we would get them in the car, then just open the hatch and buckle them that way. Now the older kids can buckle themselves or they will buckle the 3 year old in the car seat if she is back there. As a previous poster said and I can attest - the kids do love the back row. The Hockey test: Test one - was to see if I could lay the stick flat with the third row seats up. This failed on the flex and barely made it in the enclave. My son is 8 and his stick is only going to get bigger over the next few years. Test two - was can I get the hockey bag behind the 3rd row. The problem with the flex was the body molding narrows - and it was just not going to fit. I didn't have the bag with me for the enclave test, but I am pretty sure it would have been like getting a 10bls of potatoes into an 8lb bag. The Pilot storage area behind the 3rd row, does not narrow in, it is square with the car and now it has a small well. The stick lays flat and the bag fits in like a glove. I will say this, the Flex was very impressive but just not practical for a sports family with 4 kids. The Buick is nice as well, but I think you can get just as much car for a lot less money with the Pilot, Flex or CX9.
#355 of 478 Re: [lithnights] by nxs138 Feb 10, 2009 (7:21 pm)
Replying to: lithnights (Feb 06, 2009 7:58 pm) We have the CX-9, and had the same dilemma as you did, since we only have 2 young kids (2 and 4 years old) in carseats: should we get vehicle with a 3rd row? Well, we use the 3rd row maybe 4 times a year, whenever grandparents come over and we want to take one car. Getting into that third row isn't the easiest for older folks, even though the seats in the second row fold down and push forward. This is mainly due to the height of stepping in and out. We end up sticking the kids in the 3rd row (our 4 year old actually doesn't like that one bit) so that the grandparents have an easier time getting in and out. Other than that, the 3rd row is always folded down, which gives you tons of space. Personally I would have been fine with a 2-row vehicle, something like a Murano, which would have likely been a bit smaller and lighter, thus better on gas. But to the CX-9's credit, it drives like a European sedan and I love taking it out on the twisties. So I guess it's a good compromise, in my case.
#356 of 478 Resale value comparison CX-9 vs. Highlander by ewsnc Feb 22, 2009 (3:24 pm)
After reading through this thread, I got an impression that Highlander may have an edge of better resale value. So did a quick comparison of 2007 Highlander Limited vs. 07 CX-9 Grand Touring, both AWD with 30000 miles, and default equipment options on KBB.com. Here are the results: Highlander: Excellent: $21245 Good: 20195 Fair:$18745 CX-9: Excellent: $22575 Good: 21475 Fair:$20025 You may get slightly different numbers using your zip code. But the trend likely stay the same. With Mazda's aggressive incentives ($3k for 09 models), I think CX-9 represents tremendous values. I priced at local dealers 2009 CX-9 GT vs. Highlander LTD, similarly equipped, and consistently got at least $2K lower for the CX-9. I'm interested in both cars but lean toward CX-9 for this great look inside out and outstanding handling and ride. Welcome any thoughts. Replies to this message: steve_ (Feb 22, 2009 8:58 pm)
#357 of 478 Re: Resale value comparison CX-9 vs. Highlander [ewsnc] by steve_ HOST Feb 22, 2009 (8:58 pm)
Replying to: ewsnc (Feb 22, 2009 3:24 pm) Edmunds would give the edge to the Toyota for the '07 models in those styles, using a Houston zip code. CX-9 True Cost to Own is $45,251 over 5 years Highlander True Cost to Own is $44,075 over 5 years. You can run the numbers for new or used models and for different trims and zip codes.
#358 of 478 Pilot v. CX-9 by mommy_of_two Apr 01, 2009 (9:57 am)
We have two kids ages 4 and 5 and currently drive a Volvo S60 and have been looking for something with more room to carry additional passengers and more flexibility for the family - i.e. carrying larger items since we do not have a truck. We drove almost every three-row seat SUV and CUV on the market. Our decision came down to between the CX-9 and Pilot. I also like the highlander for the way it handled and smooth ride, but the interior material was not kid-friendly. Every used highlander I've seen didn't seem to "wear" well. I loved the look of the CX-9 and the way it handled on the highway. It was fun to drive. The only negative for me was the runners in the floors - I could just image how much junk would end up down in the runners with the kids. My husband who is tall felt that the CX-9 seats where too short and too cramped. We ended up getting a 09 Pilot. I don't like the look of the Pilot, but it was much more practical for us as a family. With the boxy design, it gives it much more room inside. We didn't feel cramped. Because of the type of tires (so my husband says) it doesn't drive as smooth on the road as the CX-9. I wished I could get more of the CX-9 look with the practical interior of the Pilot, but my husband is super happy with the Pilot and we got a good deal, so I think it was the best decision. We have a long road trip planned this summer and it will be nice to have some room for travel. I read through this whole discussion before buying and appreciate everyone's input. Thanks! Replies to this message: thegraduate (Apr 01, 2009 7:21 pm)
#359 of 478 Re: Pilot v. CX-9 [mommy_of_two] by thegraduate Apr 01, 2009 (7:21 pm)
Replying to: mommy_of_two (Apr 01, 2009 9:57 am) Thanks for sharing, and be sure to stop in and tell us how your family is liking the Pilot after a few thousand miles!
#360 of 478 March sales, 2009 by ceric Apr 01, 2009 (9:56 pm)
Pilot: 6789 Highlander: 5404 CX9: 1795 MDX: ~2200 Veracruz: 1587
#361 of 478 April sales, 2009 by ceric May 01, 2009 (10:48 pm)
Pilot: 6569 Highlander: 5595 CX9: 1179 Varecruz: 1206 MDX: 2337 Replies to this message: nxs138 (May 02, 2009 3:08 pm) citivas (May 02, 2009 6:03 pm) nxs138 (May 03, 2009 2:03 pm) and 2 more...
#362 of 478 Re: April sales, 2009 [ceric] by nxs138 May 02, 2009 (3:08 pm)
Replying to: ceric (May 01, 2009 10:48 pm) I'm still amazed that Honda is selling so many Pilots: general reviews make it seem like an average SUV, even Consumer complains about lackluster interior fit and finish, poor acceleration, low mpg, and road noise (it rates below all the SUVs you have listed in May sales). I guess it does have good functionality, though. Then again, it is a Honda. Might be the reason why a few colleagues at work want to buy the new Honda Insight Hybrid, even though the new upcoming Prius is almost the same base price, bigger, quieter, and gets nearly 10 mpg more....ah well. Replies to this message: citivas (May 02, 2009 6:03 pm) nxs138 (May 03, 2009 2:03 pm) berri (May 03, 2009 3:48 pm) and 1 more...