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 8 of 48: 1; ...; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11; ...; 48; Prev; Next; Last

#69 of 478 I'll give a good reason by rmp690 Jul 18, 2008 (1:28 pm)
Personally, I don't understand why anyone who needs a third row would choose any of these CUVs/SUVs over a minivan. But, like you stated, to each their own. I'm not fan of SUV's - I've always been a sports car guy. But one good reasons to buy a 3-row SUV over a minivan is AWD. We have a Caravan (best American car I've ever owned) for our four kids. We recently moved into a new house with a steep driveway - and neither our van, nor my BMW will go up it with 1/2" of snow on it. We've decided we must trade both cars for AWD. Easy for me - there are a lot of AWD sports sedans out there. Impossible for my wife. The only AWD minivan sold in America is the Toyota Siena. While the literature and website say AWD is offered on the LE model, try finding anything less than a fully loaded XLE ($38,000+) on the lot - and then there is only one, in a color you don't like, and they want full sticker. Not to mention the fact that you have to deal with the Toyota "got you by the b***s" arrogance. So, we're stuck getting an SUV to get three rows and AWD. I have to say, though, the CX-9 is a pretty good compromise. It is nearly as roomy as our regular-length Caravan, and it drives as much like an X5 as any SUV I've ever driven. In fact, it's better than an X5, because the new X5 third row is a carnival novelty seat. In fact, if my wife decides she just has to bend over for Toyota to get an AWD van (probably a used one, if we can find one), I may just get the CX-9 to replace my 325i. I liked it that much, and it wouldn't hurt if we both had three rows of seats.
#70 of 478 PS: Test Drove the Highlander by rmp690 Jul 18, 2008 (1:42 pm)
Good car. Unbelievable gaffe by Toyota to not split the third row seat. This is a dealbreaker for us, since we cannot go on vacation (or to out of town baseball tournaments) without folding down half of the back row. As my previous post indicates, I'm not much of a Toyota / Honda fan, anyway. It's not the cars, it's the dealers. Positive impressions of the 2008 highlander: Great ride. Beautiful interior materials/dash design. Nice exterior design. Good stereo. Negatives: The afformentioned third row seat. A little disconnected from the road. Steering/road feel nowhere near as precise and linear as the Mazda. Hate the fact that within five minutes of your arrival on the lot, the salesmen start "preparing" you that "they don't move on the Toyotas (price)". I have driven many BMW X3's and X5's as loaners when my 325 has been in for service (it's got 86,000 miles on it, so it hasn't been unreliable). BMW proved you can make an SUV that handles in the turns. I've never driven a CX-7, but the CX-9 is only the second SUV I've driven that can compare with the BMW (the others are the two Infinity models). I told my wife right after the test drive, this is a poor man's X5, and we can stop looking, now. Replies to this message: citivas (Jul 18, 2008 5:21 pm) cx7lover (Jul 19, 2008 5:27 am) nxs138 (Jul 19, 2008 7:21 am)
#71 of 478 Re: PS: Test Drove the Highlander [rmp690] by citivas Jul 18, 2008 (5:21 pm)
Replying to: rmp690 (Jul 18, 2008 1:42 pm) It's the little things that are holding me back on the CX-9. After years of waiting to replace my car (we have gone through 3 for my wife in that time), I really want great electronics. I am a electronics power user and early adopter in general. But the electronics system on the Mazda is the weakest of the bunch and the source of the "reliability" issues. Their nav is as useless as the Toyota's, but with a much weaker UI. Toyota (more) and Honda’s (somewhat) nav screen’s truly control the rest of the cars as well, including climate, audio, preferences, trip, etc. Mazda’s doesn’t. Toyota’s screen is easy to navigation satellite radio. Mazda not so much. Toyota you can pick your sat radio provider. Honda you can actually control your iPod from the nav screen – frankly this should be a standard in EVERY car these days. Mazda let’s you plug it in but doesn’t control it, and, oh wait you want sat radio AND an iPod, sorry can’t do it. Dumb. The real world mileage people are reporting is very disappointing as well. Other than that, it seems like a great car. Definitely drives the best in the group. Way better in fact. I guess for some people the electronics aren’t that big a deal, I’m just not one of them. Replies to this message: cx7lover (Jul 19, 2008 5:27 am) nxs138 (Jul 19, 2008 7:21 am)
#72 of 478 Re: CR [steve_] by msam Jul 19, 2008 (2:38 am)
Replying to: steve_ (Jul 18, 2008 11:49 am) I did not catch that article about CR on truedelta before u mentioned it. Thanks for that and MT as well. To citivas - The real world mpg reported for the Mazda CX9 on average seems to be as one would expect. Replies to this message: citivas (Jul 19, 2008 5:25 am) aviboy97 (Jul 19, 2008 5:38 am) msam (Jul 19, 2008 9:25 am) citivas (Jul 19, 2008 11:24 am) and 12 more...
#73 of 478 Re: CR [msam] by citivas Jul 19, 2008 (5:25 am)
Replying to: msam (Jul 19, 2008 2:38 am) To citivas - The real world mpg reported for the Mazda CX9 on average seems to be as one would expect. Not sure what this means. If you mean for a heavy, 3-row SUV in general, I guess I don't understand since the non-Hybrid Highlander is comparable (within 5%) but has meaningfully better real world mileage (about 20%). Replies to this message: aviboy97 (Jul 19, 2008 5:38 am) msam (Jul 19, 2008 9:25 am) citivas (Jul 19, 2008 11:24 am) nxs138 (Jul 19, 2008 1:46 pm) and 4 more... waygrabow (Jul 19, 2008 6:07 pm) and 6 more...
#74 of 478 Re: PS: Test Drove the Highlander [citivas] by cx7lover Jul 19, 2008 (5:27 am)
Replying to: citivas (Jul 18, 2008 5:21 pm) The reliability issues we're just first year issues, Mazda has some great aftermarket iPod adapters that are extremely superior to most interfaces. http://www.neocaraudio.com/product_info.php?products_id=5044 That allows control from the steering wheel, and the NAVI screen, if you want SAT and iPod, you get the Mazda Switch box. done. What else is there? Review from a CX-7 owner. http://www.mcx7.com/showpost.php?p=19535&postcount=5
#75 of 478 Re: CR [citivas] by aviboy97 Jul 19, 2008 (5:38 am)
Replying to: citivas (Jul 19, 2008 5:25 am) Lemme get this straight, you say the Highlander (non-Hybrid) gets 20% BETTER real world FE then the CX-9??? I'm really curious as to what math did you use to calculate that? According to this article by Edmunds, the Highlander averages 20mpg and the CX-9 got 18.4. 1.6mpg's does not constitute 20% better efficiency.
#76 of 478 Re: PS: Test Drove the Highlander [citivas] by nxs138 Jul 19, 2008 (7:21 am)
Replying to: citivas (Jul 18, 2008 5:21 pm) We have owned a CX-9 GT AWD for about 5000 miles now, and gas mileage has come down to a best of nearly 22 mpg on the highway (all highway driving on a road trip), and 18 mpg in mixed driving. In the winter, the mixed driving was around 16-17 mpg, not sure if it's the cold or the different gas formulation. So gas mileage isn't outstanding by any means, but right there with all other SUVs (if you read the forums). If you have a lead foot, you'll get much worse than what I've posted. The CX-9 drives like a European sedan, which is why we chose it over the GM Lambdas. It also drives "smaller" than the Lambdas. The Highlander was also a nice option, but lack of 3rd row split seat was a dealbreaker. Toyota goofed on that one. The new Pilot looked versatile, but boy, we just didn't like the look, especially the front end. That's mostly due to my wife, who doesn't like the "trucky" look. My wife is the main driver of the CX-9, and she loves it. I've taken it out on the twisties, and Mazda really did a good job with minimizing body roll and feeling connected to the road. It would be even better if it had a bit more low-end torque (it seems to shine above 2500 rpm), but you can really throw the car around and still feel confident in the way it responds. I didn't get that feeling with the Highlander or the Acadia.
#77 of 478 by citivas Jul 19, 2008 (8:25 am)
From reading the forum, you will find that is not right where the Highlander comes out, and it is just as heavy. I didn't just go off the Edmunds review, which only was dealing with a very limited test period, but I built a spreadsheet and read through page after page of the real-world MPG posts on this forum from users (I don't think there were enough for the 2009 Pilot yet to be adequate for comparison). If you do that for these three cars, the gap between the Highlander and the CX-9 increases from the approximately 10% reported in Edmunds test to approximately 20%. I also checked out the comments on the reviews and the posts on some other sites. Even 10% is more than it should be. That works out to a lot annually. I haven't ruled out the CX-9; that is just one of the "cons" that is weighing on the decision. All I was pointing out is some people keep justifying the low MPG as inevitable for these CUV's but the Highlander proves they could be better. The Highlander is far from a perfect car, but it proves there is more to be done by most manufacturers in fuel efficiency. And even with all that, it has the largest towing capacity of the group. Replies to this message: cx7lover (Jul 19, 2008 9:17 am)
#78 of 478 Re: [citivas] by cx7lover Jul 19, 2008 (9:17 am)
Replying to: citivas (Jul 19, 2008 8:25 am) You have to weigh in the other things as well, starting off with a considerably smaller third row and just less space. They're reasons why it's lighter, being smaller is one of them. I had a CX-9 AWD and got an amazing 22mpg on the highway and 18mixed. The MPG gets better as the engine is broken in and I got those numbers with 10K on the odo.