Honda Pilot vs Mazda CX-9 vs Toyota Highlander

446 messages, Last post on Nov 11, 2009 at 11:33 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 11 of 45: 1; ...; 8; 9; 10; 11; 12; 13; 14; ...; 45; Prev; Next; Last

#99 of 446 Re: You can ZOOM ZOOM better [ch1rravu] by nxs138 Jul 25, 2008 (6:35 pm)
Replying to: ch1rravu (Jul 25, 2008 12:31 pm) Has anybody gotten monthly sales figures for CX-9 compared to Highlanders vs Pilots to see how well each brand/model is doing ? Overall Toyota sales are down 11.5% as compared to this time last year, while Mazda is up 3.7% (both based on a daily selling rate for June). Highlander sales are down 31%, while CX-9 sales are down only 6.4%. As far as absolute numbers, Toyota has always outsold Mazda in terms of shear volume. Mazda caters to a more sport-minded crowd, and have always had less models to offer. But as you can see, the Highlander is taking a beating, while the CX-9 is doing a nice, steady job.
#100 of 446 Self conflicting statements by ch1rravu Jul 25, 2008 (7:46 pm)
Some folks may be saying Mazda is offering more discount (over $3K-4K under invoice!!), if CX-9 roped in that many awards, why does it need that /rebate/ push ? All we are hearing is one is lucky if Highlander can be had for under 1K below invoice. What little I know, Toyota does what it calls - product mix changes, and during such shifts, its expected one model sells more than the others. MAZDA is pushed to being a a niche player (note: sidelined), considered one or two trick pony. Come 10 years now, would you believe Mazda, which is under controlling stake of Ford, is going to be steadfast and honor its commitment to its product line(s), parts and service and continue to make and support CX-9 model? Some of you guys can have CX-9, it may not be a bad vehicle on first year or two of ownership. Wait till those lease-returns start trickling in .. By all means - I also enjoy driving sportsy vehicle occationally say 'stang, but do I want to own one knowing its reliability, and how stiff driving hurt backs on long-trips history ? pass, No doubt, Highlander is not sports tuned, and may feel slightly wobbly to somebody's tastes, thats a choice folks gotta make. What award did Highlander win? "Peoples Choice Award" - just check sales numbers. Where did CX9 rank among 'sumer 'rports rankings? mid-pack fourth !! Where did I heard the quote "The CX-9's sales are a drop in the bucket compared with Toyota's Highlander" ? No wonder CX-9 is a one trick pony. By the way its smaller brother CX-7 dropper well over 50% in June. So, you can't really compare company to company sales volume .. By all means - nobody saying CX-9 is a bad vehicle, only time will determine the truth, and its re-sale value., until that time zoom fast for what may be a short-lived fun! (CX-9 is based on stretched Ford Edge, we know resale values of Ford Edge !!) What did 'sumer 'rports have to say on CX-9? -- "First-year reliability has been below average" "Braking distances .. long in our tests on both dry and wet pavements (compared to all 6 competitors)" "Low Fuel economy" Sure Highlander has some low points as well, but it seems more people are willing to make a choice with safe, reliable vehicle more than a niche-market player. Replies to this message: aviboy97 (Jul 26, 2008 8:27 am) nxs138 (Jul 26, 2008 2:12 pm)
#101 of 446 Re: You can ZOOM ZOOM better [ceric] by qs933 Jul 25, 2008 (11:43 pm)
Replying to: ceric (Jul 25, 2008 3:18 pm) I don't. I made my own choice considering my own needs and criteria. ... Yes, awarding winning is a big factor of mine when it comes to choosing vehicles. Interesting. You based your choice on your own criteria, of which winning an award based on someone else's criteria was a big factor. In all seriousness, I doubt anyone will regret purchasing any of these CUVs. Each is a little different. Everyone's motivation for choosing one over the other will be different too. Nothing wrong with that. I took a look at an '09 Pilot Touring this afternoon. Maybe it was the black interior, but the plastics used were an immediate turn-off. Like the Highlander, the dash and upper door panels are hard plastic. Unlike the Highlander, the texture and grain look and feel out of place for a $38K vehicle. The only advantage was the headliner, but since I don't spend much time staring at the ceiling, that's a minor plus. I also don't like the center seating position's ceiling-mounted seat belt. When installed, it looks terrible. When stowed, you have to remember to set it up whenever you plan on having a passenger in that position. It's a minor detail, but the Highlander has a seat-mounted center shoulder belt. Replies to this message: baggs32 (Jul 26, 2008 7:12 am) qs933 (Jul 26, 2008 1:37 pm) baggs32 (Jul 26, 2008 5:30 pm) and 1 more...
#102 of 446 by msam Jul 26, 2008 (3:05 am)
It seems to me people are trying to convince one another based on their own needs. Everyone's needs and expectations are different and hence different vehicles are going to suit their differing needs. Why would a person who earns 200 K a year worry about fuel economy as much as a person earning 100 K a year (if money spent towards fuel is the main consideration)? Why would a person who wants regular 3rd row seating for adults consider a Toyota Highlander? Why would a person who likes the nice comfy ride of a mini van, go for a vehicle that is more tuned towards sportiness? Also, in some posts people are talking about price to own after a few years and seem to be saying that Toyota will turn out much better than a Mazda. Looking at available data, the difference is much lesser than what people would imagine. See ya...
#103 of 446 by ch1rravu Jul 26, 2008 (5:27 am)
100K or 200K a year earnings ? you ought to shoot for X5 or some other fancier models to befit your lifestyle. Betcha, many Highlander customers earn less than that. Ofcourse, many sensible 100k-200k+ guys buy it too, but largest volumes comes from middle class families, I surmise. Somewhere I recall reading about Highlander's sales drop in June: Discontinuing of 4-cylender models, while gas prices are hovering over $4+ ! If you notice on prices paid discussion, even in Car's sale prices, the difference between V4 (or I4 you may want to call it) and V6 models has narrowed significantly. ie., what used to be V6 premium is fast evaporating under prevailing $4+ gas prices. No wonder this broader phenomenon affects SUV/CUV purchase decisions too. I am /making an educted guess/ at this point, but has anybody got sales figures where folks who once were in market for V4 Highlander cross shopped for RAV4 ? Also, has V4 RAV4 made more sales compared to V6 ? Now, what /real/ choice do people have that want 4-cylender alternative to CX-9? Try RAV4 mebbe, seriously ! Like somebody said earlier, its your choice what vehicle you want to buy, but make a sensible one at that.
#104 of 446 by msam Jul 26, 2008 (7:00 am)
Even with V6 when I test drive these 3 row SUVs it feels a bit underpowered. So, I think V4 will be worse. For 2 row SUVs V4 may be acceptable. Though since I am in the market for 3 row SUVs and only own V6 vehicles I don't know how that will work out. If one is looking for space, X5 is not an option. For a fuel efficient / gasoline-less vehicle, I am waiting for a plug-in electric vehicle.
#105 of 446 Re: You can ZOOM ZOOM better [qs933] by baggs32 Jul 26, 2008 (7:12 am)
Replying to: qs933 (Jul 25, 2008 11:43 pm) I also don't like the center seating position's ceiling-mounted seat belt. I hope that's for the 3rd row! Right? Nonetheless, that still sounds like a big turnoff to me too. Makes it look like that position, albeit it's probably a not often used position for most, was an afterthought. Also, how is it legal to trust owners to install something so important to personal safety? Did Honda find a loophole in the annals of safety laws or something? They do sell the Pilot as an 8 passenger SUV so I would expect nothing less than 8 *FACTORY INSTALLED* 3-point safetly belts. Do any other mfrs do this too? I never noticed it before. Replies to this message: qs933 (Jul 26, 2008 1:37 pm) baggs32 (Jul 26, 2008 5:30 pm) qs933 (Jul 26, 2008 6:41 pm)
#106 of 446 Re: Self conflicting statements [ch1rravu] by aviboy97 Jul 26, 2008 (8:27 am)
Replying to: ch1rravu (Jul 25, 2008 7:46 pm) The CX-9 is reality is not selling "3,000 below invoice". There is a $3000 dealer engagement money on the car, that makes it appear "$3000" below invoice. The CX-9 is not on a stretched Ford Edge platform. The Ford Edge is on Mazda's platform. Any educated automotive person know that the platform does not make the vehicle what it is, but rather what is placed on it. While CR had red dots for every catagorie on the CX-9 except for the audio system controls, it appears that CR based their reliability on that alone. Makes no sense. Besides, Toyota is not CR's favorite anymore with constant issues in quality and reliability as of late. We all know CR is not perfect, and you are nieve if you think they are. The CX-9 is not a "one trick pony". It happens to do everything better then the Highlander, except straight line acceleration and a slim FE average. To me, Toyota's are highly over rated. Yes, they are good mechanically, however, they have some of the cheapest materials I have ever seen on the interior. Styling makes me want to hang my self. And the drive....it the most slushy, non responsive vehicles on the market. While they get good remarks for dependability (which has taken a HUGE hit lately) they consistently rate near the bottom in comparison tests.
#107 of 446 Re: You can ZOOM ZOOM better [baggs32] by qs933 Jul 26, 2008 (1:37 pm)
Replying to: baggs32 (Jul 26, 2008 7:12 am) I also don't like the center seating position's ceiling-mounted seat belt. I hope that's for the 3rd row! Right? If I remember correctly, both the second and third row in the Pilot use a ceiling-mounted seatbelt. It's actually fairly common. Both the Nissan Murano (a two-row CUV) and the Mazda CX-9 use roof-mounted belts for the center position in the second row. As I mentioned, the Highlander has a seat-mounted center belt for the second row. Keep in mind: I'm sure the ceiling-mounted belt is just as safe as a seat-mounted belt. and it's far better than just a lap belt only that used to be common in center seating position. Replies to this message: baggs32 (Jul 26, 2008 5:30 pm) qs933 (Jul 26, 2008 6:41 pm)
#108 of 446 Re: Self conflicting statements [ch1rravu] by nxs138 Jul 26, 2008 (2:12 pm)
Replying to: ch1rravu (Jul 25, 2008 7:46 pm) Mazda is offering more discount (over $3K-4K under invoice!!), if CX-9 roped in that many awards, why does it need that /rebate/ push ? All we are hearing is one is lucky if Highlander can be had for under 1K below invoice. Let me illuminate you on why the Highlander might sell only $1k below invoice: MSRP Highlander Limited AWD: $34,350 Invoice Price: $30,571 Difference: $3779 MSRP CX-9 GT AWD: $34,655 Invoice Price: $32,041 Difference: $2614 Basically, the Highlander has a much lower invoice price than the CX-9. That's why dealers would likely not sell for thousands below invoice, since invoice is already low! So you're making fun of the CX-9 by saying you can get it $3000 below invoice, which would be $29,041. Yet you're somewhat proud to say that you can get the Highlander $1000 below invoice, which would be $29,571...IT'S THE SAME PRICE AS THE CX-9! You obviously have a bias against the Mazda, that's fine, but come on, at least do a bit of research before spouting off.