4th Apr 2015, 19:44
Sorry to note that this review imparts little useful information concerning the vehicle being reviewed but lots of insight into the consumer writing the review.
A buyer that's done a poor job determining the type of car they should be driving in terms of their needs, preferences, features, budget and driving style is not a reflection on the vehicle purchased when it ends up not serving the buyer's needs.
Clearly this reviewer was suffering buyer's remorse and had significant issues with the selling dealership that should properly have been addressed in another forum.
6th Apr 2015, 20:08
An alternative could be a Subaru Outback. My brother has one and they've gotten quite large, can handle off roading well, and have a lot of storage and stowage capacity. Only slightly better fuel economy.
18th Jul 2015, 02:12
Interesting how there are always people commenting about haven't you test driven the car in the first place? What is the meaning of such comments? Don't you people know that nobody today buys a car without test driving it? So why comment like that? Do you feel the need to make the moral point? Besides, you seem to forget that when test driving a car, most people are in an emotional state and not all annoying things are noticed.
As for the OP, I have been there too, with different cars, and took an even bigger loss. We all learn from things like that. Can't have it all, but when you have the chance to find something, it's good for us, even with its faults.
18th Jul 2015, 15:31
Interesting how there are always people who will ignore their own shortcomings, like not noticing potential issues during a test drive due to their "emotional state", and instead will brand the vehicle as terrible once they have bought it.
23rd Feb 2016, 02:36
Interesting how so many people will repeat one another, without even reading the reviewer's comment.
23rd Feb 2016, 14:51
Your comment is right on the mark, unlike some of the later ones that try (but fail) to justify the reviewer's complaints about the vehicle.
14th Feb 2017, 22:31
Here's the crash test results.
26th Jan 2018, 02:20
I think the original review is a fake. The story is just not credible. Too many things wrong with one vehicle, and some that make no sense. For example, the reviewer thought the headroom was tight for a 5'5" person. Really? I drove an example CX-9 from that era a few times. I'm 6'4". A little tight for me, but easy for anyone 11 inches shorter. Or even 4.
Seems to be an awful lot of push and pull to a GM Suburban/Tahoe. Something you'd expect from a GM salesperson.
Other replies figured out that you wouldn't cross-shop those GM items with a Mazda. There's no logical comparison.
25th Jul 2018, 23:35
I am on my 2nd CX9 and I love the car. I don't know what you expected, but if you have to turn your whole body to see out of the car, then maybe you should buy a AMC Pacer.
You don't know your cars if you recommend buying a Ford Edge instead of a CX9, since the Edge is a CX9. If you looked at almost all the running gear of a Mazda, engine, transmission, shocks, suspension, almost everything, it is a Ford Edge. When this car came out, Ford owned a substantial portion of Mazda. Common in today's world of cars. So Mazda, to save $, used a lot of Ford parts. The Ford engine that you hate has 272hp, 270ft.lbs torque and that makes it among the most powerful in its class at the price point.
The biggest mechanical difference from the Ford, beside the body, is the "tuning" of the suspension and transmission that Mazda makes to better reflect their reputation for a sportier, more responsive car. It has highest ratings for crash, and stopping power.
So, you have your opinion, but it is kind of strange that the strongest points of the Mazda are the points that you think are lousy and hate. Every review I have read on the CX9 puts it at or among the top crossovers on the market.