By CL request, a review of the new 2007 Mazda CX-9 Grand Touring.


http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/disp...ehicleCode=CX9



In a Nutshell: Competent and fairly well-built, but not particularly Mazda-sporty, silly marketing, and somewhat overstyled for my tastes.




Mazda, after Ford took over many of its functions in the late 1980's, originally entered the SUV world, in the early 1990's, with the Navajo, an obviously rebadged version of the Ford Explorer Sport, a 2-door model that, at least in my part of the country here, never even approached the enormous sales numbers of the 4-door Explorer models at the time. The Navajo, inside and out, was virtually indistinguishable from the Explorer Sport.....with only very minor differences in trim, grille, steering wheel, and company logos. So, if Ford couldn't couldn't sell the Explorer Sport in large numbers under its own name, it certainly is no surprise that Mazda, which, at the time, was not an SUV-oriented company like Ford, could not either (and Ford never gave Mazda a 4-door Navajo). After several years of mostly collecting dust and bird droppings on dealer lots, the Navajo was quietly pulled from the marketplace. Meanwhile, however, the mid-late 1990's SUV craze was on, and then, of course, the late 1990's rise of the Crossover, car-based AWD SUV's, so the marketers at Ford and Mazda decided to try again with a Mazda SUV to expand its lineup. Ford and Mazda jointly designed the smaller-than-Explorer, car-based, FWD/AWD Ford Escape/Mazda Tribute....later to be joined by the Mercury Mariner.
The Tribute, again not surprisingly, sold much better than the ill-fated Navajo. The Tribute had the same general shape as the Escape, but a different, more sport-oriented suspension, a different stering wheel, dash, and trim....all more in line with Mazda's "Kansei" sport-orientation and driving feel......an advertising slogan that, IMO, made FAR more sense than the current, inane "Zoom Zoom" line that is about a second-grade level in school.


Once again, however, Ford short-changed Mazda, by witholding the Toyota-licensed Hybrid system in the Escape/Mariner from the Tribute, but no matter....the Tribute was relatively successful even in spite of this. And I myself liked the more conservative squared-off lines and interior styling of the Escape/Mariner/Tribute, more than I do the styling of the Ford, Lincoln, and Mazda vehicles that replace them....including the Edge, CX-7 and CX-9.

So, now, enter the third-generation of Mazda SUV's....the Mazda5, the larger CX-7 (already covered in a previous review), and the still larger CX-9.
The Mazda5 is essentially a redone, semi-minivan styled, 2+2+2 seating version of the small, Mazda3 sedan. The CX-7 is a slightly larger version of this platform, with front-end and front-fender styling cues from the Mazda RX-8 sports car. The CX-9, subject of this review, is a slightly stretched, redone version of the Mazda6 platform that is also shared with the new Ford Edge and an upcoming Lincoln version. Its general styling more or less mimics the CX-7's, but differs slightly in the front fenders, grille, headlight, and D-pillars....still not enough to easily tell them apart unless you are up very close. Also redesigned this year is the Tribute itself......but that is, of course, the subject of another thread/review, and I won't get into that here.
The new lineup now gives Mazda FOUR minivan/SUV type vehicles....and this from a company that one had trouble moving the lone Navajo off the lots. The CX-9 is easily the largest, plushest, heaviest, best-equipped, and......not surprisingly.......the most expensive of the four. Still, no Hybrid versions (yet) for any Mazda product, (and of course, being a Ford subsidiary, Mazda cannot offer one without Ford's OK ).

Even without a hybrid, though, the CX-9 has plenty to offer. Three versions are offered...Sport, Touring, and Grand Touring. Only one drivetrain is offered...a transverse-mounted 3.5L V6, automanual Sport-Shift automatic, and a choice of FWD or AWD. All three versions have the FWD/AWD choice. The list prices of the three versions don't really vary that much. Sport versions start just under 30K and Grand Touring versions just under 34K.....making, IMO, the Grand Touring version a fairly good deal....unless you're like me and prefer cloth to leather. In that case, you have to get the Sport....the other versons come with leather.


Many safety-related devices come standard in all three versions. One area where Ford DIDN'T short-change Mazda this time is in giving the CX-9 the Volvo-designed Roll-Stability System, standard on all three CX-9 versions (Volvo, of course, like Mazda, being also Ford-controlled). The system allows a small amount of body roll (I'll get into the handling details in the review below), but steps in to prevent rollovers when things get really dangerous.


Although Mazda still clings to the silly Zoom-Zoom image in its ads, I didn't find the CX-9, overall, to be particularly sporty or responsive. Part of this, of course, has to do with its size....it is not only heavier but much less agile than the smaller CX-7, and did not have the steering feel, either.
And even the CX-7, IMO, did not have the stering feel of earlier Mazdas (I drove exclusively Mazda sedans myself in the mid-80's to mid-90's, and owned three of them, before switching to Toyota and then Lexus).



So, then......just what IS the CX-9 like, and how does it measure up in detail? Let's find out.











Model Reviewed: 2007 Mazda CX-9 3.5L AWD Grand Touring



Base Price: $33,875


Major Options:

Cargo Net: $40

Pearl Paint Charge: $200

Moonroof/Bose/CD: $1760

Towing Package: $525

GT Assist/NAV: $2500



Destination Charge: $595



List Price as Reviewed: $39,495





Exterior Color: Crystal White Pearl
Interior: Black Leather



Drivetrain:

3.5L transverse-mount DOHC V6, 263 HP @ 6250 RPM, 249 ft-lbs. torque @ 4500 RPM

6-speed Sport-Shift automatic.

Active, Torque-split full-time AWD system.






PLUSSES:



Well-designed brake pedal with no sponginess.

Vented disc brake rotors on all four wheels instead of rear solid ones.

Relatively small price difference between trim levels.

Smooth, quiet V6 engine.

Regular, 87 Octane recommended.

Relatively solid-feeling doors.

Smooth, sedan-like ride, comparable to non-MazdaSpeed 6.

Plenty of room inside, front and rear, for adults.

Slickly done White-Pearl paint job.

Plushest, highest-quality interior of any Mazda.....much nicer than CX-7.

High-quality stereo with Bose speakers.

Cloth seats available on Sport model for those who don't want leather.

Well-done interior hardware.

Well-designed gauges except for the red-orange lighting.

Digital dash-mounted gear display even with transmission in non-sport, full-automatic mode.

Relatively easy-to-use radio controls and displays even with NAV system.

Third-row seat in back a little larger than average for this size vehicle.

Well-designed steering wheel with cruise control and radio volume functions.

ABS, EBD, Traction, Stability, and Roll-Stability systems all standard.

Slick-as-butter climate controls with effective A/C system.







MINUSES:



Silly "Zoom-Zoom" marketing....and the CX-9 does not have that much zoom.

Extra charge for Crystal White Pearl paint.

Transverse-mounted V6 means a rather complex AWD system.

Plastic engine cover hampers too much underhood access.

MazdaSpeed versions and manual-transmission versions, as yet, not available for enthusiasts.

Mazda and BMW automatic Sport-Shift patterns opposite from most vehicles.

Ugly (IMO) front-end styling.

Gimmicky (IMO) Mazda web site.

Uncomfortable exit from rear seat.

Power-steering effort and feel not as good as other Mazdas.

Heavy vehicle weight hampers performance.

Not as agile or responsive as little-brother CX-7.

Manual prop-rod hood not compatible with this class of vehicle.

Outside mirror housings and hardware somewhat flimsy.

Odd-looking two/tone/multi-patterned black/gray leather seats.

Red-orange dash lights not well-suited for bright sunlight.

The usual funeral-home paint color choice.

Poorly designed rear wiper arm.

Awkward zig-zag automatic shifter pattern.

Step-on parking brake....but not particularly awkward.

OK handling but with some body roll.






The first impression of this vehicle, as you walk up to it, as I mentioned above, is a strong resemblance to little-brother CX-7, particularly in the front end......little besides the CX-9's somewhat larger size gives it away. The obviously RX-8-inspired styling, with the bulging front fenders, cat's-eye headlights, strongly wedge-shape nose, and Acura-smile grille, may turn some people on, but is just not my cup of tea. For one thing, I was a strong admirer of the Escape and Tribute (I considered the Escape one of the top ten Domestics for the money), and, like with Chris Bangle BMW styling, I find the CX-7 / CX-9 general shape difficult to get used to....particularly the front end. However, styling is personal and subjective, and I know my dislike may be somebody else's dream machine....so take my styling comments with a grain of salt.

The actual body itself is well-built, with durable, solidly attached trim/chrome. Most of the exterior hardware seemed of high-quality and well-done, but I disliked two things. First, though the swiveling outside mirrors had a strong and durable housing, they felt flimsy on the plastic piece where they joined the main body of the car. Second, the black plastic rear wiper-arm, though actually hinged in two places, did not seem to want to pull up enough to clear the window glass to fit in a new blade insert...that could make it difficult when the original blades wear out and need replacing. (My 2006 Outback has the same problem...that was fixed on the 2007 model). In my part of the county, with the ozone level in the air, the rubber blades wear out every 18 months or so on the average, and either the blades or the entire arm have to be replaced.

The paint job is quite well-done, especially with the extra-cost ($200) White Pearl Crystal Mica on my test vehicle (I chose white because it was one of the AWD Grand Touring models in stock, a clear sunny morning, and the sun was beginning to heat things up...white obviously stays cool). Up close, it is hard to tell this paint from the superb Lexus White Pearl used on many of its products. Mazda is one of the few Japanese-nameplate manufacturers to charge extra for some colors (it is much more common with German and Sweedish nameplates). I am generally not a fan of that practice, but in this case it may actually be worth it for the White Pearl.....especially when you look at the rest of the paint colors offered. Yes, just more of the usual funeral-home stuff, including TWO blacks (Brilliant Black Clearcoat and Sparkling Black Mica) and TWO grays (Galaxy Gray and Liquid Platinum). The Copper Red, Black Cherry (actually a super-dark wine red) and Stormy Blue have a little class to them, despite the general dullness.

Whatever color you choose, it should at least stay reasonably well-protected from road-spray debris along the lower-body edges. Unlike the poorly-designed sharp tuck-ins on the new Acura MDX, the CX-9's lower-body appears to better-resist spray and debris kicked up from the front tires (This, of course, will reduce the need for my ever-present SCRATCH-OUT). The black lower-body edge and wheel-well cladding, like on most car-based crossover vehicles of this type, seems well-designed, of high quality, and runs around the entire lower body of the car...front, sides, and back. The roofline, in conjunction with the CX-9's "sporty" image, appears a little lower and of course much more swept-back than the squarish Tribute's, but, surprisingly, does not cut out much headroom inside.....more on this in a minute.

Open the hood, unclip the prop-rod and put it into its hole (that's right......no gas-strut supports on an almost $40,000 vehicle) and the transverse-mounted 3.5L V6 fits in rather snug, although there is a little room to drop your hands down and get to some things on the front side of the block. The big, unneeded, (and idiotic, IMO) plastic engine cover, like on many other vehicles these days, blocks almost EVERYTHING on top of the engine block.
Like other AWD vehicles with transverse engines, and unlike Subaru and Audi, the CX-9 has a rather complex AWD system (not as complex, of course, as Acura's superb SH-AWD system) that requires extra gears and hardware to re-route the power back to the AWD system and front drive shafts behind the engine and transmission. The hood itself seemed of average quality and solidness....not particularly light of thin, but not tanklike either like on the
BMW X3 and X5.

Open the doors and get in.....like several other mid-sized crossover vehicles and SUV's I've tried at lately, the step-in height is not bad at all, and running boards are neither needed nor listed as a facory option or dealer-installed accessory. The doors close with a reasonably solid feel and "thud".
Inside, this is easily, as befitting its price, the plushest American-market Mazda interior I've seen yet. The leather, though not quite as smooth as of Jaguar/Lexus quality, is well-done, comfortable, and though the gray pattern and contrast that runs around the edge of the seats on the black interior gives it a rather odd, two-tone swirl, the power seats (power is optional in the Sport model) are quite comfortable, and adjust low enough for my big 6' 2" frame and ever-present baseball cap to clear the ceiling, even with the optional moonroof. Rear-seat legroom is unusually good...almost as good as the front, and the rear seats slide forward and back on manual tracks if desired, but don't appear to have the rake-recline seatbacks that some competing vehicles do. There is a hard plastic cover ridge on the outer edge of the rear seats that houses the tilt-down mechanism...it hits your butt as you slide out, but otherwise there are no major rear-seat discomforts. Headroom in the rear, while not quite as good as in the front due to the sweep-down rear roofline, is not bad either. Even the third-row seat, while, like with other vehicles of this type and primarily for children and small adults, still has more room than you usually expect in a seat of this type.

Like I said, the Grand Touring model has, in general, the plushest interior of any U.S.-market Mazda I've ever seen. Rich-looking, polished wood trim runs up the sides of the console, along the dash, and along the door panels. Classy, well-finished, high-quality chrome and metallic accents highlight and add to the wood in several places. Lesser CX-9 Sport and Touring models, unfortunately, make do without the wood trim and have a much more monochrome black interior, with much less metallic trim (Mazda calls it "Piano-Black") though beige leather is also available in the Touring model like it is in the Grand Touring. The Sport comes just one way...monotone black cloth, which, from a comfort point of view, would probably be my choice...but I LIKE that wood and metallic trim in the Grand Touring. (Never was a big fan of leather seats though....I even managed to get my old Lexus IS300 with cloth seats).

The dash gauges are generally well-designed and clear, and like other vehicles of this type, sit in little circular tunnels. In spite of the protection that the tunnels normally give from bright sunlight, for some reason, the CX-9's reddish-orange dash lights (red-orange chosen, of course, for that "sporty" look) tends to fade out a little in sunny conditions, even with the dash light control turned up. Not serious, but just a little noticeable. The interior switches, buttons, and controls were all of a very high quality and slickly done.....some appear and feel of higher quality than the more expensive Acura MDX and BMW X3 I just recently looked at. I liked the way Mazda integrated the NAV, radio, and climate controls....the radio and climate modes are up above and forward of the NAV screen, in a separate readout at the base of the windshield, and are not a complete mess like with BMW's I-Drive and Audi's MMI. ALL of the interior buttons and ALL of the interior controls were well-done and of high quality...I really didn't see and feel much of anything inside I didn't like, except for the foot-operated parking brake (I prefer a console-mounted lever) which, still, was not particularly awkward, and the definitely awkward zig-zag shifter pattern. (I have to put up with that ziz-zag nonsense on my Outback, too......Subaru got rid of the nice straight forward-back levers several years ago) BMW and Mazda shifters do have one feature that, while I didn't necessarily dislike it, takes some getting used to. In the automanual mode, you bump the lever up to down-shift, back to up-shift. Takes some getting used to.....be careful you don't redline the engine on shifts until you get used to the pattern, though, of course, the shift computer will step in to prevent any real engine abuse. Still, you could get a jolt to the drivetrain.

The stereo is of very high quality with the Bose speakers, and produces excellent sound (darn it...I forgot to bring AC/DC and Judas Priest with me). Like the Acura MDX stereo, it one of the best I have heard since the insanely good one in the Lexus LS460, and easily one or even two steps above the one in the BMW X3 last week. With the readout away from the NAV screen, up above with the climate readouts, it was also fairly easy to adjust and change stations, and of course, there are volume controls on the well-designed steering wheel.

The cargo area, as you would expect from the intruding third seat (which of course, can be folded away), and the sweepback rear roofline missing in the
more squarish Tribute, is not exactly a Chevy Suburban's, but, with the third seat seat holds a reasonable amount of cargo, and the quality of the hardware and trim back there is about equal to the X3's and the MDX's......one step below the superb Audi Q7 real chrome and metal hardware. The cargo floor, like most mid-sized SUV's, lifts up to expose an under-floor compartmantalized tray with the jack and tire-change hardware, and there are built-in 12-volt outlets.


OK....Mazda, like BMW's, are generally built to drive, so lets go driving. Start-up is rather unusual, even by the new electronic standards these days. A hard-plastic but comfortable, easy-to-use, grip-**** is built right into the ignition switch...there is no key slot. A flat, card-thin, plastic "key" transponder must be with you or in the car for the switch to work. With the "key" on you or close to you, twist the **** just like would a conventional key, and the 3.5 L V6 fires right up and settles immediately into a Lexus-smooth,quiet idle. Like always, adjust seats, mirrors and belts, bring the shifter back into Drive (the auto part of the shifter, unlike the manual sport-shift part, works conventionaly), and off you go. One unusual feature I especially liked was the digital gear display on the dash that told you exactly what gear you were in, even in the full-automatic mode.....most vehicles have that only in the automanual mode. In fact, I wish that auto manufacturers would use a gear readout for MANUAL, clutch-operated transmissions....it would save a LOT of guessing, missed shifts, and, yes, damaged or ruined engines. Why they don't is beyond me.

Anyhow, the 4500-lb. weight of the Grand Touring model, plus the drag of the AWD system, plus (yes, I know) my own portly weight, despite the well-designed 6-speed transmission and fairly short final-drive unit, doesn't help the engine performance any. The engine is smooth and quiet, except for exahust noise on acceleration, and will get out of its own way, but not much else. The torque curve, unlike excessively peaky Honda/Acura engines, is flat enough that you get at least some response at low RPM's, and you do get a small shove in your back starting around 3000 RPM or so. But is not the "Zoom-Zoom" Mazda image by a long stretch.....so don't take this vehicle down to the drag strip on Friday and Saturday night to run with Mustangs and Camaros. It is plenty good for all normal driving, however, and it does seem to have enough reserve power, above 3000 RPM or so, for passing, for hill-climbing, and for reasonably heavy loads.

Much of the transmission, I have already described, but in general it is smooth-shifting and responsive, and the lever has a nice feel once you are out of that ridiculous zig-zag pattern into real driving. Just remember, like I said earlier, that, with Mazdas, back is UP and forward is DOWN....the engine will thank you for it.

The ride, perhaps due to the longish wheelbase, is rather smooth for a mid-sized SUV, and especially a MAZDA one....this in contrast to the firm, even harsh, rides of many other Mazda products. It was noticeably smoother than the ride on little-brother CX-7. Mazda, more so than almost than any other Japanese automaker, places a premium on steering response, sharp handling, and all-around sportiness, though they have sometimes, until the MazdaSpeed models debuted, lagged behind competitors in engine power (A MazdaSpeed or manual-transmission version of the CX-9 is not in the works yet that I know of). Anyhow, though you won't mistake this chassis and
suspension for that of a Lincoln Town Car or Buick Lucerne, you will find comparatively little of either the "Zoom-Zoom" ride or "Zoom-Zoom" handling. Bumps, while felt, are easily absorbed by the relatively supple (for a Mazda) suspension and steering response, while not sluggish, is not exactly Miata-quick either. Body roll, while kept in check by the standard Roll-Stability System, is likewise a little more noticeable than other Mazda products. Again, not severe, but just a little noticeable. The power steering effort is also not quite what you expect in a Mazda....and a little overboosted for my tastes, certainly not in the same league as the superb BMW X3 power steering I sampled last week. But....it must be remembered, though, that my comments about the steering and chassis refer to the Grand Touring model only, with its obvious bias toward luxury rather than sport. I did not cross-check or test out the Sport or Touring models......their steering and suspension systems might be a little more like those of conventional Mazdas.


But the car, as a whole, is pleasant to drive........I can think of lots worse automotive ways to spend several hours on a long trip. And the brakes are fully up to Mazda standards....with a smooth, German-like, firm pedal, NO sponginness, evenness of response and modulation, and even good spacing for my size-15 clown shoes, something that a lot of other vehicles don't have. In addition, instead of putting on solid rotors in back that are prone to warping with heat buildup, Mazda gives you nice vented rotors all four wheels, not just up front like on most non-high performance vehicles. That is something else that the entire industry, IMO, should be doing, and is still dragging their feet on.....standard vented rotors on all four wheels, on vehicles that have rear discs, of course......some entry-level and lower-priced vehicles still have rear drums.


So.....the verdict? IMO, Mazda has produced essentially what the Acura MDX, perhaps its closest competitor, should have been...and isn't. The CX-9 Grand Touring model trumps the new MDX in a number of areas.......interior quality, hardware, suspension, brakes, body design, body trim, a good steering wheel (the MDX's is terrible), seat comfort, interior room, usefulness of the 3rd-row seat, gear-dash readouts in all transmission modes, and simplicity of controls. The MDX, to be fair, has better dash lights, a slicker transmission shifter with a conventional pattern, a gas-strut-supported hood to the CX-9's cheap prop-rod, and better warranty and dealer service.

So.....my advice to Mazda? Dump the ridiculous, kid-mentality "Zoom-Zoom" campaign, get a better U.S-market web site (the present one is less than ideal), yank the cheap prop-rod and put a hood mechanism in the CX-9 worthy of its price, go to a better color for the dash lights (white back-lit ones are generally the best), drop the $200 charge for the White Pearl paint and offer more colors that will actually wake you up, dump the awkward full-automatic zig-zag shift pattern, and put the parking brake lever back on the console where it belongs. But, all in all, even with the CX-9 as it is (and I know I sound like a cliche when I say this).....there are lots worse ways to spend your hard-earned automotive dollars. Mazda, here, has come up with a pretty nice vehicle.

 

That was quick.

I didn't reat the whole review yet, but i wanted to say thanks for the nice job as usual.

Good of you to point out that it uses regular gas instead of expensive premium that too many cars now require. Big thirsty SUV that require premium gas (like the MDX) adds insult to injury.

You say there is no MS version or MT version. I don't think you will ever see such things. There is no market for that, these are minivan-like SUVS there are very few MT minivans or SUVs for that matter.

The MDX is about $6K more expensive, but may have better resale service and warranty.

If you are taking any more requests mine would be for the new Hyundai Veracruz which is yet another MDX/CX-9 type SUV. And in a few months when the all new Highlander comes out.

 

BMW offers a straight manual on the X3...of course, in my traffic-choked and stop-and-go area, it is not very popular. And, while there are no MazdaSpeed versions for the CX-9 planned yet that I know of (Robparata or 1SICKLEX will likely post it when there is), sport-oriented, high-performance SUV's are not unheard of in the industry....witness the old GMC Cyclone, a chopped, slammed, and lowered Turbo Blazer, the current 500 HP Porsche Cayenne Turbo, Mercedes AMG ML55, and Jeep 425 HP SRT8 Hemi Grand Cherokee.... a slammed, lowered version of the regular Grand Cherokee. The Jeep SRT, in a straight line, according to some tests I've read, actually outruns the $100,000 Cayenne Turbo 0-60 and in the quarter-mile....the Cayenne is powerful but heavy.

 

Well, if i was in the market for a SUV i would consider the CX-9. MMarshall i think you hit just about every point made on the CX-9.. Maybe Mazda and Ford should get back to the drawing board and fix these little quirks and maybe just maybe it will be equivalent to the X3 that you tested.. Maybe they should call it the Mazdaspeed9.. LOL.. A 300 HP turbo would sure carry the 4500lb SUV down the road..

Great Review..

 

Thanks. Apparantly a number of CL members are looking at this vehicle....I got several requests and PM's to check it out.

It is somewhat of a compromise, though, at least in the Grand Touring version, between traditional Mazda sportiness and a softer, more luxurious, car-based SUV like a Lexus RX350.

 

Great review, thanks! Big contrast to the write-up I'm currently doing on the Mazda5 haha.

 

That was quick... and a very good review as always.

 

Yes, if you are reviewing the Mazda5, you will find it is a much different, and much more agile, vehicle than the CX-9. Its seating arreangement is a miniature version of that in the Chrysler Pacifica and Mercedes R Class.

 

Nice review.

I have to disagree with you on the styling. I simply love it...I'm to be honest, I'm partial to Mazda styling since I have an RX-8. The CX-9 look almost Audi like to me, which is a good thing.

The extra charge for the crystal white pearl is definitely worth it. It's brighter and really stunning in person.


ZOOM ZOOM mmarshall!

 

I said, in the review, that styling is a personal matter, and that even though I don't like it, others might. I also said that the extra charge for the White Pearl, though annoying, might be worth it.

But.....ZOOM, ZOOM....No, I'm NOT changing my opnion of that. It is inane and juvenile.

 

Thanks, mmarshall! I've been away on a road trip for a couple of days w/o access and was surprised by your test when I logged in this morning. Very, very nice - thorough and complete; you answered my first questions I had when I saw this car for the first time Saturday night. It looks like it will be on my short list when I decide to trade the RX. Lexus obviously has some ground to cover in light of the latest MDX and now the CX-9. For the early leaders of this crossover segment, they are beginning to fade.

I'm sure that the next-gen RX will answer the competitors' latest offerings, but with more vehicles available in the segment, content, quality, and service are definitely going to be issues in addition to cost. At something like $10K over a similarly loaded CX-9, an RX is getting hard to justify. If you lease or trade every three years, the RX's retained value may make it the better bargain, but somewhere in the ownership cycle there is a breakover point where the higher resale no longer enters into the bargain.

Again, thanks for your great review

 

anyone who is interested in this class of SUV should have the new Higlander on the radar. Its already well shown on the Toyota website. Even tho it's an 08 it's been shown around to the press and (I think) will have a july release as an early 08.

We all know Toyota isn't dumb, they probably have been planning the Highlander for a good while to be bigger and better than the current gen. The new Highlander will be smack in the middle of the MDX and CX-9. I think. From the photos it looks very good, and for sure the 3.5L is a nice engine.

I'm sure Toyota will try to raise the bar with the Highlander. Unfortunatly the RX350 is caught in the time frame where the re-design is a year away (?) similar to the Honda Pilot.

I would love to wait for the new Pilot or new RX350 (if it would move to the 7-passanger class). But I can't wait 12 to 18 months so they are out.

 

Whoa mmarshall! That was a quick and thorough review, as always.

Glad to hear that the 3rd row seat is larger than the comparables.
I didn't see about the trunk space with the 3rd row seat when down, but does look roomy in the commercial where the family was at the beach.

The GX trunk space is practically useless, esp. if going on a weekend trip with cargos.

Looks is always subjective.

I read the (-) and fortunately, very minor points.
Most 3rd row exits are usually clumsy.

However, the new saturn suv (hint hint ) seems like it has a nice 3rd row exit where the 2nd seat slides forward

Now to check out your Q7 review, one of my favorite suv.

 

The rx and highlander don't have 3 row seatings, unlike the cx-9 and mdx.

GX is pretty small for 3 row seatings, so I can't imagine the rx adding 3 row, unless you want to be amputated

 

did you read my post? I said the new Highlander, if you look at the Toyota web site you will see it does have 3-rows thats the only way it's gonna come just like the MDX and the CX-9 etc.....

Also the Hignlander (current gen) has 3rd available, my sister-in law has one.

I said the 'future RX350 would hopefully have 3-rows. If it's related to the the highlander it will also.

The new highlander is bigger in every way than the current gen by several inches and 500 lbs. If you think the current gen Highlander is smaller than the Pilot the 08 will put that to bed.

here is the current gen Highlander with 3-rows: