Mazda CX-9 Review & Road Test

Pros: Confident handling, loads of space, great third row, luxury finish

Cons: Thirsty around town, visibility

By Nadine Armstrong | June 02nd, 2010

Add to shortlist

Price: $32,580 to $51,120

Our Rating:

Performance, Ride & Handling	3.5
Comfort and Interior	4
Quality & Design	4
Value & Features	4
Green	3

Mazda CX-9 Review & Road Test

When the standard is high, maybe bigger is better?

Model Tested:

2010 Mazda CX-9; 3.7-litre, V6, 24 valve, DOHC, S-VT, petrol, six-speed automatic – $63,186

CarAdvice Rating:

The Mazda CX-9 is a gutsy seven-seater of grand proportions and significant pomp. Who said size doesn’t matter? When the standard is high, maybe bigger is better?

Available in three specification levels; Classic $49,990, Luxury $56,990 and Grand Touring $63,186, the Mazda CX-9 caters to a variety of budgets.

I’m testing the range-topping Grand Touring, which sees me inexplicably excited with its abundance of space and numerous gadgets. I wasn’t expecting the drive experience to match this excitement.

The CX-9′s imposing dimensions – it measures 5,099mm long, 1,728mm tall and 1,936mm wide – are softened by nice curves, soft sweeping hips and that big smiley face. The CX-9 Grand Touring sits upon 20-inch alloy wheels that are fitting for a vehicle this large. Its rear end is complete with chrome twin exhaust pipes. Our white test vehicle has a lovely road presence.

The CX-9 offers one engine only, Mazda’s largest, a 3.7-litre V6. It produces 204kW at 6,250rpm and 367Nm at 4,250rpm. Ninety percent of this torque is available from 2,800rpm, which helps move this 2,097kg mass with unexpected haste. Mazda’s on demand Active Torque Split all wheel drive system adds an element of grace to this equation.

The V6 engine of the CX-9 does not disappoint. It’s gutsy and obedient, fun and powerful. Just a gentle prod of the throttle is enough to ignite the hardy V6, from standstill or on the roll. This enthusiasm does, however, call for some care to stay within the speed limits. During a long freeway haul that leaad us into some winding country hills, the CX-9 did not faulter. It sits beautifully flat and composed on the freeway with minimal road and wind noise, and displays admirable agility on more demanding corners.

The CX-9 runs a six-speed transmission that works in automatic mode, or manual sequential shift mode. It’s the same transmission used in the CX-7, but gear ratios have been tweaked to suit the CX-9s torque. Gear changes are seamless.

It strikes me as preposterous to quote acceleration statistics for a medium SUV, however, the CX-9 claims to move from 0-100km in just 8.5 seconds. That will throw the kids back in their seats.

The CX-9 runs MacPherson struts suspension up front and multi link on the rear that nicely handles the hefty CX-9. On some demanding, poor surface country roads, the CX-9 was more than fit for the task. Steep hills with a full load on board were no challenge. The CX-9 brakes fast and is quick to gather pace on the roll, dropping down through the gears to get the job done. The CX-9 is responsive and behaves with a lovely sense of confidence.

I found the CX-9 to be incredibly sure-footed. Balance, handling and on-road performance is impeccable. Steering is precise and firm in hand.

Large A-pillars are a significant obstacle to forward visibility. I found myself looking around the pillar, particularly on tight corners. Side visibility is good, and rearward perfect, thanks to a reversing camera.

The cabin of the CX-9 Grand Touring is spacious, plush and packed with features to impress even the most discerning buyer, to include: heated front seats with eight-way electric adjust (four-way for front passenger), rain-sensing wipers, reversing camera, three?zone climate control (dual-front and second row), power windows, power door locks, keyless entry, satellite navigation, a Premium Bose sound system with 10 speakers, 6?disc CD player with MP3 and iPod compatibility, a power tailgate, heated side mirrors with auto tilt down function for reversing, a glass sunroof, and the list goes on.

The CX-9s interior is luxurious and conveys a sophisticated image. Leather, chrome and high-shine plastics feature in perfect proportion to forge a level of grandeur that is fitting for its price tag.

The leather multi-function wheel is lovely in hand, while nicely bolstered leather seats and a large centre armrest cocoon your body like a finely crafted lounge chair.

The CX-9 also boasts loads of good storage compartments and robust drink holders. Fit for a family load.

The build feels solid. Doors feel big and sturdy but they are not too heavy or too cumbersome for kids to open and close.

The second row is comfortable and spacious, for all three passengers. You can easily accommodate three adult passengers; head, leg and shoulder room great. The second row also has its own climate control and two directional air vents.

Three child anchor points are available for second row fixing.

There are few vehicles that can boast a third row seating option that isn’t considered punishment for its occupants. It’s like the ‘naughty chair’ in mobile format. But this is not the case in the CX-9.

To start with, it’s easy to engage and access the third row. The second row of seats tilts and slides forward easily. You can do this from the kerb, or while seated in the third row.

The third row is comfortable and can accommodate adults. Foot room is slightly compromised, but it’s a rarity of space otherwise.

Third row passengers also enjoy dedicated lighting, adjustable headrests, cup holders and speakers. There are no directional air-vents, but in floor vents provide sufficient airflow to the third row.

Getting out of the third row is a more tricky manouvre, with a large step down to the ground. A gained skill I suspect.

The power tailgate activates auto open and close. It’s so handy for when you’re laden with gear without the ability to reach for the tailgate. However, I found the height of the open tailgate quite dangerous. I’m short, and I almost hit my head several times. My husband encountered a near miss every time he accessed the boot. A nasty bump was imminent.

There are several bag hooks and anchor points in the boot, as well as a concealed in-floor storage compartment.

Second row has a 60/40 split and the third row a 50/50 split fold that sinks flat into the floor. All seats down, you’ve got 928 litres of cargo space at hand. And if the CX-9s cavernous load space is not enough to carry your load, braked tow capacity is 2,000kg.

Even with seven passengers on board, there is still good luggage space in the CX-9.

Fuel consumption of the Mazda CX-9 is quoted at 12.2-litres per 100km for a combined cycle. On a freeway test run, the CX-9 displayed a fuel consumption reading of 10.8L/100km. At the end of our road test, at refuel, the CX-9 was drinking around 14.6L/100km travelled for a combined cycle.

All CX-9 models come standard with antilock brakes, dynamic stability control, emergency brake assist, electronic brakeforce distribution, roll stability control and front and side airbags for the driver and passenger, as well as a curtain airbag that extends to the third row.

Rivals to the Mazda CX-9 Grand Touring include the more expensive Toyota Kluger Grande and the cheaper Ford Territory Ghia, both offering seven seats and all-wheel-drive handling. Priced in the middle of these two, at $63,186, the CX-9 is a good value pick.

The V6 of the Mazda CX-9 makes light work of its size. Its steering and comfort make it a pleasure to drive, and it packs a load of luxury conveniences, too. With more kids, more luggage and more money, the Mazda CX-9 would make me very happy!

Ratings:

CarAdvice Overall Rating:
How does it Drive:
How does it Look:
How does it Go:

Reader reviews of the MAZDA CX-9

Write a review for the MAZDA CX-9

Do you own this car? Share your opinion and add your own review below.

Add a New Review

The competition

TOYOTA KLUGER

Rating:

FORD TERRITORY

Rating:

http://internode.on.net Old Pete

People keep talking about the small boot space of vehicles like the VW Tiguan (at 395 litres) but nerry a peep regarding the CX9′s paltry 267 litres (with 3rd row in use). I figure if you need the 3rd row for extra people you may need room for their gear as well!

Other than that a nice vehicle, although it should be at near enough to $60,000 on road.

HNC

The CX-9 has one of the better luggage areas out of the 7 seat SUV’s with the 7 seats up, most dont have enough room for a weeks worth of groceries. At least you can put them down and still keep 5 adults seated with heaps of luggage space, cant do that in a Tiguan.

http://caradvice Ray

Of course you couldn’t do that in a Tiguan – its a much smaller car in a totally differnet class. No third row of seats for a start

Kampfer

What’s your point? If you need the 3rd row for the extra people the VW Tiguan will be totally unless.

jinsei

Excellent car. Probably the best large SUV from volume brands in Australia.

It would have been good competition if Hyundai brought the Veracruz(i50) here.

Kampfer

i50? You mean ix55?

jinsei

Thanks Kampfer, you are right. I meant ix55.

I am still a bit confused with Hyundai’s ‘i’ naming convention.

ADLover

If Mazda can add 3L (plus) diesel Turbo engine with decent 6 speed Auto Box, and similar price tag (around 60K), who will buy X5 or MB M350 ?
Well done Mazda and please give us diesel with automatic.
Yianni

63 grand for a Mazda? No thanks.

Eric

Why not??

Kenny

Why would u pay 63k for this, you can buy a real 4WD like a Diesel Pathfinder Ti for 64k, a Diesel Mitsubishi Challenger XLS for a 60k.

http://baji192.wordpress.com Baji

Simple – you’d pay 63k for a cx9 if you DONT WANT a real 4wd.

Kenn

There r much nicer & cheaper larger 7 seat softroaders in the Market a Top of the range Diesel KIA Sorento is 51k driveway or a Subaru Tribeca Driveway for 58k.

http://saab Devil’s Advocate

How is that any different to people who would pay over $100k for a Commodore?

Sharon

Maybe there are families out there that have four kids and dont want to drive around in an ugly tradesman type vehicle but need permanent six seater WITH boot space so no need to tow a trailer for the weekly groceries

Dyllip

Huge cars like this should be taxed a lot more on city roads. They are big, dangerous and block vision at intersections. Above all they are UNNECESSARY!

Newshound

Big, dangerous, block vision – only if you have made the poor choice to buy a small fartbox – and you are now trying to make sense of your poor choice. If I were to be in an accident, I definitely wouldnt choose to be in some of the tiny cars around at the moment. Safety, size and weight do tend to correspond.
ScottT

Pretty narrow mined thinking there Dyllip, you ever stop to think that people have a genuine need for a vehicle such as this? I own a 4WD and i drive it in the city, why? because I need one, but what I cant afford is a different car for every situation something seem to forget. I tow a 21ft caravan so if you care to name another 7 seat vehicle with a 3t towing capacity then i’d like to hear it. Dont judge us all because we drive these types of vehicles. these vehicle are only dangerous in the wrong hands, any vehicle is for that matter.

dazzer01

“I tow a 21ft caravan so if you care to name another 7 seat vehicle with a 3t towing capacity then I’d like to hear it.”

And this massive piece of jelly can only tow 2,000kg. Check the specs above. I understand your point about being able to afford only the one vehicle, and it has to be the 4WD tow tug, but the Mazda wouldn’t tow your 21 footer because it’s not designed with a strong enough chassis. It’s just a bloody big soft roader, not a serious rig.

filippo

I agree. They weight more and require more road space so there’s no reason why buyers of such tanks shouldn’t be paying more road tax. Plus, vehicles like this cause accidents due to other road users not being able to see around them and the tendency of their drivers (especially in the inner eastern suburbs of Melbourne) to hit other cars in car parks and then innocently drive off.
Midgetgypsy

Hey Dyllip, I could’t agree more. I also have a small car and it suits me and my family. We have a Subaru Sherpa, and we regularly fit in our family of 7,and sometimes tow a trailer/caravan. It is such a delight to drive in the country with 7 on board plus all of our luggage, and the safety afforded to us and all other road users is also a big plus. Every Australian family should be squeezing into one…NOT
Dyllip

I suppose my hatred for large AWD’s like this started in primary school when witnessed a crash right in front of me between a Mazda Astina hatch and a Toyota Prado. The Astina got absolutely pulverised and the driver was taken away in an ambulance covered in blood to the shock of my young mind, whilst the Prado like one scratch on in! >:l

Oh, and the crash was caused by the driver heading into oncoming traffic for god knows what reason.

Blokie

so you now hate all AWDs/4wds? thats a bit of a stereo typing isnt it?

wouldnt you rather have the Prado, seeing as they were barely scratched? or would you rather be in the smaller hatch?

nickdl

would you rather live with the guilt as well? Not leaning either way, just another way of looking at things.

Kat

You buy this size car if you are like me and have four children!!!! and don’t want an ugly useless Kia minibus.

You buy this because there are no other vehicles on the market that allow for 7 adult size seating to allow for a mixture of child seats and bigger children but also enough room for a pram in the boot.

nickdl

Would’ve loved one of these but the Territory was in our price range. Still the Territory is a great compromise!
dlunn64

Territory is no compromise here. How much are those 20′ tyres going to be to replace on this vehicle? And 10,000km not 15,000km servicing on the Mazda.

nickdl

Mate the Territory tyres cost heaps as well and the Mazda would probably be more reliable in the long run. Still the Territory’s better to drive.

dlunn64

Terri tyres 260 to 300 each (have bought both rwd and awd), These mazda tyres would be over 500 at least.

nickdl

OK fair enough the Terry tyres are still quite a step in price from the 15s I had on my previous car. Still you get a fair mileage from them.

tim

I would go for KIA Sorento and it is cheaper.

Hung Low

RE-PHRASE: The only reason you would go for a KIA Sorento is because its cheaper!!
Crossy

A good example of getting what you pay for.

Gibbo

It is quite a nice looking vehicle, but if I was in the market for one of these family haulers Id take the Turbo Territory- doesn’t cost much more, uses about the same amount of fuel and goes harder.
Countrygirl

Test drove the CX9 last week (along with the Kia Sorento, Subaru Tribeca and Toyota Kluger) and I agree it is a good drive. Very smooth and comfortable. But at 62K and being too thirsty we’ve struck it off the shortlist. The Tribeca has been reduced to 58K and a seems a more sensible buy than the Mazda if you want that extra bit of luxury. The Sorento Platinum hasn’t got the same luxurious feel as the Tribeca and the CX9 but the torque of the engine and the bling inside probably makes up for it.

nickdl

Have a look at the Territory. It’s about as thirsty but it does cost a fair bit less. While it is getting old it definitely isn’t outclassed by the others. That or the Kia would be a really good car as well.

Al Juraj

But you don’t get rust or brake issues in the Mazda. The CX-9 drives more like a car, perhaps a thinking man’s X5. The Toyota Kluger is just as versatile seems to be more efficient especially with a FWD option, but not as sporty. Mitsubishi’s Challenger offers diesel economy and true off-roading potentials with Triton-based chassis but doesn’t do as well on-road. These three are the best bets for reliable high-riding transport for seven.

Neo Utopia

I woman driving a CX-9 cut me off while changing lanes and doing a right turn at an intersection a few weeks ago, I was so annoyed by the fact the person had no awareness of my existance in the opposite lane, visability problem or bad driver? As Jeremy Clarkson says for the X6, what is this type of car for? It looks like an off roader, but can’t go off road and it trys to drive like a estate but it’s too cumbersome.

http://baji192.wordpress.com Baji

Depends on what you were driving. I would say both visibilty and bad driver. The rear of the CX9 is quite high so if you were in her blind spot and you were driving some low slung sports car, unless she was really paying attention, she may not have seen you.

But with that said, the people who buy this car are those who have no intentions of going off-road, but need the extra space and seats. Wagons and mpv’s like the Honda oddyssey may drive a lot better, but they don’t have the power. People movers like the tarago and carnival are more practical, but don’t look nor drive as well as the CX9, plus the tarago is just plain overpriced if you spec it with the v6, and the carnival just doesn’t compare to the CX9′s luxuries.

Imo people should keep an open mind and stop bashing these vehicles so much.

http://ozmazda.com ozmazda

The fact that this vehicle is really for off roading its purpose is for families that need the space….whats the difference between an SUV or a family mini van as they are both big and I know if I needed a vehicle to move my family about I would rather drive the CX9 than a Tarago…

Great report and the CX9 looks classy…well done Mazda

but a turbo diesel would be nice…3ltr from the BT50 with an upgrade

http://ozmazda.com ozmazda

oops I left out is NOT really

http://caradvice OSU811

GO the TRIBECA, it drives better has a glorious sounding
boxer six, is better on fuel and has more std features!
and is more than big enough but not as big to drive or park!

http://saab Devil’s Advocate

However the interior plastics look like they came straight from a left over ice-cream container.

Baji

Yup i agree with you DA.

Not to mention, most publications are of the opinion that the CX9 drives and handles much better than the Tribeca. Apart from the higher fuel consumption, The CX9 has more power and torque than the tribeca, 6 speed auto, more space, is better looking and has better quality materials inside.The Tribeca is also more expensive than the mazda.

With that said the tribecas ride is a lot softer.

The Oracle

And there is no comparison with the space in the 2nd and 3rd rows to what’s in the Mazda. The Tribeca has only enough legroom for legless dwarfs and has had a serious disagreement with an ugly stick.

Altezza

With the top of the line Grand Touring at $63k, I would rather spend little more to get Lexus RX350 or Volvo XC60 or even Audi Q5.

Hung Low

None which have 7 seats!
The CX9 is one of the best value 7 seater packages out there!
If 5 seats is what you want the Murano is probably a better bang for the buck over the euro’s and RX!
MazMagic

Add to list of ‘negatives’ : It’s a Mazda!

It seem to be the badge speaks louder than the car itself! Shame, because most Mazdas are just as good as most high-priced base model Europeans. Same goes with Hondas, Subrarus too!

Al Juraj

How can being a Mazda be negative? Unlike the badged Euros, they will run trouble-free longer. They also offer better value and similar driving appeal. BMW would probably be the only one they can’t touch for pure excitement.

Gavjon

Im Sorry to disappoint you Nadine, but did you or another adult happen to sit in the second row seat? had you of had a normal size adult sit in there they would of told you there is NO legroom as the CX9 lacks a footwell in the rear and therefore you sit with your knee’s in your chin. This was the primary reason we opted for a Kluger Grande over the CX9.

Anyone who has one of these vehicles would know this too……

filippo

Yes, but the Kluger is effectively a 6 seater. The middle seat couldn’t seat anyone who has a head.

Ti

We looked around for awhile at the 7 seater/ SUV sector and narrowed it down to the cx90, Kluger and CX9. Previously owning the Kluger which has been a perfect trouble free car. Both cars showed very high levels of fit and price offering were similar Volvo being the highest of the three. The decision to buy the CX9 Grand Touring came down to the following –
-over looks of the car external and internal
-centre seat in second row too narrow for teenagers-Klug
-CX9 less body roll and better divers car to Klug and definitely the Xc90(steering vague, too soft & turbo lag at low revs.)CX9 disguises size well and handles brilliantly.
-Bose system was top shelf, good as $2K Dynaaudio in xc90
-Bluetooth enabling streaming of music from iPhone
-cost of servicing a little more then Kluger definiely less then Volvo.
Overall the family have been delighted.
Improvements- centre console high and wide, A-pillar and big side mirror creating obstructed view. Thirsty
http://baji192.wordpress.com Baji

Kinda dissapointed at the interior door drims. The top spec versions of the pre-facelift model had nicely stitched leather door inserts, whereas the face-lift model has just plain matte leather with no texture at all.

Apart from that, its a nice upgrade.
Ken

Like the Mazda CX9 but was turned off with the price and fuel consumption as well as the 10,000km servicing. The quality is great and the inclusions are nice, but $63,000 for a car that is as thirsty as a V8 and not capable offroad turned me off buying one. The Mazda dealer himself asked me if I was taking it offroad and when I mentioned the beach, sand, dirt tracks etc he said to look elsewhere. The 20′s with no 4wd lock mode would not be good on the sand he said.
Looked at the Kluger and was turned off by the 2nd and 3rd row of seats. No Diesel option to save on fuel as I travel over 25,000kms per year and found the top spec model just to expensive.
Looked at the Tribeca and found the rear seats just to small. My 8 year old found the back seat limited and I couldn’t handle the middle seatbelt for the second row being anchored at the roof. Poor design for a seven seat car.
Looked at the Santa Fe and Sorento which are a lot cheaper and eventually decided on the Platinum Sorento for under $49,000 drive away with extras. I know i’ll get the usual comments of quality and cheap etc, but having a decent size 7 seat SUV that has all the extras I need and is capable of the offroading I plan on doing won me as well as the extra $15,000 to $20,000 saving up front. The diesel engine is great and i’m currently averaging 8.0 Litres per 100 which should improve when the engine runs in properly. That should save me over $2000 per year just on fuel costs compared to the CX9/Kluger.
Over a 5 year lease, $10,000 in fuel plus the initial $15,000 saving equates to a $25,000 saving. Some of this will be recovered with the re-sale of the Toyota/Mazda due to better re-sale, but I’m happy with the quality of the KIA with the 5 year warranty and the money in the pocket.
sakegaby

Ti please don’t compare the Bose in Mazda with the Dynaudio in Volvo.

PM

Which one is better Bose or Dynaudio?

Ali

Just had to pop in here and mention how much I LOVE my CX-9! The car prior to this was a Territory Ghia with 3rd row of seats. The Territory wasn’t a bad car, but it definitely didn’t have the luxury of the CX-9. The Territory for our growing family of 4 kids under 6 and all requiring car seats, wasn’t suitable anymore as there wasn’t enough room for a double pram once the 3rd row of seats was up. The CX-9 offers a lot more flexibility with the split rear seats as well as more than enough room for groceries, school bags and prams. We didn’t need the 4WD capability however even the Prado didn’t offer as much room. We love that it’s the same length of a van without being a van!

It’s a completely different ride to the Territory. If you like the rugged grunty feel of a 4WD type vehicle then you’ll like the Territory. I prefer a smooth ride and we certainly get this in the Mazda.

We’ve taken ours onto the beach albeit on hard sand. The servicing on the Territory was every 20,000kms as opposed to every 10,000kms on the Mazda however we didn’t feel the Mazda needed a service until well past the 20,000kms and after 15,000kms in the Territory, we were callng to book it in. We feel the CX-9 is great value for money and the ONLY fault we have found with the car are the interior ‘silver’ panels that scratch easily. I think they’ve rectified this on the newer models though. We use the same amount of fuel as we did in the Territory, although the Territory was a thirsty car too!
tam

I agree with you Ali, Mazda is at least 1 class above the
Terry, its third row seat can not call seat rather just a padded foam. Having my CX9 for over 2 years, we never have any problems even the silver panels had them replaced for free of charge, servicing once a year is good enough for us. Great car to drive with high seating, sporty feel, what else can you get from the car.
ian

yes mazda does need to put a decent size turbo diesel engine in the cx9 with a 8 speed auto to match
Rochelle

Thank you everyone for your reviews. We have 4 children, 2 big ones with school bags, hockey bags, footy mates etc etc and 2 little ones with 2 car seats and pram with toddler seat. I currently drive a Holden Calais and we also own the Toyota Landcruiser V8 GLX. I use the commordore for the around town school pick up etc and the toyota for out of town/4WD/towning etc. I am wanting something that fits all the kids, friends, gear, prams and shopping, and from the sounds of the boot space and third row comfort, as well as the over all look, we will definitely be taking a look one soon. Thanks again.
The Guv

The CX9 is one of the thirstiest vehicles on the road. Mazda’s claimed fuel consumption is far from correct, a friend and CX9 owner has quoted me figures of 19L/100km around town, so need to consider your fuel/running budget. Also many people talk about the CX9 having some off road ability, this is only true in very limited and sedate conditions, especially with those 20inch tyres, which may look pretty but are useless off bitumen! Despite all it’s size the CX9 still only comes with a space saver spare tyre! And what are Mazda thinking not having a diesel option in CX9?? Opt for it’s little brother the CX7, it comes in diesel and is a much better all round performer, unless you genuinely need the space to cart a football team around!!!

Big D

Guv…u r wrong…the cx9 has a full size steel rim spare. just not an alloy. also the fuel figures compare to other petrol 6′s figures (kia etc) and i hear 2013 will have a spec’d up bt50 tuebo diesel but remain with 6spd auto…look out bmw x5

marco

i have tried the Kia Sorento what a noisy beast..I will buy the CX9.So smooth.
and the finish 10 times better than the Kia .Another couple of generations and they might get there.Kia might look good but thats all.
Norman

I’ve had my CX-9 since October 2010. Based on the kilometers I travel each time I fill the tank, I’ve been using up between 12.5L to 13.9L per 100km. Happy with it all around.

Cheers!
Seany

Had a CX9 for just coming up three years and its been a fantastic car. Sure its a little thirsty (been getting around 14.5L per 100km) round town and a diesel option would be good, but the reliability, handling and comfort is second to none. If you need the extra seats and want a safe car I would highly recommend it.

Now my dilemma. I need to downsize and what to go for next, as been spoilt with the CX9! Fortunately the resale values are better than I orginally anticipated.
polldc@bigpond.com

Just bought a 2008 Luxury CX9 that has ‘after market’ sat nav. Thing is, it’s Mazda but has a remote cobtrol unit – not a touchscreen and the Mazda Service people don’t know how to update the Maps! Can anyone hep?
Octomillean

My family and I have really enjoyed our CX9 for the past 2 years nearly 80,000+++kms over the east coast, the drive, appointment and all purpose versatiliy of the CX9 GT has been outstanding. I agree a turbo diesel auto would be great. For those looking for comfort, luxury & 7 seats its extremely hard to beat. It’s a soft 4×4 and can only tow 2000kgs with a 170kg towball weight – but this suits most younger families venturing into caravan/camper/ cabin holidays.