Model Tested: 2017 Mazda CX-9 Grand Touring AWD
Engine: 2.5-liter turbocharged I-4, 250 horsepower 310 lb-ft torque
Transmission: 6-speed automatic transmission, all-wheel-drive
EPA Rating: 20-mpg city/26-mpg highway/23-mpg combined
Base Price: $42,270
As Tested: $43,610
Performance:
Powerful, turbocharged I-4 Skyactiv engine
Sport mode noticeably sportier
Confident winter vehicle
Smooth 6-speed automatic
Good highway fuel economy—our best was 25.3-mpg
Excellent safety features
Head up display includes blind spot monitoring and speed limits
Comfort:
Spacious interior
Great front and second row leg/head room
Ample front passenger shoe room
Heated front seats (3 temps)
Driver power lumbar support
Thick, contoured leather steering wheel
OK auxiliary controls
Good quality interior materials and execution
Second row seats have adjustable seatback angle
Second row seats have large track travel
Soft, wide armrest with covered shallow storage
Adults can fit in second row middle position, but seat is hard
Third row seats snug for full-size passengers
Utility:
Seven-passenger seating
Long rear doors open wide
Power tailgate
Carpeted storage under cargo deck
Flat cargo deck and folded rear seats
Ample grocery room behind third row seats
Stiff tilt/telescopic steering column adjustment
Small center console bin with soft armrest
Medium size front door bins
Big rear door bins
Medium size glovebox, but no lock
Pull-up rear door sunshades
Rear HVAC controls on back eng of center console
Rain sensing wipers
Small moonroof
WOW Factors:
Excellent head up display
Mazda Skyactiv technology
Handsome styling, not bulky looking
Spacious cargo area
Whines:
Setting satellite radio favorites overly complex
Third row access challenging for older passengers
Bottom Line:
The handsome 2017 Mazda CX-9 Grand Touring is a mid-size, three-row seven-passenger crossover SUV that neither looks or behaves like many of its lumbering competitors. It’s spacious and comfortable inside, performs very well, has excellent safety features and gets impressive fuel economy.
Comments