Another year has passed since I first drove the Mazda CX-9, and I still haven't pulled the trigger on a more family-friendly vehicle. So my Mazda Protege5 is still being used to transport three kids on a daily basis. I can see how a larger vehicle with three rows of seats could come in handy, but I insist on something fun to drive.

Last year I only drove the base version of the CX-9. Twice. I came away only moderately impressed, but a number of car magazines have picked the CX-9 as their favorite large crossover.

For 2008, the engine has been bumped from 3.5 to 3.7 liters. And I also wanted to see if the Grand Touring's 20-inch wheels--two inches larger than the other trims--would affect the ride and handling. So I took a 2008 Mazda CX-9 Grand Touring for a test drive. My impressions follow.

Styling

The seven-seat CX-9 looks much like the half-size smaller, five-seat CX-7, but with crisper, less cartoonish fenders. I don't care for the looks of either CX. On both, but especially on the CX-9, the front end is too blobby, amorphous, and anonymous. It's a generic economy car--just on stilts. Viewed from the bumpers up, both CX's look like cars. So why the SUV-like ride height? The visual effect is much like a boy who has outgrown his pants.

Also, as with the similarly styled Subaru Tribeca and upcoming Hyundai Veracruz, there's not enough wheelbase and too much overhang for a vehicle just under 200 inches in length. Buick's 2008 Enclave does the "curvy large crossover" thing better, with a bolder front end, a stronger stance, a longer wheelbase, and tidier overhangs.

The lower trim levels have 18-inch wheels that do not begin to fill the large wheel openings, which appear even larger than they are courtesy of a dark band of trim. The Grand Touring's 20s better fill the openings. Both wheels are of the multi-spoke variety. A smaller number of spokes would likely improve the CX-9's overall appearance.

Inside, the two-tone-leather-and-fake-wood-trimmed Grand Touring interior has a much more upscale appearance and ambiance than the all-black cloth interior of the base model. The Grand Touring substitutes chrome-outlined faux wood for the piano black trim in the other variants. I'm not often a fan of synthetic wood, but it works well in this case, lending some needed warmth to the cabin. In either trim, the armrests have well-padded, stitched covers, always a big plus in my book.

Accommodations

In an attempt at a sporty feel, the driving position in the Mazda CX-9 is different than that you'll find in other three-row crossovers. The center console is relatively high, wide, and prominent, and the windshield is raked far back. I like the console, but not the windshield.

I didn't mind the similarly raked windshield in the CX-7, but in Mazda's smaller crossover you sit significantly lower relative to the instrument panel, and farther from the upper A-pillars. In the CX-9, the tops of the pillars are closer to my face than I like. I prefer the more distant and more upright windshield in GM's large crossovers.

The CX-9's front seats feel moderately plush in leather. These seats provide more lateral support than those in most competing vehicles, but that's not saying much.

The CX-9's second row is too low to the floor to provide adults with any thigh support. This is a common minivan and large crossover failing, but there are some exceptions (e.g. Ford Taurus X). A shame, since the seat itself is cushier than most second-row seats in such vehicles. Visibility forward is also not as good as that in most competitors. Essentially, second row passengers are treated to an excellent view of the first-row headrests.

The second row seats slide fore-aft. When all the way forward, there's not much legroom even with the front seats only three-quarters of the way back (where I naturally position them for my shortish, 30-inch inseam). With the front seats all the way back, the second row will also have to be all the way back to provide someone my size with an inch or so of knee clearance.

The fore-aft adjustment could be better, as its detents are few in number and about two inches apart. Unlike in the Ford and GM crossovers, second-row captain's chairs are not available. Families with three or more children often insist on captain's chairs for access to the third row when the second row is filled with child seats.

Getting into the third row is much more difficult than in the GM and Ford large crossovers. The second row seatback tips forward and then the seat only slides forward a couple inches. It then re-latches in its fully forward position, rather than in its previous position.

One advantage of CX-9's system is that you can still get to the third row when child seats are installed in the second row, since the seat cushion does not tip to provide access.

Once in the third row, I find space minimal for both my head and my knees with the second row all the way back. Moving the second row one detent forward helps. So, in terms of room, the CX-9 has just enough to provide just enough space for three people my size (5-9) to sit one behind the other. This is much better than in, say, the Acura MDX or Subaru Tribeca, but both GM's and Ford's large crossovers have roomier second and third rows.

In all three rows the Mazda falls between the commodious GM crossovers and the relatively compact Taurus X in cabin width, at shoulder level and even more at eye level (thank the curvy upper body). Like most competitors, but unlike the GM products, the Mazda seats two and not three in the third row.

As in the GM vehicles, the cargo floor is fairly high off the ground (a deep storage well lies beneath). Credit the decision to fold the third row forward rather than stow it in an underfloor well, as in the Taurus X. The spec of 100 cubic feet, fourteen more than the Ford and 16 less than the GMs, is enough to qualify as the second largest of any currently available crossover. My eyes just don't see this many cubes. Last year, I parked the Saturn and Mazda side by side. The GM vehicle is a bit wider, taller, and squarer in cross-section. In comparison, the Mazda's cargo volume appears tight.

Unlike the Ford's, but like the GMs', the Mazda's front passenger seat does not fold flat to enable extremely long items to be carried. The back two rows do fold flat fairly easily, and without having to remove any headrests.

On the Road

Last year, motivation for the Mazda CX-9 was provided by a 3.5-liter DOHC V6, good for 263 horsepower at a reasonably accessible 6,250 rpm, couple to a six-speed automatic. It moved the CX-9's 4,300 pounds well enough, especially once over 30 miles-per-hour, but didn't excite. For 2008, the 3.5 has been replaced by a 3.7-liter V6. Peak horsepower only increases by ten, to 273. But midrange power increases more substantially, as seen in a bump in peak torque from 249 pounds-feet at 4,500 to 270 at a more accessible 4,250. The result is most noticeable when first starting out from a dead stop, where the CX-9 feels more energetic than before. At higher speeds the difference is minor.

Even with front-wheel-drive there is little evidence of torque steer. Still, if you want to put the power down in turns you'll want the all-wheel-drive.

The Mazda CX-9 is more firmly sprung than most competitors. Especially with the Grand Touring's lower profile 20-inch tires, its ride is busier and includes sharper reactions than that of most competitors. It's still far from punishing, though, and some competitors (such as the Hyundai Veracruz) ride less smoothly. Noise levels from all sources are low, so the CX-9 should serve well as a highway car.

Since ride quality is iffy, the handling must be spectacular, right? Well, not exactly. The Grand Touring doesn't feel significantly sportier than the other trims despite its low-profile treads, if my memory of the latter is accurate. The difference might be more noticeable in back-to-back test drives. But even with the 20s, I feel like I'm driving an exceptionally well-behaved minivan, with a moderate amount of lean in turns and good composure when said turns included a frost heave or two. It handles well, almost surprisingly well, when pushed, but doesn't ask to be driven this way. I suppose it is a family hauler, after all.

Problem is, good behavior is not the same as fun to drive. "This is fun" never enters my mind, as much as I want it to. The Mazda's steering may be quick and communicative compared to that of other largish crossovers, but doesn't compare to that in a decent sport sedan. In casual driving, the CX-9 feels large rather than agile, only shrinking in perceived size when I pushed through its initial recalcitrance to hustle.

Mazda CX-9 Price Comparisons and Pricing

The price of the 2008 Mazda CX-9 is up about $700 compared to the 2007. The top-of-the-line Grand Touring now starts just short of $34,000.

Compared to a Buick Enclave, the Mazda CX-9 lists for about $1,000 less. Compared to the Acura MDX, an AWD CX-9 Grand Touring lists for about $4,200 less before adjusting for feature differences, and about $3,700 less afterwards. (The gaps narrow by about $600 when comparing invoices.) Hyundais are usually cheaper than Mazdas, but even the Veracruz is at most $1,000 less than the CX-9 (after adjusting for feature differences, before incentives).

So the prices for the CX-9 seem competitive, if higher than people are used to spending for a Mazda.

Prices change frequently, and differences will vary based on feature level. To quickly generate these and other comparisons with the specific features you want, visit my Web site, www.truedelta.com. (It's the only site that provides true "apples-to-apples" price comparisons.)

TrueDelta's page for the Mazda CX-9:

http://www.truedelta.com/models/CX-9.php

Last Words

The 2008 Mazda CX-9's enlarged engine provides a bit more grunt off the line, but doesn't make a big difference. The Grand Touring's tires negatively impact ride quality more than they positively impact handling, but in neither case is their impact substantial. The main advantage of the Grand Touring: its interior seems considerably nicer than that of lesser CX-9s.

On a functional level, there's more third-row room than you'll find in most crossovers, most notably the Honda Pilot and Toyota Highlander (Mazda's primary targets). But you'll find still more room, with easier access, in Ford's Taurus X and GM's large crossovers.

Shortfalls notwithstanding, there is also a lot to like about the CX-9. Adults will fit in all three rows. And the performance and handling are perhaps as good as you'll find in a 200-inch-long, 68-inch-tall, under-$40,000 vehicle, just not nearly good enough to make me willing to give up my nimble compact.

A Note on Mazda CX-9 Reliability

I cannot practically cover reliability within the context of this review. However, many people are interested in such information, so I've started collecting my own data. Results, once they are available, will be posted to my site, www.truedelta.com, with updates every three months.

Unlike other sources, TrueDelta will clearly identify what difference it will make if you buy a CX-9 rather than another vehicle by providing "times in the shop" and "days in the shop" stats (among others). You will be able to specify the number of years, annual miles, and types of repairs to include in Mazda CX-9 reliability comparisons.

Before I can report results, I need reliability data on all cars--not just the CX-9--from people like you. To encourage participation, those who help provide the data will receive free access to the site's reliability information. Non-participants will have to pay an access fee.

For the details, and to sign up, visit www.truedelta.com.

A link to this website and alphabetized links to my other vehicle reviews can be found on my profile page.

Some of my reviews of related vehicles:
Acura MDX review
Audi Q7 review
Buick Enclave review
Ford Taurus X review
Honda Odyssey review
Hyundai Veracruz review
Mazda CX-7 review
Saturn Outlook review
Amount Paid (US$): 38,250
Model and Options: Grand Touring, moonroof and Assistance packages