New large CUV

[wallyuwl]

My wife and I are looking for a large CUV in the next few months. Our warranty is up on the Equinox and we are scared to death of having it once the power train warranty is up. Too many problems with the 2.4L engine with us and others, we don't want a $3000 repair out of nowhere. We are looking for something bigger than the Equinox.

We looked at a 2014 Mazda CX-9. They are coming out with a new design for 2015 model year, so they will be looking to clear these out this summer I think. Anyone have any experience with this?

We are also looking to possibly get rid of our 2013 Elantra lease early. We calculated about $4500 in mileage overages if we keep it the whole time. I know we are upside down right now on value, but I don't think we are that much upside down. Therefore we could trade it in with some positive equity (vs. if we kept it for the duration of the lease and paid for mileage overages). It was a mistake to lease in our case (wife wanted the deal done that night and wouldn't let me do the appropriate research), we got taken, lesson learned, so I don't need a lecture on leasing. We were told they have programs where they do lease trade ins toward a new Hyundai and don't count mileage against you. I don't know how truthful this was or not, but the wife doesn't want another Hyundai anyway.

So... for my wife once we are looking at a new or used CX-5. Any thoughts on that?

Would possibly be looking to get both vehicles at the same time this July or so.

Any other vehicles we should look at for a large CUV (for me) and/or smaller one for my wife? Not interested in Toyota or Honda. Explorer? I'm not against a new Santa Fe, but for pretty much the same price would rather have the CX-9. Not interested in Traverse, Acadia, Enclave because of the engine in those. Not crazy about the new Pathfinder because of the transmission (and transmission problems people are having).

Also possibly open to large SUVs (instead of the large CUV) on a truck frame. Would use for towing some snowmobiles and a smaller (2500 lbs) boat, so a CUV would still work, though.

Open to late model used, as well.

Thanks.

 

[RamFan]

Can't speak for the CX-9 but I couldn't be happier with the CX-5.

 

[gofast182]

With all of those exclusions about all you've left for us to suggest is Mazda CX-9! Have you thought of a new Tahoe? You can't get much more reliable than a Chevy V8 and you could probably get a great deal as a replacement comes out later this year.

 

[zloveraz]

2015 Tahoe or the outgoing 2014

 

[Nick R]

CX-9 is ok. Also why are you excluding the Traverse? What exactly is wrong with the engine in that? Change oil every 5k or so with good quality oil, and you are fine. I'd go so far as to say one of the best crossovers in that segment. We absolutely love ours, it gets phenomenal gas mileage on the highway (we've managed 25, 26 on long highway trips), and is incredibly comfortable.

 

[SF0059]

The one thing I can say for the CX-9 is that being this late in the life cycle most of the kinks should be worked out.

I say go for it!

 

[Kuato]

Heard good things about the Jeep Grand Cheroke with the 3.6.

 

[wallyuwl]

So we looked at the CX-9 and Santa Fe closer yesterday. Didn't test drive either, though. Also looked closer at the Explorer, Durango, Pilot, Highlander, Pathfinder, and Acadia. First four are short on cargo room. Second two are expensive and I'm worried about the transmission on the Pathfinder (lots of problems reported already) and engine and general build quality on GM offerings (not sure if I want to do another GM DI engine after the issues with the 2.4 in our Equinox).

CX-9 seems like higher quality materials are used on the interior than the Santa Fe. I also like that it is older "tried and true" technology. No DI engine. No CVT transmission. No electric steering. Prices for the two are comparable: about $32k for a decently equipped AWD (0% financing for 60 months on Mazda right now). I think prices will drop another grand or two and financing for 72 months in summer on the CX-9 as the new redesigned 2015 models hit the lot.

Only thing I'm worried about: I don't know if 3500 lb towing capacity will be enough. We plan on getting a 16' or so boat (probably fiberglass) within the next few years, not sure if that will be too heavy to tow for a 3500 lb. rated vehicle?

I think we decided to trade in the Elantra this summer if we can get a good deal on a 2014 CX-9, if we are comfortable with the tow rating. We figured (I think correctly) that accounting for depreciation and payments, we'd be paying $2500 to rent the Elantra another year (for the year it would be $3000 in payments, about $2700 reduction in payoff amount on the lease, and the vehicle would depreciate about $2200). So we'd be +$500 on trade in vs. now, but would spend $3000 to get there and in the process use the car for a year. Not sure if that is worth it. Definitely not turning it in at the end of the lease because mileage overages will kill us and don't like it enough to buy. Then the wife will drive the Equinox at least for a little while, since I found out GM is now warrantying the timing chain and fuel pump issues for 10yr/100k (I'm looking into the details). Then we get our "family vehicle of the future" and she gets a CUV to drive in the mean time.

This stuff gets confusing.

 

[Nick R]

Originally Posted By: wallyuwl
So we looked at the CX-9 and Santa Fe closer yesterday. Didn't test drive either, though. Also looked closer at the Explorer, Durango, Pilot, Highlander, Pathfinder, and Acadia. First four are short on cargo room. Second two are expensive and I'm worried about the transmission on the Pathfinder (lots of problems reported already) and engine and general build quality on GM offerings (not sure if I want to do another GM DI engine after the issues with the 2.4 in our Equinox).

CX-9 seems like higher quality materials are used on the interior than the Santa Fe. I also like that it is older "tried and true" technology. No DI engine. No CVT transmission. No electric steering. Prices for the two are comparable: about $32k for a decently equipped AWD (0% financing for 60 months on Mazda right now). I think prices will drop another grand or two and financing for 72 months in summer on the CX-9 as the new redesigned 2015 models hit the lot.

Only thing I'm worried about: I don't know if 3500 lb towing capacity will be enough. We plan on getting a 16' or so boat (probably fiberglass) within the next few years, not sure if that will be too heavy to tow for a 3500 lb. rated vehicle?

I think we decided to trade in the Elantra this summer if we can get a good deal on a 2014 CX-9, if we are comfortable with the tow rating. We figured (I think correctly) that accounting for depreciation and payments, we'd be paying $2500 to rent the Elantra another year (for the year it would be $3000 in payments, about $2700 reduction in payoff amount on the lease, and the vehicle would depreciate about $2200). So we'd be +$500 on trade in vs. now, but would spend $3000 to get there and in the process use the car for a year. Not sure if that is worth it. Definitely not turning it in at the end of the lease because mileage overages will kill us and don't like it enough to buy. Then the wife will drive the Equinox at least for a little while, since I found out GM is now warrantying the timing chain and fuel pump issues for 10yr/100k (I'm looking into the details). Then we get our "family vehicle of the future" and she gets a CUV to drive in the mean time.

This stuff gets confusing.


I think you should seriously go look at a traverse/acadia. The tow rating is higher (about 5,000lb properly equipped). There are no real issues with the 3.6L engine, despite being DI. There were timing chain problems on early models (like 08 era) but with proper oil change intervals, they are very reliable. The early 2.4 was known for issues as well. But these engines are now mature and really do not have any issues.

Also I can tell you, after a year of ownership, we have not had a single "build quality" complaint about our traverse. It really is actually well put together. It also has hydraulic power steering still. But yeah, I really do think you take a serious look at the traverse/acadia. From what you want, I seriously think one of those is going to do right by you.

 

[andrewg]

I know that this isn't exactly what you were considering, but have you ever thought about a Honda Ridgeline? It will seat five (roomy back seat). Towing capacity is 5k pounds. Engine is smooth as glass...plenty of power...4x4 system is flawless....handles and rides very well with IRS....and reliability ratings are very good. If needed, the bed can haul a pretty fair sized load while still having the road manners of an SUV. You can get a lot of use out of one vehicle. I love mine.
Drawbacks? The mpg's are 21-24 on the highway. About 16 or so in town if you are hard on the accelerator. Cost? New is rather expensive. Used ones, in good condition, can also be a bit high for some.
Anyway....just an idea.

 

[Kuato]

What about the Jeep? Tows at least 6200 and up to 7400, and with diesel gets 30mpg.

 

[wallyuwl]

Need interior space, so it looks like CX-9, Santa Fe, or Traverse/Acadia/Enclave. GM offering would fit the bill best for what we need now and in the future in terms of space and power/towing, but I have other concerns (including price). The CX-9 would just possibly be adequate to tow a 16' or so fiberglass boat (frame-wise, engine would be fine), but I could just go aluminum with the boat and not have any worries about towing!

 

[rjundi]

CX-9 is really dated. Traverse & twins is excellent with one flaw IMHO.

In your locale AWD won't be used a lot? I really liked the Traverse I rented. However........the AWD system cannot take the tough stuff well, eg deep snow. It basically overheated I think due to heavy snow and buried itself in 12"-15" of snow as it turned over to FWD. I had to walk a 1/4" mile up a driveway with 4yr old and 6 yr old in tow + weekend stuff. Not impressed. Latter I came back and it was fine after a few hours. For reference point friends Pilot with all-seasons & CRV drove around us latter.

I also found this oddity mentioned on review where they took CUV's in the dunes.

 

[gofast182]

A couple points about Pilot, as someone else said that engine is smooth as glass, it's super-reliable, and the AWD system is quite good. Not only is VTM-4 proactive, with the push of a button you can can lock the rear diff. up to 20MPH, it will unlock over this speed, and then re-lock once you get below it again. Anyway, my main point was going to be if you can deal with the blocky styling you could probably get a screaming deal on a new one as there will be an updated model coming out in the fall. And if you do decide to give it a second look, make sure you actually get inside and play with the cargo area because it's pretty flexible despite having less space on paper.

 

[wallyuwl]

Originally Posted By: rjundi
CX-9 is really dated. Traverse & twins is excellent with one flaw IMHO.

In your locale AWD won't be used a lot? I really liked the Traverse I rented. However........the AWD system cannot take the tough stuff well, eg deep snow. It basically overheated I think due to heavy snow and buried itself in 12"-15" of snow as it turned over to FWD. I had to walk a 1/4" mile up a driveway with 4yr old and 6 yr old in tow + weekend stuff. Not impressed. Latter I came back and it was fine after a few hours. For reference point friends Pilot with all-seasons & CRV drove around us latter.

I also found this oddity mentioned on review where they took CUV's in the dunes.



Odd about the Traverse, wouldn't expect that. It isn't certain, but we plan to move back to the upper Midwest (MN,WI,MI area) in the next year and a half or so, so that is why we are looing AWD. Plus you pretty much need it when trying to get a boat out of a lake.

I partially like that the CX-9 is dated. I don't like all these new technologies that are causing a lot of problems. Electronics and software - eh (in vehicles). And I'm a millennial! I think Mazda has done a nice job keeping it up to date through the options they offer, and they redid the body in 2013 a little. The biggest dated thing in it, IMO, is the small strip on the top of the dash that has the temperature, radio station, etc. But that is minor.

Looked into boats, and I would be OK for towing with the CX-9 with a fiberglass boat up to 18' or aluminum up to 21'. Don't think I'd go more than 18' anyway.

 

[FutureDoc]

Every person I know who has bought a Mazda recently has love it. Can't say the same thing about Chevy.

As for liking the "dated" issues, I agree, it can be a good thing. It is basically a 2006 vehicle that has been constantly updated. Because it is a pre-recession vehicle, the corner-cutting "designs" that plague other vehicles should not be much of a concern.

As another Millennial, we tend to be smarter with our money and research more than the "older generations". Just slapping electronics in does not really make us pull out our wallets. The big "three" for a Millennial is vehicle quality, trustworthness, and safety.

Can I toss one more vehicle on your radar.

Subaru Tribeca. It is about to be retired/replaced, likely by a bigger outback. Towing is rated at about 3500 (but you will not stress that H6... I think it is limited by the wheelbase for its ratings). You might be able to find a good deal because it is on its way out.

 

[Hokiefyd]

If you are planning to tow regularly, get a RWD-based vehicle. The Jeep Grand Cherokee or Dodge Durango will be excellent choices. I tow a small trailer often with our two FWD-based Hondas, but it doesn't weigh more than 600 pounds. If I were going to regularly tow a 16-20' boat, I'm buying something with RWD. A 2 or 3 year old Tahoe will tow anything you care to tow and will do so in better comfort and better control than a smaller FWD-based vehicle.

I like the Mazda for everything you say you want except for regularly towing a larger boat. Do everything reasonable to maximize your margin for safety. Sure, some guys will tow 25' boats with their Volvo 850 or something. But your safe margin of error increases the farther you get between the "rated" towing capacity and your actual towed weight.

 

[wallyuwl]

Thought about a Tribeca, but it is too small and the gas mileage is really bad for a vehicle that size. A 18' aluminum boat with trailer is about 2500 lbs. The CX-9 should be able to do that without a problem (rated 3500). But I see what you're saying about margin between rating and weight, the bigger the margin the better. That is my one concern, the towing. But that also isn't immediate. I could see what the 2015 CX-9 is like and if they have a higher tow rating get one in a year and a half. Why can't Mazda or even Honda make something like the Traverse? There really is no direct competitor to it.

 

[FutureDoc]

I think there is only about a 4-5 cuft difference with the CX-9 and then Tribeca with passenger volume... I think there might be less cargo space but I am always careful how they calculate that... some vehicles are more deceptive than others at listing that spec. There is no real difference with fuel economy with the AWD Mazda (both are 16 city, CX-9 has +1mpg on the highway).

I don't know if the 3" of extra length give the Traverse more towing ability... or if they just outfit it with a better hitch.

FYI, you have to get the towing pack or the AWD model on the Mazda if you want the 3500, otherwise the FWD is 2000

 

[FutureDoc]

Originally Posted By: wallyuwl
Why can't Mazda or even Honda make something like the Traverse? There really is no direct competitor to it.


Toyota Highlander? I know at least some models have 5000lbs of towing.