Motor Trend SUV of the Year Goes To...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Joey D
  • 22 comments
  • 1,234 views
Joey D

Joey D

Premium
Messages
47,822
United States
Lakes of the North, MI
Messages
GTP_Joey
Messages
GTP Joey
the Mazda Mazda CX-9.

Autoblog
In what must have been a tough decision, Motor Trend has chosen Mazda's 2008 CX-9 as their SUV of the Year. The Associated Press quotes the magazine's editor-in-chief, Angus MacKenzie, as saying the CX-9 is "arguably the most enjoyable sport utility to drive, and a great reminder that SUVs can be as exciting as any car."

Motor Trend is expected to make the announcement early Monday, while those still relying on dead trees and the postal service will learn about it in the November 6th issue of the print pub.

The seven-seat, 273 hp SUV won the honor by beating out tough competition like Buick's Enclave, Toyota's Highlander and Land Cruiser and the Land Rover LR2. Others in the running were Hyundai Veracruz, Jeep Liberty and Patriot, the Nissan Rogue, Saturn's Vue and the Subaru Tribeca.
Click to expand...

Any thoughts? Good decision or bad? The people on Autoblog seemed to be pretty mixed, many of them think the Enclave should have won.
 
With the amount of buzz the Enclave has brought back to GM you would have thought the decision would be easy to make. They can't build enough of them over in Lansing, they're often selling on-the-spot without drives here in Grand Rapids. Its a good-looking, well-built, solid-driving crossover that certainly should have won.

...Then again, I do like the CX-9 as well. Problem is, I thought that was new LAST year?

But we can only expect so much from Motor Trend; They give the COTY awards to undeserving vehicles over, and over again. The Camry, the GL, etc... At the very least they got it right last year giving the truck award to the Silverado.
 
It was a fluke, I say. A total FLUKE.

Everyone knows the R8 is 4.8 seconds faster than the CX-9 around 89% of all Sam's Wholesale Club parking lots according to a magazine test. But are they competitors?


:dopey:


M
 
The CX-9 is a Crossover, isn't it?
I have a friend who has one, it is a beautiful machine nonetheless.
I just don't really see it as anSUV per se...
 
Sounds like it only had two competitors this year. Not knowing much of anything about the new Landcruiser other than I already miss the GX470, I'll say that the CX-9 deserved its win.
 
Yeah... I thought it was a 2007 intro too. Hmmm.
Gil; true, but if that were the problem, the Enclave wouldn't win either ;).

I'm pretty sure one of the GM triplets lost to the Mazda during the year, so I suppose in that sense the Mazda deserves it. Not that it matters a lot, has anybody ever taken MT's awards seriously? The mag's crap.
 
As I recall the Saturn Outlook may have lost in a comparison to the CX-9 in MT, but I cannot recall exactly as I do not subscribe... My father does.

With the Enclave being that much better of a vehicle overall, its a bit of a head-scratcher. If driving enjoyment is the only reason why it won, it does make a fair bit of sense... Its much the same reason why Car and Driver gives out some of their 10-Best awards to different vehicles, but there are always outside reasons such as build quality and overall value to factor in.

The Enclave, like it or not, its a beautifully-crafted machine that really has made Buick a stand-out company again. Like I had said before, they can't build enough Enclaves to meet demand, and actually had to throttle-back production of the Outlook and Acadia to fair a bit better. Its about to go to China as well, and if it is a success there, even more Kudos are to be spread...

...Sure, I'm pro-GM almost all the time, but this one would have been a no-brainier for me. I love the CX-7 and the CX-9 for their ability to drive quite well, but it by no means makes them automatically better than a particular ride for just that reason...
 
///M-Spec
It was a fluke, I say. A total FLUKE.

Everyone knows the R8 is 4.8 seconds faster than the CX-9 around 89% of all Sam's Wholesale Club parking lots according to a magazine test. But are they competitors?


:dopey:


M
Click to expand...

:lol: :lol: :lol:

-----

It's a head-scratcher... I mean, MT often goes out of its way to award a perfectly boring vehicle for their "of the year" awards almost all the time, simply because of other factors such as "value" or "importance" (yup, the "new" T-Bird was really important for non-baby boomers).

I'd have expected this choice from Car&Driver, but from MT? Oh well... you take your wins where you can get them... :lol:
 
I'd tip the CX-9 to win and here is why.

The CX-9 is more like a jacked up station wagon/esate then a 4WD. It is good that it won because people that follow these articles will be influenced to buy this rather than something like a huge gas guzzling landcruiser that is built for offroad use, not on road use.

Personally though i think all these veichles are all a waste of time and money. If you want a big car with space, why not just buy a station wagon/estate or a people mover/minvan??? You save heaps on tyres, petrol and other running costs plus they have way better handling than an SUV/4WD.
 
niky
I'd have expected this choice from Car&Driver, but from MT? Oh well... you take your wins where you can get them... :lol:
Click to expand...
Come now, the 1986 Motor Trend Import Car of the Year was a Mazda RX-7 Turbo II; give them some credit.

///M-Spec
It was a fluke, I say. A total FLUKE.

Everyone knows the R8 is 4.8 seconds faster than the CX-9 around 89% of all Sam's Wholesale Club parking lots according to a magazine test. But are they competitors?
Click to expand...
I drove a Q7 around Costco, and it lost to a Gallardo. Of course, the Gallardo was dented on the passenger door by a careless Expedition owner, so that may have tipped the scales.
 
zdenko
Personally though i think all these veichles are all a waste of time and money. If you want a big car with space, why not just buy a station wagon/estate or a people mover/minvan??? You save heaps on tyres, petrol and other running costs plus they have way better handling than an SUV/4WD.
Click to expand...

This is America, stuff like that doesn't sell all that well.
 
Pupik
I drove a Q7 around Costco, and it lost to a Gallardo. Of course, the Gallardo was dented on the passenger door by a careless Expedition owner, so that may have tipped the scales.
Click to expand...

You sound like you are offended that your Q7, which was tested by some magazine, could not even beat an R8 with racing tires.

Did someone delete my post?

-------

On topic: The CX-9 is nice. Before the wife decided she wants a sedan, we were looking at one to replace the Murano.


M
 
Well, there is also a big difference between the CX-7 and CX-9... I'd much rather have the smaller one, as if I am looking for a CX-9 sized SUV, I'm far more likely to shop at the local Saturn/GMC/Buick or Ford (Flex!) dealer...
 
Ah.. Last winter, our Murano, which is a FWD model, got stuck a few times going up our driveway. Living in Florida (and not up little dirt road, but a typical subdivision), AWD seemed completely unnecessary. Here in Jersey, it's a real nice thing to have in the snow months.

We still might trade in for an AWD Murano or CX-9, but my wife wants a sedan/wagon now and really likes the new CTS... which is conveniently available with AWD for '08. We'll see what kind of deals come up in this Dec. Otherwise, we'll tough it out one more winter in the MO'.


M
 
Pupik
Come now, the 1986 Motor Trend Import Car of the Year was a Mazda RX-7 Turbo II; give them some credit.
Click to expand...

They occassionally make the right choice, but some of their previous choices have been head scratchers. Real head scratchers. I read the issue where the TBird won and came away entirely perplexed by the choice.

Oh, they do make the occassional nice track article... but I don't often waste my money on the mag... I just wait for the more interesting articles to go online.
 
I always have to buy the "Speed Issue," just because its a bit of tradition in my head. But overall, their testing procedures and the final results are always a bit odd in my book. They very rarely seem to pick the "right" car, and more often than not, end up getting finishing orders completely askewed compared to C/D , R&T and Automobile.
 
Well, C&D often have weird finishing orders, themselves. While I find their subjective ratings to be spot on, I find their math to be... errh... problematic at times.

Like their infamous "performance tire comparo", which awarded first spot to the Goodyear Eagle GSD3 (decent tire, but not really the best in terms of performance) and the second spot to the Continental Contisports (really, really crappy tire, and that's from a zillion SE-R owners who had them as stock) and put the tire with the best grip and performance third (my Advan Neovas), simply because:\

1. It had merely decent wet grip (mid-test only, versus the GSD3's top-of-the test wet grip)

2. It was expensive (cheapness was the only reason the Continentals beat it).

Said result, I have a ton of issues with... the most important being:

Who the hell buys performance tires on the basis of cheapness (c'mon, sticky rubber is about fastest times and bragging rights!) and since when was it okay to speed in the rain? :lol:
 

Latest Posts

Back