Originally Posted by Sulu

But the Odyssey and the Sienna are comparable in interior space and comparable in features, so the comparison then comes down to whether you like smoother ride of the Sienna or the sportier handling of the Odyssey. Some prefer the smoother ride, while others, like you, prefer the handling.



The new CX-9 may not sell well just because it is missing the one key feature that people look for when shopping for 3-row minivan-substitutes, which is interior room.



I agree. I believe that in the CX-9, Mazda has traded form over function. It looks great, inside and out, but the people who are shopping for mass market 3-row people movers are looking for as much space for the buck first and foremost, and then looking at other features; I would venture to guess that sporty handling, and the quality of the wood trim and the leather are (much) further down the list. And if the Honda and Toyota salesperson is good enough, she will be able to talk down the turbocharged engine of the CX-9.



The CX-5, after Mazda put in the larger 2.5-litre engine in place of the original 2.0-litre engine is very comparable and so very competitive with the RAV4, CR-V and Ford Escape (the Big 3 in the compact crossover utility vehicle segment). But, in my opinion, Mazda designed the CX-5 as a good CUV first and foremost, selecting function over form. People looking for compact crossovers are looking for function (interior room, enough power to get out of its own way on the freeway but balanced with fuel economy) first and foremost.