dinot

Folks,
I just recently picked up a 2011 MDX Tech to replace a 2008 Mazda CX-9 GT AWD. It isn't my daily driver. It is the family weekend car. We travel to the same place (3 hours away) nearly every weekend. I wanted something with very good reliability (So it was between the MDX and Highlander).

Well, I was a bit disappointed with the driving characteristics of the MDX. It isn't bad, I just felt that the CX-9 was the better driver (or as much as a 4500lb vehicle can be considered a good driver). The handling and steering feel was my biggest complaint. The tires that our MDX came with were bad handling tires (and unfortunately relatively new). They were the Sumitomo LXV. So I bit the bullet and I upgraded to the Dunlop Signature HP (I was disappointed to have to replace newish tires). Huge improvement!

I understand that I am giving up some snow traction but that is a trade-off I will willingly make. The Dunlops vastly improved the handling. The CX-9 still felt better (it had 20" wheels with lower sidewalls, so less flex) but the MDX is much better now. The handling is about as good as my old CX-9. The steering is still WAY too light though. It feels numb and as if I can turn the wheel with my pinkie.

There is a caveat here. I love performance vehicles with great handling. My daily is a 2006 Subaru Forester (love the sleeper aspect as it is a dumpy looking car) that has a complete aftermarket suspension meant for an STi. (Struts. Springs, front/rear swaybars). I also have dedicated summer/winter tires. But my "winter" tires are Pirelli Pzero Nero All Seasons (Ultra High Performance tires). I also have an STi steering rack in it. My engine and turbo are completely built with forged internals.
So the caveat is that I like a stiff suspension and tight steering. Therefore, what might be light steering for me might be just right for you.

Anyways, I highly recommend the Dunlops. I believe that they might be on closeout (I asked my local repair place to order them as I like to give my business to the little guy, but he couldn't get them from their distributor).

Skirmich

My MDX Steering hovers from "Mild Hard" to "Hard" when driving spirited...
Your MDX compared to that year CX-9 is comparing Apples to Oranges. Your MDX is 1 second faster to 60 and has a higher cornering G-Force with SH-AWD with proper tires...
So yeah Tires are pretty much everything, That year was also crippled with slimmer tires because the OG 2G MDX had wider tires from the factory, they went down for "MPGs" in the refresh model.

I am now rolling 265s and well, Its pretty much unstoppable in my Touge Track compared to many Crossovers.

Si_jeff

Maybe you just need some getting used to the mdx because there is no way that the CX-9 handles better than the 2G MDX. You need better tires, all cars do. And the steering is on the softer side on your model MDX but it has road feel , you just need to drive it more to appreciate the handling prowess. It doesn't handle like an X5 or a Cayenne but the MDX certainly can handle despite the 4,500 Lbs weight. Good thing you did not get the Highlander if handling is your priority. Congrats on the MDX, you will love it.

dinot

Just to clear it up, when I switched to the Dunlops the handling on the MDX feels every bit as good as our old CX-9. I was also running ultra high performance all seasons on that vehicle. The CX-9 also had 245/50-20 tires which have a narrower sidewall than the 18's on the MDX. I don't push this car into turns very hard because when I drive it, my wife and kids are in the car. The only time I drove it solo was during the test drive and the drive home from the dealer when it still had the awful touring Sumitomos. They are on Tire Rack for $100 each....so these were cheapies.
The steering is a personal preference thing with me. I drove a coworkers 2013 MDX and it too had ultra light steering. He thought that his steering was fine. I imagine that I am in the vast minority of MDX owners in preferring a stiffer steering rack.

Don't misunderstand me, I like the MDX better than the CX-9. I was just a little surprised at some of the things it lacks compared to the CX-9 as the MDX I have is 3 years newer and more expensive. (Considered a Luxury SUV whereas the CX-9 is not in that category)

The light steering and visibility were my biggest gripes (handling was too, but that was addressed with the tires). IMO, the side-view mirrors on the MDX are rather small (vertically). I find that I have to rely more on turning my head to check the blindspots than I did with the CX-9. The CX-9 also had blind spot monitoring.

The other things I don't like (these are minor issues):
- You can only access the 3rd row from the passengers side. The CX-9 could do either side.
- The second row seats on the CX-9 moved. You could adjust them forward/back (manually of course)
- Trunk space on the CX-9 was bigger.
- The 3rd row on the CX-9 were bigger.
- Keyless entry (like keyless entry a lot, I don't care for keyless ignition)
- Timing chain instead of a belt. I didn't know about this beforehand. My wife's RDX has a chain so I assumed the MDX did as well. This isn't the end of the world, I will just have a big expense in a year or two.
- Gas mileage. I would average about 22MPG on our weekly trip with the CX-9. The MDX is at 19MPG. Combine that with the need for premium gas and the gas bill is higher. (BUT - I prefer having more power, so I will take this tradeoff)

Things I like better on the MDX:
- Front seats are very comfortable on the MDX. I take a weekly 3 hour round trip with this car. With the CX-9, I had to constantly shift my seating position. The side bolsters and overall feel are great.
- 2nd row seats can lean back slightly. The CX-9 second row were very upright. My 6 year old has a knack of instantly falling asleep in the car. On the CX-9 her head would just dangle forward. On the MDX her head stays back against the seat.
- Bluetooth audio streaming. No more headphone cable.
- Power. The MDX is faster.
- Keyed ignition (I once drove off without the key on the CX-9)
- Paddle shifters (the CX-9 "shifted" via the shifter)

Again, I like the MDX better than the CX-9. The above list are minor gripes. I went in thinking that the MDX would surpass the CX-9 all around as it was in a higher class.

Skirmich

The 2G MDX was never designed with "UTILITY" in mind, this is the KEY DIFFERENCE (pun intended) to your CX-9..
The 2G MDX is a Sport Crossover designed to out handle everything in its class, SH-AWD is meant to aid in performance not weather.

So the competition to your CX-9 will be a Honda Pilot which does have more space than a comparable MDX..
The MDX is for people that want Sport over Utility.

Right now even the MDX Hybrid it has "Sport" written on its Hybrid Badge..
"SPORT HYBRID"-SH-AWD


On a side note:
The MDX uses very tiny and basically useless when turning paddle shifters, The gear shifter SS mode is still preferable because of those mini-tiny paddle shifters.

nats007

Thanks for the tip. Different topic, how do you like your Forester? I'm thinking about getting a Subaru in the future and the Forester is an option. Love the fact you can get them in manual, boosted, and I'm leaning to wagons lately. Wished Acura made the TSX wagon in manual.

265 on OEM wheels? Interested in seeing a pic!

dinot

I LOVE my Forester. So much so that last year I spent 5 figures getting a new engine built.
BUT, the turbos were only available with a manual between 2004-2008 (referred to as the SG Forester). The new Turbos (2014+) have a CVT which is a POS and fails often.
For my tastes, the SG Forester was the best Forester. It is small, (3200lbs) but has a huge cargo capacity. My hobby at the time was collecting and repairing pinball machines and I got tired of renting cargo vans to pickup machines. The biggest plus of that model year is that it is basically an Impreza chassis. So, WRX/STI parts will fit on the Forester. So that means, tons of aftermarket parts.

I have extensive aftermarket suspension (handles like a dream) parts. I went "mild" with my engine mods even though I have a fully built bottom end. I am at about 22lbs of boost and on the dyno I am 315WHP/325WTQ. Estimated crank numbers based on this dyno is 400HP/410TQ. With those "mild" numbers on a 3200lb car=LOTS of fun. Subarus have good 5-spd transmissions....BUT when you start adding lots of power, you can get lots of problems.

What year are you thinking about?

nats007

Awesome! Thanks for the info. I recall talking to another Forester owner at a shop and he recommended that same years and model xt. I recall him saying it's definitely a sleeper and sti parts were direct bolt on.

So if I find a good one, I'd shoot for an 08XT, but I also really like the LGT, so I had my eyes on them as well. It's a few years out, so it depends when I'm really ready to pull that trigger.

dinot

I do like the MDX very much. My issue is that I went in thinking that the MDX would be a huge upgrade over the CX-9. The MDX is an upgrade but not the huge upgrade I was thinking it would be. Also, I was running Continental Extemecontact DWS on 20" wheels (OEM) on the CX-9 and when I got the MDX, it had awful tires.

I like the paddle shifters as the CX-9 used the shifter which I never used to "manually" shift. I don't drive the MDX daily, it is used typically on the weekends when we go away. The seats in the MDX are unbelievably good.

My only complaints so far are:

- Bluetooth audio streaming disconnects
- Reverse lights need to be brighter (looking at options)

nats007

My solution for the reverse light (see post 105)

https://acurazine.com/forums/1g-2g-m.../#post16001213

dinot

I had seen that post. I will probably go that route. Originally I was hoping that I could swap out the reverse bulbs with some friggin bright LEDs. I have had mixed success with that. On my wife's RDX, that did the trick. On my Forester, it is a no go as the diffuser really hampers the LED. It seems as if the MDX has the same diffuser issues.
I just need to figure out how to mount them (maybe even on my Forester).

csmeance

The dunlops will not disappoint you in wet weather nor dry, however by the halfway mark they start getting a bit noisy! I've not got the Pirelli Verde Tires and am not that big of a fan of them. Not enough grip in the dry and noticeable under braking vs the Dunlops, but WAY quieter and gained an MPG.

Skirmich

Yeah the main issue with the reverse lights is that they are not aimed to the ground....
Acura made the wrong decision to make the lights usable for non-Reverse camera models (Perhaps the Reverse Camera was a last thing addition in development). They made them horizontally to the tailgate and since they are way up in the tailgate the light disperse far in the distance.. Useable for non-Reverse camera models, Useless for anyone that wants to see what the reverse camera is seeing in the night...

Even if you upgrade to stupid bright LEDs in the OEM Bulb position it wont help you see in the reverse camera area.
nats007 solution is the way to go since the light starts beneath the bumper which is what the reverse camera is seeing.

Si_jeff

How does the Pirelli compare to the OEM Bridgestone or Conti cross contact lx20? I have the Pirelli P Zero all season on my TL and I like them.

LagunaBlueAP2

Dunlop Signature HP are a damn good UHPAS tire. On tire rack, it was either the Dunlop’s or the Continental DWS06 in size 255/55/18. The Dunlop’s were cheaper by fifty bucks each. It was a no brainer.

The dunlops are a good fit for the MDX. Rides nice, quiet and comfortable.