In the competitive landscape of three-row SUVs, manufacturers often promise a harmonious blend of family practicality and engaging driving dynamics. Mazda, with its premium aspirations under the “Kodo: Soul of Motion” design philosophy, positioned the CX-90 Turbo S as a vehicle that could deliver on both fronts. However, a comprehensive 40,000-mile long-term evaluation has revealed significant gaps between the promise of its impressive hardware and the reality of its on-road performance, casting doubt on its ability to compete at the top of the segment.
The Promise of Premium Performance
On paper, the Mazda CX-90 Turbo S presents a compelling case. It arrives equipped with what Mazda calls the e-Skyactiv-G 3.3-liter inline-six turbocharged mild-hybrid engine, a unit producing a robust 340 horsepower and 369 lb-ft of torque. This power is channeled through an eight-speed automatic transmission and Mazda’s i-Activ all-wheel-drive system. The chassis features a front double-wishbone and rear multi-link suspension setup, specifically tuned for what the brand describes as a “Jinba Ittai” (horse and rider as one) driving experience. For a vehicle of its size, the specifications suggest a focus on agility and refinement that would set it apart from more utilitarian competitors.
Initial Impressions Versus Long-Term Reality
The Honeymoon Phase
During the initial break-in period and the first several thousand miles, the CX-90 Turbo S made a strong first impression. The inline-six engine provided smooth, linear power delivery, a welcome departure from the coarse character of many turbocharged four-cylinder engines in the class. The cabin, adorned with high-quality materials like Nappa leather, real wood trim, and soft-touch surfaces, felt genuinely upscale. The driving position was commanding, and at lower speeds or on smooth highways, the vehicle felt composed and quiet. Early feedback praised its confident stance and the lack of body roll in gentle cornering, hinting at the sporty DNA Mazda aimed to inject.
The Cracks Begin to Show
As the odometer climbed past the 10,000-mile mark, the fundamental compromises in the CX-90’s driving dynamics became increasingly apparent. The primary issue centered on the suspension tuning and chassis communication. While the hardware suggested capability, the calibration seemed conflicted, struggling to reconcile comfort with control.
The suspension, particularly over broken pavement and expansion joints, exhibited a firm, almost brittle quality that transmitted sharp impacts directly into the cabin. This was not the connected, communicative firmness of a sports sedan, but rather a jittery, unsettled sensation that undermined ride comfort. Conversely, during more aggressive driving on winding roads, the same suspension failed to provide adequate body control. Pronounced body roll and floatiness emerged, with the steering—though precise on-center—offering little in the way of meaningful feedback as loads increased.
The Powertrain’s Split Personality
Strength in Straight Lines
The 3.3-liter turbocharged inline-six remained a highlight throughout the test. Its power delivery was consistently strong, making highway merging and passing maneuvers effortless. The mild-hybrid system operated seamlessly, providing a slight torque fill at low RPMs. The transmission, for the most part, executed smooth upshifts, contributing to a refined cruising experience. As a tool for covering long distances with authority, the powertrain largely delivered.
Where the Drivetrain Disappoints
However, the drivetrain’s weaknesses were exposed in dynamic situations. The eight-speed automatic transmission, when called upon for quick downshifts during spirited driving or when navigating hilly terrain, often hesitated or hunted for gears, breaking the driver’s rhythm. The all-wheel-drive system, while competent in providing traction in poor weather, did little to enhance the driving feel or rotate the vehicle in corners. The overall sensation was one of a powerful engine mated to a driveline and chassis that couldn’t fully exploit or complement its capabilities, creating a disconnect between the driver’s inputs and the vehicle’s responses.
Practicality and Daily Usability Concerns
Beyond pure dynamics, the long-term test highlighted ergonomic and practical shortcomings that affected daily usability. The third-row seating, a key selling point for families, was found to be suitable only for children or very short trips for adults, with limited legroom and a cramped seating position. Cargo space behind the third row was also less generous than key rivals, a sacrifice seemingly made for the sloping rear roofline.
More critically, the infotainment system—centered around a large screen controlled by a rotary dial—grew increasingly frustrating over time. While the interface is visually clean, menu complexity and a lack of intuitive touchscreen functionality (which is only enabled when the vehicle is stationary) made simple tasks like inputting a navigation destination or adjusting audio settings more distracting than they should be in a modern vehicle.
Reliability and Cost of Ownership
From a mechanical standpoint, the CX-90 Turbo S proved reliable over the 40,000-mile period. No major drivetrain or electrical failures occurred. Routine maintenance costs aligned with expectations for the premium segment, though some dealers noted the complexity of the new inline-six engine might lead to higher long-term service costs compared to more conventional powertrains. Fuel economy averaged 23 mpg combined, which was respectable but not class-leading for a mild-hybrid system, falling short of some turbo-four and plug-in hybrid competitors.
Segment Context and Competitive Failure
The ultimate letdown of the CX-90 Turbo S is best understood within its competitive set. Vehicles like the Hyundai Palisade, Kia Telluride, and Honda Pilot offer superior ride comfort, more spacious interiors, and more user-friendly technology, often at a lower price point. Meanwhile, European offerings like the BMW X5, Audi Q7, and Mercedes-Benz GLE—while more expensive—deliver the genuinely engaging and refined driving dynamics that Mazda aspired to, demonstrating that blending luxury, space, and agility is possible. The CX-90 Turbo S, unfortunately, occupies an uncomfortable middle ground: it lacks the plush comfort and practicality of its mainstream rivals and fails to match the dynamic polish of true luxury performers, despite its premium price tag positioning it against them.
The Verdict After 40,000 Miles
The long-term test concluded that the Mazda CX-90 Turbo S is a vehicle of unfulfilled potential. Its core strength—the smooth, powerful inline-six engine—is undermined by a chassis that can’t decide between comfort and sport, resulting in a ride that is neither serene nor engaging. The cabin’s premium materials are offset by a frustrating infotainment system and compromised third-row utility. For a brand that has built its reputation on delivering driving joy, even in practical vehicles, the CX-90’s dynamic shortcomings are particularly disappointing. It represents a bold step upmarket for Mazda, but one that stumbles in execution, failing to deliver the cohesive, premium experience necessary to justify its position and price in a fiercely contested market. The takeaway for consumers is clear: while the CX-90 has notable attributes, those prioritizing either seamless family comfort or genuine driving pleasure will likely find more complete solutions elsewhere.
Ultimately, the story of the CX-90 Turbo S is a cautionary tale about the difficulty of executing a premium proposition. Spec sheets and first drives can create compelling narratives, but it is the daily experience over tens of thousands of miles that reveals a vehicle’s true character. In this rigorous test, the gap between the CX-90’s ambition and its reality proved too wide to ignore, leaving it as a compelling but flawed contender in a segment where excellence is the minimum requirement for success.
