When Mazda unveiled the CX-90 as its new flagship three-row SUV, the automotive world took notice. Here was a brand known for its “Zoom-Zoom” ethos and driver-centric vehicles launching its most ambitious model yet, powered by an all-new inline-six engine and rear-biased platform. The promise was clear: a premium, three-row family hauler that wouldn’t compromise on the driving experience. After subjecting a top-trim CX-90 Turbo S Premium Plus to a rigorous 40,000-mile long-term test, however, the reality proved to be a significant departure from that promise.
The Promise of Premium Performance
On paper, the Mazda CX-90 Turbo S presents an impressive technical portfolio. Its centerpiece is a 3.3-liter turbocharged inline-six mild-hybrid engine, producing 340 horsepower and 369 lb-ft of torque. This is paired with an eight-speed automatic transmission and Mazda’s i-Activ all-wheel-drive system. The platform itself is new, designed for longitudinal engine mounting to enhance driving dynamics, a configuration more commonly associated with luxury brands like BMW. The suspension is a sophisticated multi-link setup at the rear, and the Turbo S trim adds adaptive dampers. For a family-oriented SUV starting in the mid-$60,000 range, the hardware suggested a vehicle that could genuinely deliver a sporty, engaging drive.
Initial Impressions and Early Promise
In the first few thousand miles, the CX-90’s strengths were apparent. The interior of the Turbo S Premium Plus model is a masterclass in understated, high-quality design. Materials are excellent, with nappa leather, open-pore wood, and soft-touch surfaces throughout. The cabin is quiet, comfortable, and thoughtfully laid out. The inline-six engine is smooth and delivers strong, linear power. The initial feeling was one of a premium product that justified its price tag, living up to Mazda’s aspirations of moving upmarket.
Where the Dynamic Promise Unraveled
The core issue that emerged over the long haul wasn’t with reliability or build quality, but with the fundamental driving experience—the very attribute Mazda has built its reputation on. The adaptive suspension, despite its hardware, never found a satisfying middle ground. In its default setting, the ride was often overly firm and busy, transmitting too many small road imperfections into the cabin without the communicative feedback of a true sports sedan. Switching to the softer mode introduced noticeable body roll and a disconnected, floaty feel during highway cruising or cornering.
The steering, often a Mazda highlight, felt artificially heavy and lacked the natural, progressive weighting and feedback found in models like the Mazda3 or MX-5 Miata. It was precise but numb, failing to involve the driver. The braking system, while powerful, had an inconsistent pedal feel that made smooth stops difficult to execute, a notable flaw in stop-and-go traffic.
The Daily Grind Reveals Flaws
As the odometer climbed past 10,000 and then 20,000 miles, these dynamic shortcomings became more than just quirks; they defined the daily ownership experience. The transmission, while generally smooth, exhibited hesitant downshifts when a burst of acceleration was needed for merging or passing. The stop-start system for the mild-hybrid setup was often jarring. Furthermore, the third row of seats, a key selling point for a vehicle of this size, remained best suited for children or very short trips, with limited leg and headroom for adults.
Comparison to the Competition
This is where the CX-90’s positioning becomes problematic. It asks buyers to consider it alongside not just mainstream rivals like the Honda Pilot or Toyota Highlander, but also premium offerings like the Acura MDX, Genesis GV80, and even entry-level versions of the BMW X5. While its interior quality can challenge some of these, its driving dynamics—supposedly its trump card—end up falling short. The Acura MDX with its SH-AWD system offers sharper, more predictable handling. The Genesis GV80 delivers a far more refined and composed ride. Even some less expensive mainstream competitors provide a more comfortable, predictable, and cohesive driving experience for family duty.
The Cost of Ownership and Reliability
From a purely mechanical standpoint, the CX-90 proved reliable over 40,000 miles. No major mechanical failures occurred. Routine maintenance costs were in line with expectations for a vehicle in this class, though premium-grade fuel is recommended for the turbocharged engine. Fuel economy averaged around 23 mpg combined, which is respectable for a powerful, three-row SUV but not class-leading. The real cost was in the depreciation of the driving experience. The initial thrill of the powerful engine gave way to frustration with the chassis’ inability to match it with finesse and communication.
Software and Infotainment Quirks
Another area of persistent annoyance was the infotainment system. Mazda’s decision to use a rotary controller and touchscreen is fine in theory, but the software felt dated and occasionally laggy. Wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto connectivity was sometimes unstable. These are not deal-breakers on their own, but in a vehicle aiming for a premium feel, they added to the sense that the details weren’t fully polished.
A Missed Opportunity for the Brand
The CX-90 represents a bold and costly step for Mazda. It’s the vanguard of a new generation of larger, more premium vehicles. The investment in a new inline-six engine and rear-wheel-drive-based platform is enormous. To see the final product stumble on something as core to the brand’s identity as driving dynamics is therefore particularly disappointing. It suggests a disconnect between the engineering of individual components—a great engine, good suspension hardware—and the final calibration and tuning that makes a vehicle feel like a cohesive, engaging whole.
The Takeaway for Potential Buyers
For shoppers, the lesson is clear: a compelling spec sheet does not guarantee a compelling driving experience. The Mazda CX-90 Turbo S is a competent, well-built, and powerful SUV with a beautiful interior. It is not, however, the driver’s SUV it purports to be. For those who prioritize luxury ambiance, smooth power, and interior quality above all else, it remains a credible option. But for the driving enthusiast seeking a three-row vehicle, or for anyone who believes Mazda’s marketing about joy in motion, the CX-90’s dynamic shortcomings over 40,000 miles make it difficult to recommend over more resolved competitors. The soul of a Mazda, it seems, is harder to scale up than its engineers anticipated.
In the end, the CX-90’s journey reflects the immense challenge of balancing multiple priorities in a single vehicle. The pursuit of premium status, three-row practicality, and driving exhilaration may have stretched the recipe too thin. For a brand whose identity is so tightly woven to the feel of its cars, this long-term test reveals a gap between aspiration and execution that will need to be addressed as Mazda continues its climb into the luxury arena. The hardware is largely in place; now, the focus must turn to the finer art of tuning and integration that transforms components into a memorable machine.
