When Mazda unveiled the CX-90 Turbo S as its new flagship three-row SUV, automotive enthusiasts and industry observers took notice. The vehicle represented Mazda’s most ambitious push into the premium segment, packing a 340-horsepower turbocharged inline-six engine, a sophisticated rear-biased all-wheel-drive system, and promises of the brand’s signature “Jinba Ittai” driver-engagement philosophy. On paper, it seemed like a compelling alternative to established luxury SUVs from brands like Acura, BMW, and Lexus. However, after subjecting the CX-90 Turbo S Premium Plus to a rigorous 40,000-mile long-term test, the reality proved significantly different from the promise, revealing critical shortcomings in its core driving dynamics.
The Promise of Premium Performance
Mazda’s strategy with the CX-90 was clear: leverage its reputation for building engaging, driver-focused vehicles to create a family hauler that didn’t sacrifice pleasure for practicality. The hardware specifications were undeniably impressive. The new 3.3-liter turbocharged inline-six, dubbed the e-Skyactiv G, was paired with a mild-hybrid 48-volt system and an eight-speed automatic transmission. This powertrain delivered 340 horsepower and 369 lb-ft of torque, numbers that placed it competitively against rivals. The chassis featured a double-wishbone front suspension and a multi-link rear setup, while the i-Activ AWD system could send up to 100% of torque to the rear wheels. On the surface, it was a recipe for a dynamic, responsive, and enjoyable large SUV.
Initial Impressions and Early Concerns
During the first few thousand miles, the CX-90 Turbo S presented a mixed bag. The interior, finished in handsome white Nappa leather with maple wood trim, felt special and well-crafted, a clear step above mainstream competitors. The powertrain provided strong, linear acceleration, and the steering was precise and well-weighted. However, early testers noted a persistent disconnect between the sophisticated hardware and the actual driving experience. The transmission, despite its eight gears, could be hesitant and occasionally clunky during low-speed maneuvers and sudden throttle applications. More concerning was a subtle but ever-present vibration through the steering wheel and floor at highway speeds, a trait unbecoming of a vehicle with premium aspirations.
The 40,000-Mile Reality Check
As the long-term test progressed, these initial quirks evolved from minor annoyances into fundamental flaws that defined the ownership experience. The core issue was a lack of chassis composure and refinement that became glaringly apparent over varied road conditions.
Ride Quality and Suspension Tuning
The CX-90’s suspension, despite its advanced hardware, failed to find a comfortable middle ground. On smooth highways, the ride was acceptably compliant, but the moment the pavement turned imperfect, the SUV’s demeanor deteriorated. It transmitted sharp impacts from potholes and expansion joints directly into the cabin with a jarring, hollow thump. Simultaneously, it exhibited excessive body roll and float over larger undulations, creating a disconcerting, wallowing sensation. This combination of a harsh primary ride and uncontrolled secondary motions was fatiguing over long distances and undermined any sense of luxury or control.
Powertrain Refinement Deficits
The inline-six engine, while potent, never felt fully integrated or refined. The mild-hybrid system’s stop-start function was abrupt, and the engine note under hard acceleration was strained and unmusical, lacking the smooth, turbine-like character expected from a modern six-cylinder. The transmission’s programming remained a persistent weak point. It was often caught off-guard, downshifting too aggressively or refusing to upshift smoothly, which disrupted the driving flow. In stop-and-go traffic, the powertrain’s behavior felt unpolished and occasionally uncooperative, a stark contrast to the seamless operation found in top-tier competitors.
The Handling Paradox
Perhaps the greatest disappointment was in the handling department, an area where Mazda has historically excelled. The CX-90’s steering, though accurate, delivered little feedback, isolating the driver from the road surface. The chassis never felt truly cohesive when pushed. During spirited driving on winding roads, the body roll was pronounced, and the all-wheel-drive system’s rear-bias did not translate into the playful, balanced feel Mazda promised. Instead, the SUV felt heavy, inert, and ultimately reluctant to change direction with enthusiasm. The sporting hardware seemed at odds with the vehicle’s substantial 5,100-pound curb weight, resulting in a driving experience that was neither engaging nor exceptionally comfortable.
Ownership Costs and Reliability
Beyond the driving experience, the long-term test provided insights into running costs and reliability. Fuel economy averaged a modest 23 mpg combined, falling short of its EPA estimates in real-world use, especially with spirited driving. Scheduled maintenance costs were in line with the premium segment, but no major mechanical issues arose during the 40,000-mile period. The interior materials held up well to family use, with only minor signs of wear on high-contact surfaces. However, several electronic gremlins appeared, including intermittent warnings from the driver-assistance systems and occasional glitches with the infotainment interface, which required dealer visits to reset.
The Competitive Landscape
When viewed against its intended rivals, the CX-90 Turbo S’s shortcomings become more pronounced. The Acura MDX Type S offers sharper handling and a more charismatic powertrain. The Genesis GV80 provides superior ride comfort and a more opulent cabin. Even mainstream players like the Honda Pilot and Toyota Grand Highlander deliver more consistent, predictable, and comfortable driving experiences for families, despite lacking the Mazda’s peak power figures. The CX-90’s attempt to blend sporty dynamics with three-row practicality resulted in a compromise that excelled in neither area, leaving it in a no-man’s-land between segments.
What the Long-Term Test Reveals
This extended evaluation underscores a critical lesson: impressive specifications on a window sticker do not guarantee a satisfying ownership experience. The CX-90 Turbo S is a vehicle of unfulfilled potential. Its individual components—the engine, the suspension design, the all-wheel-drive system—are technically competent. Yet, Mazda’s calibration and integration of these systems failed to create a harmonious, refined, or engaging whole. The SUV feels like a collection of good parts in search of a unified philosophy, resulting in a driving dynamic that is, ultimately, a letdown.
The Mazda CX-90 Turbo S represents a bold but flawed step in the brand’s journey upward. For buyers considering this three-row SUV, the long-term test suggests caution. It is essential to look beyond the horsepower figures and premium materials and spend significant time behind the wheel on real-world roads. The disconnect between its promising hardware and the actual on-road experience is too significant to ignore. While it offers style and space, those seeking the dynamic excellence for which Mazda is renowned may find this flagship model comes up short, proving that in the automotive world, the whole is only as good as the sum of its carefully tuned and integrated parts.
