After 40,000 miles of real-world driving, our long-term test vehicle, a Mazda CX-90 Turbo S, revealed significant shortcomings in its promised driving dynamics. Despite being equipped with what appeared on paper to be impressive hardware\u2014a 340-horsepower turbocharged inline-six engine and standard all-wheel drive\u2014the three-row SUV consistently failed to translate its specifications into satisfying performance.<\/p>\n
When Mazda introduced the CX-90, it positioned the vehicle as a premium alternative to established luxury three-row SUVs. The Turbo S trim, in particular, promised sporty handling and refined power delivery, targeting buyers who wanted utility without sacrificing driving pleasure. Our expectations were high given Mazda’s reputation for crafting vehicles with engaging dynamics, even in mainstream segments.<\/p>\n
The 3.3-liter turbocharged inline-six engine produces 340 horsepower and 369 lb-ft of torque, numbers that suggest brisk acceleration and confident passing power. In practice, however, the powertrain felt strained and unrefined under normal driving conditions. Throttle response was inconsistent, with noticeable lag followed by abrupt power delivery that made smooth acceleration challenging in stop-and-go traffic.<\/p>\n
Transmission tuning proved particularly problematic. The eight-speed automatic frequently hunted for gears on inclines and hesitated during downshifts when additional power was needed. This behavior became more pronounced as mileage accumulated, with the transmission developing a noticeable harshness during certain shift patterns that wasn’t present during the initial evaluation period.<\/p>\n
Mazda’s commitment to “jinba ittai”\u2014the horse and rider as one\u2014has been a defining characteristic of their vehicles for years. The CX-90 Turbo S, despite its sporting pretensions, consistently fell short of this ideal. The steering, while precise on center, lacked the natural feedback that has distinguished Mazda’s best efforts. At highway speeds, the system felt artificially heavy without providing corresponding confidence or connection to the road surface.<\/p>\n
Ride quality presented another significant disappointment. The suspension, which includes frequency-selective damping, failed to effectively isolate passengers from road imperfections while simultaneously lacking the controlled body motions expected in a vehicle with sporting intentions. The result was a ride that felt both busy and unsettled on varied road surfaces, with noticeable side-to-side head toss on undulating pavement that proved fatiguing on longer journeys.<\/p>\n
Over 40,000 miles of testing, several build quality issues emerged that raised concerns about long-term durability. Interior rattles developed at multiple locations, most notably in the dashboard and second-row seating area. The panoramic sunroof mechanism began exhibiting intermittent noise during operation at approximately 25,000 miles, requiring dealer attention that only partially resolved the issue.<\/p>\n
The CX-90’s infotainment system, while visually appealing, proved frustrating in daily use. The combination of touchscreen and rotary controller created confusion rather than convenience, with some functions accessible only through one input method. Wireless smartphone connectivity proved unreliable, with frequent disconnections that required rebooting the system to restore functionality.<\/p>\n
Mazda’s i-Activsense suite of safety features delivered mixed results. The adaptive cruise control system exhibited abrupt braking in response to vehicles in adjacent lanes on curved highways, creating an unnerving experience for both driver and passengers. Lane-keeping assistance was overly aggressive in its corrections while simultaneously allowing too much wander before intervening, creating a tug-of-war sensation that led most test drivers to disable the system entirely.<\/p>\n
Official EPA estimates for the CX-90 Turbo S stand at 23 mpg combined (21 city\/28 highway). Our real-world testing yielded significantly different results, with observed fuel economy averaging just 19.8 mpg over 40,000 miles of mixed driving. This 14% deficiency relative to EPA estimates represents a meaningful increase in operating costs, particularly given the vehicle’s requirement for premium fuel.<\/p>\n
Scheduled maintenance followed Mazda’s recommended intervals, with no unscheduled repairs required during the test period. However, service costs were notably higher than expected for a mainstream brand, approaching luxury territory for routine items. The dealership experience varied significantly by location, with some facilities demonstrating expertise with the new platform while others seemed unfamiliar with the CX-90’s specific requirements.<\/p>\n
When evaluated against its intended competitors\u2014including the Acura MDX, Genesis GV80, and Lincoln Aviator\u2014the CX-90 Turbo S struggled to justify its positioning. While priced more aggressively than some luxury alternatives, its driving dynamics failed to surpass those of established players, and its refinement fell short of vehicles at similar price points.<\/p>\n
The CX-90’s three-row configuration proved adequate for family duties, with reasonable third-row access and sufficient space for children or occasional adult use. However, cargo capacity behind the third row was limited compared to some competitors, and the load floor height made loading heavier items more difficult than in key rivals.<\/p>\n
Mazda has made significant strides in interior design and material quality in recent years, and the CX-90 continues this trend in many respects. Soft-touch surfaces are abundant, and the overall design is aesthetically pleasing. However, some material choices didn’t withstand daily use as well as expected, with noticeable wear appearing on frequently contacted surfaces earlier than anticipated.<\/p>\n
The most perplexing aspect of the CX-90 Turbo S experience was the consistent gap between what the vehicle promised on paper and what it delivered on the road. Individual components\u2014the engine specifications, suspension design, technology features\u2014all suggested a capable, engaging vehicle. Yet the integration of these elements failed to create a cohesive, satisfying driving experience.<\/p>\n
For prospective buyers considering the CX-90 Turbo S as a long-term vehicle, our 40,000-mile test raises important questions. The driving experience, which might seem acceptable during a brief test drive, revealed its shortcomings over extended use. The combination of disappointing fuel economy, emerging build quality concerns, and unsatisfying dynamics suggests that ownership satisfaction may diminish rather than grow over time.<\/p>\n
As the automotive market continues to evolve toward electrification and increased refinement expectations, vehicles like the CX-90 Turbo S face heightened scrutiny. Our extended testing revealed that Mazda’s ambitious attempt to blend sporting dynamics with three-row utility has resulted in a vehicle that excels at neither. For drivers who prioritize engagement behind the wheel, more focused alternatives exist. For those seeking maximum comfort and refinement in a family vehicle, numerous competitors deliver superior experiences. The CX-90 Turbo S occupies an awkward middle ground\u2014a vehicle with identity that fails to deliver on its core promise when measured against the reality of daily use over thousands of miles.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
After 40,000 miles of real-world driving, our long-term test vehicle, a Mazda CX-90 Turbo S, revealed significant shortcomings in its promised driving dynamics. Despite being equipped with what appeared on paper to be impressive hardware\u2014a 340-horsepower turbocharged inline-six engine and standard all-wheel drive\u2014the three-row SUV consistently failed to translate its specifications into satisfying performance. The […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":7,"featured_media":92197,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/cards.overcentral.com\/cards\/en\/18256.png","fifu_image_alt":"Mazda CX-90 Turbo S Performance Fails to Deliver in 40,000-Mile Long-Term Test","footnotes":""},"categories":[2336],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-18256","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-automotive"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/cards.overcentral.com\/cards\/en\/18256.png","fifu_image_alt":"Mazda CX-90 Turbo S Performance Fails to Deliver in 40,000-Mile Long-Term Test","fifu_redirection_url":"https:\/\/www.caranddriver.com\/reviews\/a45873287\/2024-mazda-cx-90-turbo-s-reliability-maintenance\/","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/overcentral.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/18256","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/overcentral.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/overcentral.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/overcentral.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/7"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/overcentral.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=18256"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/overcentral.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/18256\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/overcentral.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/92197"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/overcentral.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=18256"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/overcentral.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=18256"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/overcentral.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=18256"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}