CX-7 Pricing

[TBR]

From Mazdausa.com's BYO section:
FWD:
Sport- $23750
Touring- $25500
Grand Touring- $26300
AWD:
Sport- $25450
Touring- $27200
Grand Touring- $28000

Is it just me or are those really good prices for a midsize crossover? If they ever offer a MT I could very well get my parents to trade in the Outback ahead of schedule (my mother likes the high seating position of suvs and the FWD CX-7 should get similar gas mileage to the Subaru).  

[ifcar]

It entirely depends on what equipment is standard at those prices. But it does look impressive based on the first info.  

[Raza]

I imagine that they'll offer a manual, since they sell the Mazda5 with a stick.

[crv16]

From Mazdausa.com's BYO section:
FWD:
Sport- $23750
Touring- $25500
Grand Touring- $26300
AWD:
Sport- $25450
Touring- $27200
Grand Touring- $28000

Is it just me or are those really good prices for a midsize crossover? If they ever offer a MT I could very well get my parents to trade in the Outback ahead of schedule (my mother likes the high seating position of suvs and the FWD CX-7 should get similar gas mileage to the Subaru).

If you compare the CX-7 internal dimensions to the Mazda6 wagon, they are almost identical.

The Mazda6 seems to be a couple grand cheaper than comparable CX-7 models with the rebates that are available now.

[TBR]

The CX-7 also has 30 more HP . Really not sure what your point is, crossovers are always more expensive than their sedan/wagon siblings. Want to compare a Camry to a Highlander or a Outback H6 to a B9 Tribeca? I am pretty sure the differences are bigger there in both cases.

[crv16]

The CX-7 also has 30 more HP . Really not sure what your point is, crossovers are always more expensive than their sedan/wagon siblings. Want to compare a Camry to a Highlander or a Outback H6 to a B9 Tribeca? I am pretty sure the differences are bigger there in both cases.

Just wanted to make the (obvious) point that most crossovers are simply jacked up wagons.  In the case of the cx7, it's no roomier than the 6 wagon, yet it's a couple grand more expensive.

It's a case of crossovers having a higher "perceived value" than a wagon.

Crossovers, right now, are the "hot" vehicle type, and their pricing defies logic.

Compare the base Highlander to the base Sienna.  The Highlander has a 4 cyl, 4 speed auto trans and far less interior space than the Sienna.  The Sienna has a 5 speed auto trans, 6 cylinder, etc.

Why then, is the Highlander almost a grand more expensive than the Sienna? (24,530 vs 23,625).   It's because that's what the public is willing to pay.

While the CX-7 may be a good value in comparison to other crossovers, crossovers in general aren't the best values.

[crv16]

Which leads me to another point.  Why don't manufacturers offer more wagons?  It's because people are only willing to pay a small premium for a wagon over a sedan.

Yet that same wagon, restyled, jacked up a bit and marketed as a "crossover" commands a several thousand dollar premium.

You wouldn't consider spending $4,000 more for a theoretical Camry LE Wagon over a Camry LE sedan, yet people gladly spend that premium for a Highlander.

[NomisR]

Well, because Wagons used to be considered uncool back in the days.  I would gladly drive a wagon over a SUV, Minivan or any other cross over vehicles as I dont have use for that size of a car and a wagon is basically no smaller than majority of those popular cars today anyways.

[TBR]

Actually, I do agree with you there, if manufacturers besides expensive Euro brands and Subaru offered MT wagons I might be much happier with my mom's car.

[Atomic]

wow! what a bargain   !!!

[BRealistic]

Can I get a V-tech sticker?