Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Why exactly do you need the AWD?
Thank you, - MS.
Agility, safety, and driving pleasure, I guess, and better offroad capability is another reason. AWD helps you to retain control of the vehicle mainly in slippery road conditions, but also in normal conditions when you make turns at high speeds. Good AWD system delivers so much more safety. I used to drive 2WD car with antilock brakes and I’ve experienced antilock brakes activation many times, even in a normal road condition. Now, while driving the AWD SUV, my brakes have never locked yet even in a heavy rain.
Some AWD systems differ form the others. For instance, Mitsubishi Outlander’s AWD system has 4WD Lock, 4WD Auto and 2WD modes. The electronically controlled 4WD Auto mode operates in response to accelerator pedal action, and feedback control, which monitors the speed of the four wheels and computes any difference between front and rear wheel rotation speeds. The 4WD Auto is a “smart” mode, which delivers the optimal amount of torque for driving conditions while maintaining better fuel economy. 4WD Lock mode places priority on performance vs. fuel economy delivering consistent torque to rear the wheels.
BMW xDrive is a similar intelligent AWD system. Some others are not as good. It is fair to say, therefore, that vehicle with good AWD system guides you round corners just like a vehicle running on rails.
This probably has more to do with tires and/or brakes than the fact that it's AWD. In a braking situation, AWD should have no effect - this is why you see AWD vehicles in the ditch during snow storms; people over-estimate the assistance that AWD provides.
Mark
I'm not. Toyota, etc were tired of paying for ads using the JD Powers results, but Ford was ready to pay a lot more, so thus the results! :P
Seriously, though, doesn't anybody look at the actual NUMBERS?
I believe it was something like 100 defects per 100 vehicles vs. 99 defects per hundred vehicles? Talk about differences that make no difference.
And it's been that way for quite some time, even when Toyota/etc were "winning" this silly game.
2. As far as needing AWD... in Dallas, you probably don't. (I live in D/FW as well) True, I bought my CX-7 with AWD, but even I admit it's overkill for the metroplex. I bought it more for the unknown, and because of the fact that I was replacing a 4x4. (on-demand AWD ain't quite the same, but it made me feel better about losing my rough-and-ready pickup
-c92
As you probably know, I own a couple of Fords, and have owned many Fords . . in fact, that's all I've owned.
Still, I think this whole JD Powers "winner" thing is completely RIDICULOUS.
I mean, come on . . 99 vs. 100 defects out of a hundred cars is what separates #1 and #2, and people think this is a big thing?
IIRC from years past, the entire range was something like 0.5 defects per car up to maybe 2 defects per car. Hardly worth noticing, IMO.
And be honest . . it ain't gonna help Ford anyway, 'cuz the foreign-car-lovers will just say "so what, their long-term reliability is still crap". :P
In one of the major upsets of the year (odds were on the 08 Tribeca
That is the rumor. MT and C&D both did small writeups about it too.
Another part of that rumor is that the unibody Explorer and the Mustang will drop the Cologne 4.0L V6 and get the new Duratec37 which is going into Lincoln RWD vehicles. I'm pretty sure the 3.7L is only being built for RWD right now so it does make some sense. Switching the Explorer to a unibody that tows 4 or 5 tons may not be such a good idea IMO.
Hey- it doesn't matter to Ford. They need all the good publicity they can get! And since they now "wear the pants" in quality, those auto buyers who only look at auto ratings of this kind (instead of tests by auto magazines) will be drawn to Ford. On a side note- I bet Ford won't be selling Volvo. I mean Land Rover and Jag I can clearly see. but why would they sell a company with which they share so much in safety and platforms with? Plus- Volvo is profitable- unlike their other European brands.
You'd be surprised. Check the RWTIV thread to see what a used Lexus RX will fetch, you will be SHOCKED. It's ridiculous.
OK, just searched on cars.com for used 99 models for both. Ready to be floored?
99 Explorers range in asking price from $2,500 to $10,777.
99 RX300s range in asking price from $12,000 to $17,000.
So you guestimated $1-2 grand, but it's actually $9500 on the low end or about $6000 on the high end.
Point being, if you much prefer the Lexus, go for it. You get most of it back later anyway.
There are some opportunity costs because you tie up more money, but if you like it better and will be happier in the long run, the difference in cost isn't as much as you'd think.
We got a monster sized 12" screen. It does block the top half of the rear view mirror but I turn around when I'm backing up anyway, and it does not obstruct that view.
Well, it's about comparing apples to apples. The loaded Explorer worth 10 grand vs. the lower model RX worth 12 grand. They both prabably have about the same equipment. And another thing- the longer you own two cars, the closer in value they will be. The Lexus costs 40 grand from the start whereas the Explorer might only have cost 28, but after 8-10 years and 120k miles (random figures) they will be very close at the end in value.
Remember the days when Ford advertised "Quality is Job 1"? They couldn't back it up back then. It's kinda sad that improving quality has been one of their major goal for years now, at a time when other companies have been designing more exciting vehicles. Maybe a quick attempt at a 6-sigma initiative has improved initial quality, but it's really the 3-year numbers I'm interested in. Heck, the whole Consumer Reports crowd only seems to look at long term reliability...it's engrained in their brains!!!
That being said, I will probably take a look at the Taurus X: now that it has more power and a different front-end, it's more appealing than the outgoing FS.
Also, JD Power is totally bogus and means nothing just like Car and Driver, Motor Trend and other advertiser paid outfits and magazines.
The only trustworty and un advertiser paid Car reviews/ratings is Consumer Reports.
I currently have a 2006 Subaru B9 Tribeca loaded with NAV and dvd, many accessories including 07 special edition mesh grille and retractable cargo cover, plus 20" wheels and tires with front windows tinted to match the back. Subaru lettering and front log removed, it gets a lot of compliments and questions of what it is.
Its been a fun and enjoyable suv but in the end a little short on power at only 250 HP. The 08 now has a 3.5L of the same boxer engine (which is symetrical in weight and low center of gravity like the porsche boxer engine which ironically the Cayenne doesnt have making the tribeca more like a porsche suv then the cayenne) but I would love an STi version of the Tribeca. there is rumor to possibly be a Turbo 2008 Tribeca which is reskinned btw with an front and rear fascia that appeals to more ppl though I prefer the more unique 06-07 front and rear end design as the 08 looks mor elike every other suv.
Anyway, I will be looking to sell it or trade it in for a new SUV sometime between the next few months to as long as 2 years.
Currently I am interested in the MDX for the features and tech for the money but realize the design isn't that exciting. I have become interested in the Mazda CX-9 even though I didn't like the styling of the CX-7 much at all.
Any suggestions on what is good now or what me worth waiting for that will have everything my B9 Tribeca has and more especially hopefully more then 250 HP.
2008 Buick Enclave
2007 GMC Acadia
2007 Honda Pilot (may be slightly less HP)
2008 Hyundai Veracruz
2007 Saturn Outlook
2008 Toyota Highlander (not available yet)
Personally, I liked the dash of the B9 Tribeca better than any of the above. Only match is the Acura MDX. Regards, - MS.
The only trustworty and un advertiser paid Car reviews/ratings is Consumer Reports.
Enough of conspiracy theories. Neither JD Power nor CR are perfect, but just because a magazine has advertisers doesn't mean their data or car reviewers are slanted. If you think that's the case, then show me any correlation between numbers of ads in a magazine to how they rate their cars...I see plenty of Subaru advertisements, so why isn't their initial quality ratings higher? Plus I’m sure if car reviewers in theses different magazines were all given lists on how much advertising dollars a particular car company brings in order to influence a reviewers rating, then the press would be all over it, unless again you believe there’s a giant conspiracy involving every car reviewer out there. And since CR is only polling its readers and not a random sample of the population, it’s not perfect either.
JD Power is good for initial (INITIAL) quality ratings, and CR is a good general (GENERAL) guide for comparison. Not perfect, but if you use JD Power, CR, along with other magazine reviews, on-line research, Edmunds forums, recommendation of friends and family, along with extensive test drives, you should be able to find a good vehicle. But don’t expect any one source to be perfect.
rating higher.
Way off. CR is not the best at testing cars. There mesurement sytem is really wierd, and if they are right, the BMW X5 6 cylinder gets from 0-60 about 5 tenths of a second slower than Acadia. Now- don't get me wrong- CR has as much credibility as motortrend, or any othermagazine, but NO MORE. Plus- sometimes i think they are a little biased. In example- the Saturn Aura has been a hit with many testers, but CR easily plays them down while playing up their Super Toyota Camry. they may not accept advertising, niether do they falsly advertise, but they are not the best at what they do.
The opposite has happened with the Explorer. Massive incentives have brought prices down.
I was looking at what buyers paid back in 1999. There's no way a stripped base RX300 cost $45 grand back then.
Acadia has a lot more power, why is that not feasible to you? You can't dismiss a CR review with logic like that. :sick:
Saturn Aura has been a hit with many testers, but CR easily plays them down while playing up their Super Toyota Camry
Again, Saturn puts an antiquated pushrod engine in the base model (which most people buy, BTW) with an outdated 4 speed automatic. The hybrid model is decidedly 2nd class with a mild hybrid setup and fuel economy not even close to what Toyota can obtain.
If you want to compare the sporty models the Toyota's V6 has both more power and better fuel economy using Direct Injection technology that I'm sure GM will add in about, oh, 5 more years.
Shoot, if you ask me, CR is the only pub with the guts to call it like it is, i.e. no influence from advertising dollars.
The Aura is a just a warmed over Epsilon, a bit too similar to the G6 it's based on. The only reason other mags were so impressed is that their expectations were low.
Frankly the Lambas are a far, far better effort.
The Acadia has more power than the VeraCruz, but which one's the quickest? The lighter one.
Again, Saturn puts an antiquated pushrod engine in the base model (which most people buy, BTW) with an outdated 4 speed automatic. The hybrid model is decidedly 2nd class with a mild hybrid setup and fuel economy not even close to what Toyota can obtain.
What does Toyota put in it's base model? the inline 4 with Shoot, if you ask me, CR is the only pub with the guts to call it like it is, i.e. no influence from advertising dollars.
Guts to call it like it is? Who doesn't call it like it is? When fo you hear car and driver saying "car xxx has this disadvantage, this disadvantage, etc. But we still think it's great becuase they payed us more!" CR makes no bold statement. If they called it like it is, they might have aknowledged something like, oh, how the Pontiac Grand Prix beats the Avalon in quality.
As for the Aura being a warmed over Epsilon, It may very well be, but warmed over Epsilon must be pretty darned good if it beats out the new Camry for 2007 Noth Ameerican Car of the Year. that says it all to me! Sorry for getting off topic.
And I only trust them as far as I can throw their magazine into the wind during a Category-Five hurricane. :P
Why would they be the best?
Mitsubishi, for instance has won the Dakar rally 12 times, 7 last in a row - you need a pretty darn good AWD system to achieve that. Germans did win the rally in 2001, but they avoided Audi, driving guess what? Mitsubishi.
That argument really doesn't work. Victories in events where vehicles are very highly modified don't always translate into great systems for regular passenger vehicles. The rally-bred Evo is probably a better example of Mitsubishi's AWD prowess in action.
Verdict on Consumer Reports: false, but not damaging. After a two-month trial, a federal jury found Thursday that the magazine had made numerous false statements in its October 1996 cover story assailing the 1995-96 Isuzu Trooper sport utility vehicle as dangerously prone to roll over, but declined to award the Japanese carmaker any cash damages. The jury found that CR's "testing" had put the vehicle through unnatural steering maneuvers which, contrary to the magazine's claims, were not the same as those to which competitors' vehicles had been subjected. Jury foreman Don Sylvia said the trial had left many jurors feeling that the magazine had behaved arrogantly, and that eight of ten jurors wanted to award Isuzu as much as $25 million, but didn't because "we couldn't find clear and convincing evidence that Consumers Union intentionally set out to trash the Trooper". The jury found eight statements false but in only one of the eight did it determine CR to be knowingly or recklessly in error, which was when it said: "Isuzu ... should never have allowed these vehicles on the road." However, it ruled that statement not to have damaged the company, despite a sharp drop in Trooper sales from which the vehicle later recovered. The magazine sees fit to interpret these findings as "a complete and total victory for Consumer's Union" (attorney Barry West) and "a complete vindication" (CU vice president David Pittle)
Offroad? Don't think so.
None of the C/SUV I'd tested can easily fit in 1 or 2 bikes.
Toyota never has the driving fun as Honda, but this is the best so far I can get.
At your own risk of let someone put in a DVD for you, dealers can turn their back against you anytime whenever you need the warranty service.
Let's go to Edmunds and look it up....
BMW X5:
4982 lbs
260 hp
225 ft-lbs of torque
GMC Acadia:
4936 lbs
275 hp
251 ft-lbs of torque
So the Acadia is lighter and more powerful, and more importantly offers a lot more torque to pull its lesser weight.
Yet you criticized CR for measuring a 0.5s advantage in 0-60.
Sorry but that sounds like bias against CR.
It would be a natural conclusion that a lighter and more powerful and torquier vehicle would be quicker.
Noone said anything about the Veracruz.
CR was right.
After all, the other brands are "very highly modified" as well, but they could not achieve anything as significant.
I'm a dyed-in-the-wool Subaru fan, yet their WRC cars are built by Prodrive in England. It's not even the same company.
Sure, the chassis is the same, but heavily reinforced with roll cages. The AWD system is different. They use a completely custom sequential shift transmission. The engine is very highly tuned but does start with a Subaru block.
If a WRC Impreza beats a Lancer it does not mean the one on the road is superior (even though I think it is, LOL).
It means Prodrive did a great job building a million dollar race car.
I'm sure it's the same with Mitsubishi, perhaps even more $$$ involved actually.
Would that be in the eye of the hurricane? :P :P
It doesn't translate to those on the road though. The Montero is the only model suited to true off-road duty, and it is underpowered and overburdoned. Even the Ford Explorer gets better gas mileage with it's 77 more horsepower. The Lancer EVO's AWD is on-road only. Subaru's AWD system for the WRX STI is much tougher... for a car. The Endeavor and Outlander are very light duty at best.
Consumer Reports was found to have been much less than honest in the Isuzu article by a jury. "In 2000, a jury found that seven statements in the magazine article were untrue and one was published with reckless disregard for the truth." Maybe they have learned their lesson, but you can not deny that they found to be less than on the up and up in this case. No comment on MT since I do not follow them on a regular basis.
By the way, that 2000 jury statement is actually from the original 1996 case, so it's not a new case. And Isuzu did all it could to defame CR even before suing, and even then could not show clear and convincing evidence that CR had "rigged" the test. Although I do agree with you that CR was probably trying too hard to tip that Trooper in order to make a point.
With that said, I trust CR for long-term info, and anything short term I take mainly from Edmunds.