Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Volvo XC90 vs MB M Class vs Acura MDX vs Lexus RX 350 vs BMW X5 vs Cadillac SRX

1131416181936

Comments

  • maxhonda99maxhonda99 Posts: 1,289
    hopeitsfriday,

    First you say the MDX is safer due to size, then you say they are basically both the same in terms of size? Make up your mind.
  • maxhonda99: I said I thought the MDX is safer in my opinion because its bigger, and its just my opinion. I never said the X5 was the same size as the MDX, its obviously not, what I did say was that they weight about the same, and if one vehicle is safer than another, its not by much.

    fedlawman: Come on lawman, vinyl seats on a BMW, not a chance in hell would I settle for that.
    Anyway, we were comparing similarly equipment X5 and MDX, and the MDX comes with most of the options on the X5's Premium package, also alot of the options on the Premium package cannot be brought via a la carte.
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    "vinyl seats on a BMW, not a chance in hell would I settle for that."

    But you settled for vinyl in your Acura? Don't worry, I won't tell your friends...

    "we were comparing similarly equipment X5 and MDX"

    There is no such thing because both vehicles have mutually exclusive options. Adding the $4000 premium package simply adds more stuff that the MDX doesn't have. Better to say that the MDX and X5 (without Premium package) are comparably equipped, and leave it at that.

    Of course, saavy enthusiasts like us choose a car for the way it performs, not because it has headlight washers, right?.
  • Only you would spend $45000 on a car and go cheap on the seats.
    I am doing my best to compare similarly equipment X5 and MDX. why compare both based models when it is obvious that they are not equivalent. why not compare top of the line then? My point is, there is no way we can match up every option exactly, but the comparison I used was pretty close. BTW weren't you the one that was comparing a based MDX with the loaded Buick RDV on the other forum?
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    "Only you would spend $45000 on a car and go cheap on the seats."

    I guess I simply don't sweat trivial details...
  • maxhonda99maxhonda99 Posts: 1,289
    hopeitsfriday,

    How did fedlawman go cheap when he spent $45K?

    It would seem to me more like you went cheap. Especially considering your MDX is cheaper and you are the one who's constantly complaining about how much more expensive the X5 is over the MDX.
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    You still haven't told me why the vinyl that covers about 75% of the MDX's seats is acceptable to you...
  • As they say fedlawman, its where the rubber meets the road that counts. As long as the seating surface is made from the leather, then its all the same to me. Besides almost all manufacturers use other material for trims, mostly due to cost reasons. Only cars in the real high price would consider using seats make from all high grade leather.
  • maxhonda99maxhonda99 Posts: 1,289
    hopeitsfriday,

    Now it's not the features that matter but "its where the rubber meets the road that counts."

    fedlawman has a great point. Honda/Acura tells you it's leather seating surface, but even alot of that leather seating surface is not really leather. for example, I know on my Accord, the side bolsters, the headrests are not covered in leather. Even though Honda says Leather trimmed interior on seating surfaces. And the TSX I drove a couple of days ago seems to be the same way-very little of the seats is actually leather.
    Let's not forget the fake plasti-wood that really does look fake that covers the dash on a MDX.
  • email77email77 Posts: 27
    Boys after I read the entire message about MDX/X5. It don't matter at all, as long as you like the car and the price you paid for. Just enjoy it after all. Don’t compare it. that is no ending no winner. As a consumer we are all looser. you may not agreed, that is O.K. as long as you like your dream car that is matter. hope reading more about some interesting thing in the future
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    I'm probably about to buy a new RX330. The X5 has a much better AWD system, is rear torque biased, and has a decent climate control system.

    All shortcomings of the RX330, but the RX still wins, overall.

    If the Cayenne had a 250HP engine, less weighty, and was priced at the X5 3.0 level, my wife would be shopping in Paris this summer.
  • montreidmontreid Posts: 127
    It's nearly impossible to match up cross-competition trims; but we can match as closely as possible.

    By adding as little options to a specific trim level (like X5 with many options) to match another car (like MDX that has many 'standard' options) would give the best apple:apple comparison in $$ sense.

    Most shoppers here know that Honda/Acura has always played the cheap seats trim for cost savings, thus making their cars for "cost efficient" compared to the luxury arena (to which you are comparing the MDX to in this thread).

    Hope, to correct your memory: you're the one who tried comparing the base MDX to the loaded Rendezvous, not Fed.
  • tomtomtomtomtomtom Posts: 491
    You might be surprised to know a lot of people could not tell if the seats in bimmer is leatherette or real leather.
  • bodble2bodble2 Posts: 4,519
    Wouldn't the smell of leather (or lack thereof)give it away right away?
  • suvladysuvlady Posts: 1
    I have been an RX 300 owner for a long while now and was seriously considering buying a new RX 330. Went for a test drive a week ago and found the RX 330 drove a lot like my RX 300 but a bit stiffer and a bit more powerful. Overall, I thought is was a nice machine except for the way it handled curves. Decided to test drive an X5 3.0 (not available when I got the RX) to compare. They are really different vehicles. The X5 is engineered to handle more like a BMW - tight cornering and solid road feel. The RX 330 is more like a Lexus - soft road feel and looser steerage. I decided for our second SUV it should be different - so I bought the BMW X5 an SAV. For me it is worth the extra $3,500 to get 60/40 rear/front drive, the total service package for 50K miles, and euro sport like steering. Plus the airflow control system and the transmission are awesome. I think I going to like owning a BMW, they are not a Mercedes (owned a few Mercedes - just don't like the M-class) or a Lexus - each has their own character. Advice - buy what you like and enjoy! Also, take more than one test drive in anything you are about to buy.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    suvlady:

    Did you test drive with the air suspension set at lowest level for best "curve" performance?

    Not to in any way imply that the X5 isn't the best choice.
  • There is no way a RX330 will out handle a X5, I don't care what suspension option you get. The X5 is the best handling SUV on the market. BMW design the X5 to excel in handling. I am not sure what Lexus design the RX330 to excel in.
  • maxhonda99maxhonda99 Posts: 1,289
    hopeitsfriday,

    Thanks for the information. I wouldn't have known the X5 handles better if you didn't tell me.

    Hey, the X5 will run even bigger rings around a MDX.
  • overtime1overtime1 Posts: 134
    Dunno if an X5 3.0 will run rings around an MDX although it does handle better (handling better IMO doesn't mean "running rings around"). Its slower and some of the reviews of the '03 MDX have shocked the reviewer by how "X5" the handling is.

    Or course, if you want more utility than the X5 offers (in terms of space) you can go with the WRX wagon at half the cost and that truly will run rings and rings and rings around the X5 ;-).

    OT
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    I was trying to determine if suvlady had gotten a "feel" for the RX330 handling vs the X5 with the RX hunkered down closer to the road.

    No doubt if you like full time sports car style handling in an SUV the X5 will come out on top.
  • I am not sure if you did know that at all about the X5. You sound so out outrageous in some of your post, I am not sure if you are a ten year old kid or just a mis-informed adult. Anyways, that post was not directed at you.
    FYI, for a X5 to run rings around a MDX. It would have to catch it first, since the MDX blows away the X5 in 0-60 MPH.
  • maxhonda99maxhonda99 Posts: 1,289
    hopeitsfriday,

    I sound outrageous? How about "It would have to catch it first, since the MDX blows away the X5 in 0-60 MPH."

    So, what is the difference in the 0-60 time of a X5 and MDX? about a 1/2 second? Oh yeah, it's really blowing it away!! Do you know what running rings around it means? It means the X5 will outhandle a MDX, which it will.

    "You sound so out outrageous in some of your post," Boy, you should get a load of some of your posts then.
  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 41,309
    This discussion is about the listed SUVs features and drawbacks, not about each other. Editorial comments about each other's messages doesn't shed light on the comparisions.

    Steve, Host

    Moderator
    Minivan fan. Feel free to message or email me - stever@edmunds.com.

  • Half of a second in 0-60 could means one to two car length. To drive rings around anything, you would have to get in front of it first.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    I'd just cheat, nobody said life, or drag-racing, had to be fair!
  • montreidmontreid Posts: 127
    I haven't looked at the turning radius' of the X5, but it'll probably be smaller that the MDX.

    In that case, the MDX will runs larger rings around the X5--no matter what the speed. :)
  • maxhonda99maxhonda99 Posts: 1,289
    Good one wwest!!

    hopeitsfriday,

    Actually a half-second 0-60 difference is less than 1 car lengths difference.

    ANd speaking of 0-60 times,
    Motor Trend:
    MDX 0-60MPH = 8.1 secs.
    X5 3.0 with automatic = 8.1 secs.

    you want to know some other performance figures for the 2? Well, even if you don't I'll tell you:
    slalom:
    60.1MPH for the X5 3.0
    57.3MPH for the MDX

    braking:
    123ft 60-0 for the X5 3.0
    139ft 60-0 for the MDX

    And since you're always saying the MDX is much better in everything it does over a RX300 or RX330, let's post some numbers from them also:

    RX300:
    0-60mph 8.7
    slalom: 58.9MPH
    braking: 130ft 60-0MPH

    RX330:
    0-60mph 7.8
    slalom: 57.1
    braking: 122 ft. 60-0
  • montreid: The turning radius for the MDX is 37.2 Ft., turning radius for X5 is 39.7 Ft. I am a little surprised by those data too.

    maxhonda99: Motor Trend's data is for the MDX is from 02, in fact, I dont think anyone has tested the 03 MDX yet. I am looking at the Edmunds' numbers. The X5 0-60 in 8.5 sec. and the 02 MDX at 8.1 sec., and the 03 MDX gains 20 HP over the 02.

    As far as distance difference with those 0-60 numbers. Miles per sec. = 60 mph / 60 mins per hour / 60 mins per sec = 0.01667 miles per sec
    1 mile = 5280ft, therefore (5280 * 0.01667) at 60 mph you will travel at 88 ft per sec., half of a sec. = 44 ft. Almost 5 car length.

    Can you provide a link to those MT numbers on the RX, they dont look right at all. The RX330 is suppose to handle better than the RX300, yet it loses 1.8 MPH in the slalom. The RX330 only gain 10 HP from the RX300, yet it gains 0.9 sec. in 0-60, almost impossible considering the weight for both SUV didnt change that much.
  • maxhonda99maxhonda99 Posts: 1,289
    hopeitsfriday,

    I do not think Motor Trend lists the times online. YOu must go to bookstore and flip to the back of MOtor Trend magazine and see times.

    The RX330 also gained a 5th gear in it's transmission.

    Well, until Someone actually tests a '03 MDX we can't actually do much can we? Except make up 0-60 numbers.
  • A fifth gear would help, but not to that extend. Do you have the gear ratio of the two transmissions? Perhaps the RX330 is geared more towrad the low end.
Sign In or Register to comment.