Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Mercedes-Benz M-class vs Ford Explorer/Mercury Mountaineer vs Buick Rendezvous vs Acura MDX
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The vehicles are listed in the order of satisfaction. My apologies for the uneven columns that come out with the proportional font.
Scores_are:_____satisfaction
________________________base_price
________________________________high_price
2002_Luxury_SUV_________________________bang/$100
Escalade________736_____47266___50537___1.51
Navigator_______719_____45462___51084___1.49
MDX_____________712_____36544___41112___1.83
RX300___________707_____35700___37500___1.93
X5______________705_____40195___67495___1.31
Montero_________694_____31665___35680___2.06
ML______________686_____37265___46015___1.65
Rendezvous______684_____24113___29030___2.57
Mountaineer_____682_____27971___34674___2.18
QX4_____________679_____35295___36695___1.89
Bravada_________668_____31077___32898___2.09
Discovery_______658_____34995___40995___1.73
The vehicle satisfaction index "bang" came from AutoPacific Inc. for the 2002 luxury SUVs.
www.autopacific.com
The "buck" portion was average of base price and and fully loaded TMV (R) new price on Edmunds.com
For reference, the top 20 selling vehicles (listed by Reuters, on 1 October 2002) had satisfaction scores of 597-700 and values of 2.00-4.20.
Regards,
Taras
The more you pay for a vehicle the more satisfied people are. As expected!
I wonder if people become more biased as they spend more money. I can't imagine spending 40 grand on a car and then saying this car isn't better then the 25 grand car even if the 25 grand car is "better".
http://www.geocities.com/davekuhn77/CRV.html?1035553253296
I tried linking the picture through the geocities web page but the picture doesn't link through. Where could I find a picture hosting website to display my pictures by linking them using img src? I tried www.ofoto.com above, it isn't working so well.
steve_ "Toyota Sequoia" Apr 11, 2001 10:14am
(Those that work may be around a while longer I guess).
Steve, Host
Thanks, I will give them a shot...
So what makes the ML320 "a much better SUV" than the Explorer?
I contend that the ML320 isn't a "better SUV" than the Explorer.
The only thing the ML320 does "better" than the Explorer is offer bi-xenon headlights, rain-sensing wipers, and a three pointed star on the hood...all for about $10,000.
Meanwhile, a good friend of mine is trading in his ML320 after 6 months - he hates it
I'd say people who buy either do so because they like whichever model they bought better than the other one
But, regarding M-B quality, the ML has had more than it's fair share of things falling off, fuel pumps dying, etc...no advantage over the Explorer there.
I think that the MDX offers the best combination of safety, quality, and comfort, but at $40,000, I don't think it's a particularly good value. When I compared the Buick Rendezvous to the MDX head-to-head, I found that the Buick had everything that the MDX had, except for that sweet i-VTEC engine.
I admit that I liked the MDX a little bit more than the Buick. I just couldn't justify spending the extra $10,000 just to shave 1.5 seconds off the 1/4 mile.
1. The RDV AWD system is the same McClaren system found in the Jeep Grand Cherokee "Quadra-Drive" (minus the locking differential). On all types of roads, it is superior to VTM-4 because torque can be instantly distributed in any percentage to any one wheel that has traction, not just front and rear. The locking feature of VTM-4 is pure marketing. If the MDX is designed to go off-road to the extent that you need a locking differential, why does the MDX also have ABS and VSA that cannot be disengaged? That is a recipe for disaster.
2. I agree. The horsepower doesn't compare to the MDX. However, the RDV power is more than adequate for me (I have a Miata for fun stuff). The RDV torque curve is very flat, and it weighs significantly less than the MDX.
3. Yes. Crash test scores for the RDV are lower than the MDX, but the RDV performed well. In fact, the RDV did better than most SUV's on the road.
4. Acura added VSA to the MDX this year to help compensate for the disturbing tendency it has to fishtail (extreme oversteer). Oh yeah, all the other $40,000 players already had it, so Acura had to get it anyway.
5. Even with grade logic, Honda's are well known for gear hunting on hills. Grade logic helps, but the MDX transmission in neither as smooth nor as "hill savvy" as the RDV. I live in the hills and tested this first hand.
6. Actually, the Buick and MDX are too close to call in passenger space. The RDV has more head room and hip room, while the MDX has more shoulder room. The Buick also has a markedly smoother, quieter ride than the MDX.
7. The RDV has heated power driver and passenger seats, 2 driver seat/mirror memory, auto dimming mirrors, heads up display, vehicle security system, rear sonar park assist, dual zone climate control, steering wheel audio controls, one touch tilt/open moonroof, etc.
8. The 3.4L engine is ULEV certified and gets better fuel economy than the MDX.
9. The MDX touring (RDV equivalent) sells for MSRP+...about $40,000. The RDV CXL sells for a few hundred over invoice, less rebate, or about $29,000...that's $11,000 less!
10. According to JD Power & Associates, Buick has been in the top ten for "Initial Quality", "Long-term Durability", and "Customer Satisfaction" for the last five years in a row. There is no question about Buick quality.
In essence, the only MDX features you mentioned that are not found on the RDV are: Locking differential, 260 hp, 5 star crash score, VSA, $40,000.
Here are the RDV features not available on the MDX: Quadra-Drive, driver side head airbag, quieter cabin, better fuel economy, $29,000.
I made my decision 18 months ago...and I'd buy the RDV again today. Your mileage may vary...
Finally, let me ask you a question. Why do you think you are able to pay invoice for that Buick? Its because they cannot sell these RDV at a expected pace and ended up with overstock.
There is a lot to like about the RDV and as long as engine performance is not a concern, it is a good buy.
2. You do have to compare the "CXL Plus" with the "MDX Touring" because the MDX base model doesn't include a trip computer, roof rack, reverse tilt passenger side mirror, keyless entry with remote linked 2 driver seat/mirror memory, touring tires, or power passenger seat.
As far as pricing goes, the CXL Plus package already includes leather upholstery, roof rack, chrome wheels and third row seats. Don't add them again. Simply add a sunroof and you have all of the features found in the MDX Touring, at an invoice price of $31,100. Add $500 dealer profit, then take the $3000 rebate, subtract $260 for alloy instead of chrome wheels (they look better), and get a $650 discount for the leather trimmed interior. Now you have a loaded 2003 RDV CXL AWD for $27,700...considerably less than "over $30,000."
3. The reason why the RDV has incentives is because all domestic cars have incentives...it's simply the way they do business. Buick sells an average of about 5000 RDV's each month, and they make money on every single one of them.
Hopeitsfriday, I have truly enjoyed this opportunity you have given me to discount some false myths and brag about the Buick Rendezvous, but alas, I have run out of breath.
Before I go, let me tell you what I think is your perfect solution. I have found a way for you to have your cake (plush SUV) and eat it too (sporty and fun)!
Buy a RDV for $28,000, and with the $12,000 you save, pick up a two-year old Miata to go with it!
America has finally woken up after suffering with a truck-like ride when we all wanted the sedan with a truck look: hence the crossover!
M-B, thanks for getting in early with the ML320, but the $$$ and asthetics just don't work for most Americans (unless you are a purely status symbol person).
Mercury, sorry, but you're still a truck.
So, that leaves the 7+ people hauling, sedan riding, sporty/truck look to: MDX, RDV, and the newly arrived Pilot and XC90.
So, why RDV over the MDX? Price for what you want out of your car. If anyone buying these cars want to rough it, find a truck, not a crossover. They machines are built for asphalt-only in mind. If you bring a 30k+ offroading, it better be a LandRover.
Now the meat: MDX touring (not base) = RDV CXL plus. You have to compare interior upgrades alike, and that's esssentially it. MDX has a slightly higher grade leather, but both are utilatarian, not Natuzzi grade. RDV has definitely more 3rd passenger leg room than the MDX, plus you get in on either side and don't have to remove the headrest everytime.
MDX has the horsepower, but does it REALLY matter if you're lagging behind a corrolla anyways? These crossovers are minivan replacements, not your sportcar replacements. I live in the Central Valley without hills, so torque is the main issue for city travel. 185HP is enough for the city. Everyone travels 75+MPH on the freeways, so passing is minimal. The only time I wish for a stronger engine: getting onto the highway and over over the Altamount Pass (moderate grade incline).
The shifting on the RDV is MUCH BETTER than the MDX. GM has the best transmissions in the world (ask Volvo, a FORD company putting a GM transmission in their XC90!). Not to mention about the heavy rumors of Acura transmission issues....
Styling: Acura/Honda: plain vanilla. Doesn't hit you either way, but purely mainstream and desirable. RDV: you can't beat the central console. The one style point loss: Back latch can be only opened by remote or inside---stupid. I would like to shoot the designer on that one.
Finally: If I wanted to spend 40K on a Crossover, I would buy the XC90. Safer, better performance, better styling, and just a few K more than the MDX. It's no wonder that the MDX is starting to fade in MRSP+ pricing with the XC90 being delivered now.
Get the RDV. Save the 10K and buy a used sporty car to kill that lead foot monster in you. You'll NEVER get that demon excorcised in a truck anyways. I am now 10K closer to buying a used Acura CL that really will be racing around unlike ANY crossover.
BTW, American cars always sell near invoice (thus lower residual values) compared to foreign cars. Don't be fooled by pure residual value numbers. If you pay more initially, it better hold the value more! Compare $$$ to $$$. For the $$$, the RDV gets more bang. Remember, this is a people mover class, not drag racing for the 1/4 mile.
comments from others?
thx.
So you really think the RDV looks like a truck?? it looks more like a minivan to me. Why dont you just go out and buy a minivan with AWD, since thats what you are really looking for. Perhaps you will save even more money.
I encourage everyone to do an honest comparison shop and drive prior to buying. That is the only way you'll know your vehicle's worth.
For those who have disposable income (AKA luxury vehicles), seriously look at the new Volvo XC90. It's a safer and more versatile car than any other crossover out there. You'll have to wait until May right now though!
Remember, these cars are Crossovers (minus the Ford). They are MINIVAN or car based chasis that give the ride and fuel economy. They are built for asphalt, not offroading. Get a REAL truck for that!
MSRP/Invoice/Residual values are marketing ploys. Compare your $$$ to benefits of that vehicle and resale $$$. Forget the marketing.
American companies have traditionally sold vehicles, regardless of supply/demand, closer to invoice than MSRP. The foreign companies work otherwise. Some, like Honda/Acura, purposely limit production for several years, causing pent up demand and full MSRP sales.
eg: I bought the RDV at invoice despite only 2 vehicles on the lot.
Different philosophies on marketing, but that's a whole different subject/econ class
Minus the engine issue, there isn't much difference in functionality. I strongly suggest one drive the RDV instead of looking at the 185HP spec. The torque is more than adequate for city driving, shifting is smooth as silk, and the highway driving is fine except for onramp acceleration. Yes, I would like to see a stronger engine, but can't justify 10K for 1.5 secs of drag racing other vehicles.
The MDX had the benefit of being the only game in town in 7 passenger seating near luxury--until now. Volvo is now "it". Thus, the dramatically decreased activity on the MDX vs XC90 boards on the townhall.
Clearly, the XC90 shouldn't be compared to the RDV. With almost 15K difference, that's almost an entire car.
All I been hearing is that RDV is as good as MDX, except for this and that. The MDX has set standards for its class, thats why we are comparing other SUV to it, even the Volvo. By the way, the Volvo XC90 2.8T is about 4K cheaper than the MDX touring, I suggest you do some homework before you make a statement about pricing next time. Anyways, the Volvo suffers from the same problem as the RDV, too little engine, too much car.
Again consumer demand is what determine the price of a car. Since buick cannot drum up enough demand for the RDV, it has to decrease their profile to move stocks. Boy, I wish Acura has the same problem lol.
Lastly, highway accelaration is the reason why I prefer the MDX. That 1.5 sec of drag racing as you call it can actually save your life. It will get you out of alot of sticky situations and aviod getting into bad situation on the highway all together.
Perhaps. But it may also get you into situations if you end up taking chances that you might not otherwise take! :-)
tidester, host
Volvo XC90 - MSRP
Volvo XC70 - MSRP
Land Rover Disco - MSRP
Audi Allroad - $2753 over invoice
BMW X5 - $3099 over invoice
Nissan Murano - MSRP
Lexus RX300 - $3865 over invoice
And some popular domestic "TMV" numbers:
Ford Explorer - $404 over invoice
Jeep Grand Cherokee - $417 over invoice
Cadillac Escalade - $919 over invoice
Ford Expedition - $412 over invoice
Dodge Durango - $525 over invoice
GMC Envoy - $750 over invoice
So, all the imports sell at or near MSRP, even the venerable and/or soon to be replaced models like RX300 and XC70.
All the domestics sell for Invoice +, including the brand new and/or very hot models such as the Escalade and Expedition.
Reminder: Buick sells over 5000 RDV's each month, not 4000.
hopeitsfriday, you have cited "Buick's poor reliability records" twice now. The JD Power surveys I have seen indicate Buick has a record of high reliability going back at least 7 years (the 1998 JD Power "long-term durability" survey is the oldest that I have seen). Here is a link to the JD Power surveys:
http://www.jdpower.com/auto/search/search.asp?CatID=1
Take a look at Initial Quality, Long-term Durability, Customer Satisfaction, Sales Satisfaction, and Service Satisfaction, to name five. They are ALL consistently at the top of the ratings.
If I am wrong about Buick, I'd really like to know. Could you please link me to the data you are using that indicates Buick's problematic history?
Thanks
You just proved to me that you've never really comparison shopped any European vehicle. People know that Volvos (or any European car) never come base only. It's like finding a BMW with standard vinyl seats--now that's LOL!
e.g.: the XC90 2.8T as previously mentioned, as equipped with the typical Premium and Versatility packages with metallic paint (which would be comparing apples to apples in equipment) tops out a bit over 40K. (Trying to find just the two packages is nearly impossible though). The MDX touring is 38.8K.
Ah: specs comparison:
XC90: per Motorweek:
4600#
268HP engine
1/4 mile: 16.3 sec at 87MPH
MDX
4390#
240HP engine
1/14 mile: 16.1 sec at 85MPH
I did my homework to include every car, including test drives at Alameda point for the XC90. I suggest that you remain an Acura salesperson, because they don't know beans about the competition either.
How does increased horsepower and straight linear acceleration tests translate to be a safer vehicle, especially on the freeway? The slalom test would probably be a more accurate test for that situation, which nearly all crossovers (including the RDV) beats the MDX.
I am starting to see where all your frustration comes from, Your so call facts are either wrong or old news. You mention the XC90 2.8T and right below it you claim it has 268HP. Those are the wrong specs. Its actually 208HP, the T6 has 268HP that comes with a hefty price tag. And right below that, You stated that MDX has 240 HP. Those are numbers from the 02. The 03 has 260 HP. You know something, When one doesn't know all the fact, he or she just comes off as ignorance.
Finally, I am a former owner of 2 BMW, so I know my European cars better than you. And you are wrong about having to buy options. One can buy a strip down Volvo or BMW, just have to wait longer. Another thing I like about Acura is that there is no options to argue over with the dealer.
By the way, I am not a Acura salesman, I am a mechanical engineer, it pays better lol. Lastly, I love getting you guys all work up in here, it brings a little life into the room.
Apples to apples. Your comparison included a base XC90 price that wasn't equipped similiarly. You missed the point again. If you asked Acura to credit for cloth seats, would they? Again, marketing philosophies.
You're correct regarding the HP information, and thank you for the correction, but again the point is missed. You're a ME, explain how pure HP translates into emergency handling situations?
Since you didn't test drive the RDV, not compare the spec sheet. You, yourself stated, "Again I must advise you to test drive both cars and then we can talk again. Test data cannot replace a actual test drive experience".
It's sad to see that trying to get a rise out of people actually brings joy to your life. Maybe you should join me at Church sometime
* inferior AWD system
* lacking interior space
* sub-standard transmission
* poor quality/reliability
* missing luxury features
* low sales
* non "green" engine
* $33,000 price tag
* non-enthusiast nature
I remember when you said, "When one doesn't know all the fact, he or she just comes off as ignorance."
I couldn't have said it better myself (OK, maybe a little better).
CWJ
It was fun, though.
BTW, It's good to "hear" from you again. I don't post too often anymore, but you are almost a ghost.
I just hit 25K after our 3000+ mile Seattle-San Diego-Seattle road trip last month. Mountains, ice, snow, rain, sunshine, and back again...it was "all good."
How's Gamera doing?
I was up in your neck of the woods last Month for a conference and was very impressed with Seattle. I had never visited there before.
I try to post now and again but since I don't log on as often as before I rarely get to a discussion before its past its prime. Believe me, I was ready and willing to help out with "Friday" had I joined in earlier.
I'll keep in touch. After all, as a ghost I'm committed to keep on haunting this place.
CWJ
To fedlawman and montreid: I do agree with one of the statement you guys made, the fact that I should test drive the RDV before I pass judgment. Being a man of my own words, I will try to test drive one this weekend or next. And I will post my option of it. I want to apologize for some of the remarks I have made in the prior inserts. Its just that I am a very passionate car guys and like fedlawman, I find debating a lot of fun. By the way fedlawman, the only things on that list you claim I said, I have actually stated only the last 2 items.
Let me start a new debate, The four best SUV on the market right now 30K to 50K range. These are not in any particular order. BMW X5, Acura MDX, Volvo XC90 and Lincoln Aviator. With Volkswagon Touareg and Porsche Cayenne on the horizon.
Anything more than your weekend boat tow, you should be looking beyond the crossover segment.
Being a past unibody truck owner (Pathfinder), even that shaked/rolled too much for my daily needs--thus a converter to the crossover segment.
My personnel choice was I liked the MDX, but not enough to finance the extra 10k.
Friday, I hope that your test drive will leave a better impression of the RDV. It doesn't have the engine that of the MDX, but it is a capable one that will allow avoidance and escape, especially at 185HP. It does have quite a few fine things to offer at it's price point.
As for the 30-50K, I would kill for the VW Touareg. What a machine; but alas, I need a seven seater.
Regards,
Taras