Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
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.
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.
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?.
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?
I guess I simply don't sweat trivial details...
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
No doubt if you like full time sports car style handling in an SUV the X5 will come out on top.
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.
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.
Steve, Host
In that case, the MDX will runs larger rings around the X5--no matter what the speed.
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
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.
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.
I am not sure what your point is. In the 0-60 (acceleration) you just reach 60 mph at the last instant - obviously you aren't travelling that fast the entire distance. Deceleration (60-0) is much quicker (about 4 seconds vs. 8 seconds).
tidester, host
MDX / X5 acceleration in seconds
0-30: 2.7 / 2.7
0-60: 7.8 / 8.1
0-90: 18.2 / 18.8
1/4 mile: 16.1 @ 85mph / 16.2 @ 85mph
street start 5-60: 8.2 / 8.3
top gear 30-50: 4.1 / 4.2
top gear 50-70: 5.2 / 5.7
Just for laughs, here are more numbers.
Braking: 200' / 172' (MDX was the worse of 8 SUV's tested; X5 was 2nd-best)
Skidpad: .74g / .82g
Emergency Lane Change Manuever Speed: 58.3mph / 56.9mph (the test was done with ESP off, and the X5 does not totally disable it).
The on-line version of the article doesn't have all the numbers in it:
http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Caranddriver/comparisontests/2003/- - january/0301_comparo_bradsher.xml
They both weigh about the same, and the MDX has a larger engine with 35 more hp.
How does BMW do it?
Hum, from 0-90mph, there is 0.6 sec. difference between the two car, yet at 1/4 mile or 0-85 mph, there is only 0.1 sec. difference. Something doesn't add up here.
steve_ HOST : If you are up to it, you can try to do the calculus on that scenario, but my bet is that it will be one to two car length.
I, for one, will be interested in seeing STEVE's calculation! ;-)
Seriously, I think that was intended for me - but I'll leave it as an exercise for the interested student!
tidester, host
They both weigh about the same, and the MDX has a larger engine with 35 more hp.
How does BMW do it?
That number is the closest gap you could find and is probably just representative of the different gearing between the cars. I too would like to see the calculus behind the discrepancy between the 1/4 and the 0-90 tests - although that too could be a gearing issue. Its possible the X5 could just loose considerable oomph in the 85-90 range due to the specifics of the tranny.
The point is that the MDX is faster across the board then the 3.0 X5. Dunno why thats a problem though because the 3.0 has a couple of big brothers ;-).
I'm still real curious about reasons behind owning the X5 when you can get equal utility in cars that can 'run circles around it' for much much less money. If performance is your thang then why an SUV that has less utility and less performance than other options?
If performance + utility is your thang get an MDX ;-).
OT
Steve, Host
Steve, Host
Steve is the one with a gazillion links at his fingertips ready share with the rest of us on a moment's notice!
I'm the other guy! :-)
tidester, host
Better speed up. It looks like he has a small lead on you!
Speaking of which, since only RWD biased AWD/4WD offers TRUE ("Natural") adverse roadbed performance, why is the MDX even a part of this discussion?
If you have the extra cash and can get around the BMW cache', then the X5 is the vehicle for you.
If you can't afford an X5, then by all means consider the alternatives, even the MDX.
Speaking here as a past owner of an 00 AWD RX, a current 01 AWD RX300 owner, and soon to be owner of an RX330. All truly FWD torque biased.
The only thing the X5 has that a sport wagon doesn't is height.
Personally, I'd choose a 330xi over an X5. I bet the 330xi even has more cargo capacity...
OT
OT, the BMW crew love their BMWs. The X5 wasn't built for hauling, a quick look in the 'trunk' will reflect this. It's raised for off-roading into the Tahoe/Vail/Aspen area and looking good. SUV in BMWs mind apparantly didn't include the interior utility portion (unless it's a toolbox). But that's the 5-10K (depending on who's calculation) difference for that people want for the badge and BMW leather smell.
Nobody questions the value, versatility and performance that the MDX brings; but Acura dances that line between near-lux/lux vehicles--thus its popularity (and within reach of the upper middle class incomes) among the masses.
Tricycles indeed... hrummph ;-).
How about a real link?
"It doesn't hurt that the MDX is like a living room on wheels. It certainly feels less cramped than its main competitors, the Mercedes Benz ML series SUVs and the BMW X5."
Acura SUV is a living room on wheels (Post-Gazette.com)
Steve, Host
I've read in several places where in the new RX 330, 50% of the torque goes to the front wheels, and 50% to the rear wheels, under normal conditions. What's the technical explanation of why you keep alluding to the fact that it's front wheel drive torque biased? Seems to me that if it truly is 50/50 front and rear under no-slip conditions that it would not be fwd biased, but perhaps you could educate me or post a link to where you read this.