Mercedes-Benz M-class vs Ford Explorer/Mercury Mountaineer vs Buick Rendezvous vs Acura MDX
drew_
Member Posts: 3,382
As requested, here is the 7 passenger mid-size luxury or near luxury SUV comparison topic. Feel free to compare the pros and cons of each vehicle, but please keep it civil and agree to disagree if need be. As mentioned, all of these SUVs are available with either standard or optional 7 passenger seating.
Thanks!
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
Thanks!
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
This topic is done before it even started.
If you are looking for the "cheapest" vehicle, that's another story.
Which one is better ML or MDX?
RDV=Buick Rendezvous, ML=Mercedes ML320
MDX=Acura MDX, Explorer=Ford Explorer/Mountaineer
Safety - ML,MDX,RDV,Explorer
Power - MDX, ML, Exp, RDV
Handling - ML, RDV, MDX, Exp
Interior - ML, RDV, MDX, Exp
Refinement - ML, RDV, MDX, Exp
Versatility - RDV, ML, MDX, Exp
Towing - Exp, ML, MDX, Rdv
Overall, I'd have to say ML in the 40k range, and Rendezvous in the 30K range.
Explore has questionable quality, fit and finish are terrible. Handling is "mushy" with little to no road feel. One can easily tell its a gussied up Ford Ranger.
Rendezvous has a fold flat rear seat that is actually usable by adults. Good build quality,great fit and finish, unfortunately underpowered. A good budget choice.
MDX is great, as long as you realize 3rd row is for young children only. Access is very poor, and interior is typical Honda..good fit, good integrity, but thin leather, fake wood and cheap switchgear. Nice engine though.
ML seats 7 adults, but not as much luggage room as others. Good sedanlike handling, good acceleration, good offroad ability. Overall the best choice IMO.
If you need 7 adult seating, good offroad ability, towing >3500lbs, then ML is the way to go. However, MDX has much more room for cargo, and is slightly cheaper too...
Drive em both.
-Mitch
One of my main criteria is safety and the ML wins hands down. On paper (active safety systems) and in independent testing (IIHS) it's one of the top three SUVs, along with the X5 and RX300.
Maybe safety isn't important to you and speed is. I suspect a Explorer with a V8 option is pretty quick (though I admit I haven't seen test results). Again, all depends on your needs.
ps 1: If I am looking for power and money is not issue. I will get SAFE and FFAASSTT ML55 AMG 342 HP 376 ft lb torque which will leave Explorere V8 in dust. Only costs $66.5 K price tag.
ps 2 Edmunds review comment for ML
Quote"
Pros: Safe, comfortable, car-like ride and handling, excellent bad-weather vehicle.
Cons: Reputation for poor build quality, looks like a minivan, not particularly adept off-road.
"end quote
Jeez, I seem to keep running across your messages wherever I go. You keep talking about the fit and finish, and the rattling in the Explorer. It's funny, but the one we drove demonstrated none of those qualities. It was tight and refined, as was the Sport-Trac my friend took delivery of on Friday. My 97 F-150 is as tight and rattle free as the day I picked it up...4 1/2 years ago. I know all manufacturers' have problems, but it seems you like to pick on the Fords. I'm a soon to be owner of a 2002 XLT Exploder, and maybe I'll hate it after 3 months, but I'm trying to remain optomistic.
Please, give me a break with the Ford bashing.
If anyone is getting this because it can seat 7 they should really re-think it. It's great if you only need seating for 5.
The ML's 3rd row legroom is definitely more than the Acura MDX's and the Land Rover Discovery II's in my experience.
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
I did miss the foot well though.
I've never seen the MDX or LR but I was impressed with the Buick Rendezvous and thought the 2002 Mountaineer was adequate.
The Explorer's 3rd row is okay (better than the Acura MDX's, but the seatback angle is not), but the seats are not as comfortable as the ML's and neither is the legroom. In my humble opinion, they're too thin and too flat. They also seemed to be a bit cheaply made, especially with the thin head restraints.
Just my two cents. Your mileage may vary of course.
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
Seems to me that minivans provide much easier access to the 3rd row. What SUVs can do a comparable job?
BJK- I rated safety based on features, and test results if available. The Acura lacks two things I felt are important in any SUV, rear side airbags, and stability control. Ditto the ford. However, MDX is based on Odyssey platform which does get good results. Remember..these are PERSONAL ratings, based on my research, and experience driving all of them. YMMV. BTW, that Edmunds review was for earlier models...the 2001's are much nicer, and more competant offroad.
Footballfan. First, Ford quality used to be better. My observations are just that, based on my experience driving 1 2002 Explorer Ltd, 1 Explorer EB, and 1 Mountaineer. Perhaps I got unlucky....All I would suggest is don't take my word for it, check out an ML320, MDX, etc and see for yourself. If you're used to typical ford interiors, the explorer may be fine. I currently drive an Audi A4 (which has a very nice interior) so my standards are pretty high.
I'm with Drew here on the ML 3rd row. If you need more room, you'll have either go to a minivan, or move up to a full size SUV like landcruiser/sequoia. The new 2002 Escalade is supposedly the best of the domestics. Yukon/Tahoe and Expedition/Excursion have some more room, but are major land barges, with horrible handling, gas milage, and body integrity. The Excursion is downright scary to drive.
BJK..no need to go as high as the ML55 if performance is a concern. The ML430 will blow the doors off the V8 Fords..for that matter even the ML320 comes pretty close. Of course, if performance is what you're after, a eurowagon might be the way to go.
If you have to use your 3rd row constantly nothing beats a mini-van for ease. Of course the Rendezvous has 2nd row captain chair option and it may allow you to access the 3rd row between the seats but not sure since I haven't seen any with that option.
The only negative about the LC 3rd row seats is taking them out(since it doesn't fold flat). They are heavy and it take some work.
Drew - My look at the ML320 was the 5 minute variety and I didn't notice the foot well so I will accept your opinion. Maybe it is more functional than it first appeared.
If you plan on travelling with 3 kids in the car all the time (in car seats, boosters), would anyone recommend an SUV? Minivans do seem much more "user-friendly" but there are many features in an SUV that most minivans don't have.
Once the baby comes it will be in use all of the time. I'm seriously considering a mini-van because if I have 2 child seats getting to the 3rd row will be a real pain.
My other alternative is the Rendezvous with 2nd row captain chairs. I really want to keep the 4wd for Ohio winters.
If you don't care about the 4wd I would go with a mini-van.
Regarding truck based construction and CG, you should know that the ML has a lower CG than an RX300. It's not obvious visually so it's not intuitive. A lot of the weight of the ML is in the frame which is low. The ML also passed the moose test w/o ESP (though of course it adds more safety margin as it would with all cars/trucks/etc.)
If I had 3 kids, I wouldn't get an SUV, IMHO. 2 would be the comfort limit. You eventually end up going out with parents, friends, etc. and just need more space.
Then you have the shows about the idiots who were killed because they didn't have seat belts on and were thrown out of the car and squished. Particularly amusing was one segment where some family sobbed about how their family member was thrown out and oh by the way, he was sitting in the cargo area w/o a seatbelt. Sitting in the cargo area is illegal in some states for a reason ;-)
The Rendezvous looked abysmally short of 3rd row space. I crossed it off the list in less than 30 seconds. No statistic can possibly give you a clear picture of how little space is back there, as well as a 3rd row seat that doesn't split and fold.
MDX split and fold is a superior feature. Explder doesn't do this, ML don't recall, but don't think so.
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
Correct me if I'm wrong, but in the MDX I saw, the only way to access the 3rd row was to slide part of the 2nd row forward a few inches, as it does NOT tumble forward. My wife (5'4) and I (5'11) both had to contort quite a bit to get in. Once inside, my knees were touching my chest, and my wife was very uncomfortable. Also no room for a rear facing childseat in there. The second row, as far as I could tell, did not slide forward and back (except for the small 30% section). So basically access was quite difficult, and legroom almost non existant. Did you SIT in the 3rd row of the Rendezvous? at 5'11, it was quite comfortable for me. I had more than enough legroom once I moved the 2nd row forward a bit. ML as well. Note that ML will also split and fold too. In addition, the ML seats seem far more solid than the MDX's.
Just my observation, from sitting and driving in all these vehicles, YMMV.
I'm reading all of this stuff about the various makes of SUVs, and it seems to me it all boils down to needs of individuals, and planned usage. I must state up front that I'm a Honda fan, but they don't make a vehicle that will meet our needs, so I researched vehicles that would. My wife needs a vehicle to drive to work daily, not too big, as she doesn't like driving our F-150 on a daily basis. Therefore, throw out the Burb/Yukon and the Expi and the Excursion. Now then she needs something to haul her horse trailer, which is right at 5000 lbs, with the hosses of course. Then she needs something to occasionally haul a couple of hay bales or a sack of feed. And finally, we need something where we can occasionally seat more than 5 people. So my research led me to the Explorer/Mountaineer (V-8 with tow package), the Durango, the Jeep, and the new GM trio(GMs don't have the 3rd seat). My research did not lead me to the Benz or the Acura... they simply didn't have the tow capacity. None of the foreign SUVs would do what we needed.
So here I am looking at our needs, and it came down to the Explorer or the Durango (I wouldn't own a Jeep). I obviously took into consideration the perfect (so far) experience I've had with my F-150. 4 1/2 years old, and not one trip to the dealer. So then it came down to the Ford or the Mercury, and based on price, we ordered the Ford.
So Proteus and others, I hope this clears things up. Certain people will be happier with an Acura or Benz based on their lifestyle and needs, but for us, the Explorer seemed like a better choice.
Sounds like you made the right decision to go with Explorer/Durango. Honestly, Merc/MDX are designed as luxury people haulers, with some limited off-road and towing ability. For me, thats exactly what I need, an urban combat vehicle..:-)
To the explorer's credit, it does have a very good emphasis on UTILITY..more so than most other SUV's...Sounds like you made the right choice for your needs...
Enjoy!
The MDX seat does fold and flip, just like every other SUV in this class. The RDZ access is easier for adults approaching 6ft tall.
On the minus side for RDZ, it doesn't split and the storage space behind the 3rd seat is noticeably less than MDX.
Meanwhile, my 5 foot 9 inch 13 year old has staked out the rear of the orchestra section of our new Explorer as his own personal property, and he and his equally oversized pals report that the accomodations are more than adequate, even for last weekend's 3 hour roadtrip with seven well fed Americans on board.
Where the Explorer beats the others hands down is in its versatility. After unloading the aforsaid freeloaders from my vehicle, I dropped the middle and back rows and loaded in my overpriced and filthy mountain bike for a trip to some nearby mud. Unlike faux-luxury cars like the Mercedes and Acura, the Explorer doesn't pretend to be anything more than a truck, and getting it dirty feels right.
If you want a luxury car with a third row kiddie seat, the Mercedes, Audi and Volvo wagons are all beter choices than the MDX or ML. If you want a luxury minivan, Chrysler does it best.
But if you want a midsize truck that can carry seven real people or a whole lot of anything else, the 2002 Explorer is tough to beat.
IMO, although the Explorer can be loaded up with luxury stuff, it gets expensive quickly and loses it's relative value. Modestly equipped, it is much more at home in the mud and a much better value.
I think the Explorer's main competition in your areas of interest is the Dodge Durango. Just weigh the Dodge's sketchy reliability problems against that sweet, powerful 4.7L V8.
Sounds like you need to carry 7 real people all the time..why aren't YOU in a minivan? Do you go offroad? Are you a contractor..hauling plywood and crap? If so, go with a truck or truck based SUV. If not..a minivan or luxury SUV is perfect for you. Better handling and mileage than any truck. Crossovers like the MDX and Rendezvous are also great compromises.
Oh.. and on that "faux" luxury thing? Check out the LTD or EB versions for an idea of "faux". Then check out the ML, BMW X5, MDX for true luxury.
In anycase, Fedlawman is right, they really don't match up well..if you need cheap family transport for dirty kids, minivan is the way to go. If you need to haul stuff, or do some light offroading, check out the Explorer or Durango. If you need safe luxurious family transport in city and to the campground.., then MDX, ML, RX300, or Rendezvous are the way to go.
Urban combat vehicle? LOL, why not paint it cammoflage, add some hydrolics, and limo tint? It's just a minivan. It can carry a lot of people, but not a lot of weight. Throw in 5-6 people(I feel sorry for those in the 3rd row who have to crawl over seats to get there) and see how your car like manners are. Explorers definately aren't for driving finese(sic), but they will give you good highway manners with good offroad manners combined, if you are ever inclined to go camping, or offroading, or towing. It may not be the master of the highway, but it is a jack of all trades.
Mercedes is known for poor build quality, especially for a minivan costing 35k-61k in price. Explorers problems are not as common as you think, as there will always be more on the road that Mercedes ever will have. Simple math, More vehicles = more problems reported = More Media broadbanding <> or != (does not equal) a higher percentage of vehicles with problems. Those with problems will always be the loud voices who want to be heard.
ML's 3.2l has no MPG benefit vs a 4.0l Explorer. It's acutally advertised at 1 mpg worse.
You would never trust your kids in an Explorer. That's fine, but the Explorer will have moved more families and kids than mercedes ever will, and without incident.
Its obvious you've never seen one. The third row seats are easily accesable. The 40% portion of the second row folds down and tumbles forward, helped by a hydraulic lift. Access is actually easier than in the Explorer.
Crash tests? Its rated as "acceptable" by IIHS, and "poor" for rollover rating. The ML320 is rated as "good", and has the second highest overall rating (just behind BMW X5). If an explorer does rollover, the roof will crush. The ML has reinforcement to prevent this.
Mileage? You must be pulling figures from your butt. Explorer SOHC V6 is rated at 15/20. The ML320 is rated at 17/21. Check your figures again.
Mercedes is known for poor build quality? I won't even bother with that one..LOL. There were a few small issues with the first model years (98-99), as with any new model. These were completely resolved.
So...check your numbers again..I got mine from Carpoint and Edmunds.
ML320 is certainly not a minivan, neither is it pickup truck based. It does have full frame construction for the strength of an SUV, and the offroad capability of an SUV, but was designed to have the road manners and handling of a sedan..the best of all worlds. Its pretty obvious you've never actually driven one. Do the research before you make your comparisons.
Stephen
That's funny the National Highway Traffic Safety Admin. give 2001 explorer 4 stars on frontal and 5 stars on side impact collisions. Pretty darn good, can't get much better.
Man you just don't give up. Either a lot of the issues were lost in the ascii translation, or miss interpreted altogether... I just think you have issues, and too much free time.
Depate, pick apart, and misconstrue all you want. There will always be more Explorers sold than your ML ever will.
Over 440,000 units sold last year, how many did ML do? 90,000.
4.8 : 1 Americans choose Explorers
I think I'm going back to steve(host)'s suggestion and just let you live in your own little world, any further post by you will be ignored. BUH BYE
Just to add (don't know whether you already know this) but the ML320's automatic transmission is touchshift so you can downshift and upshift just like a manual trans.
I am not putting down the Explorer, for the price I guess is a good value, as a matter of fact wherever I could I defended the Explorer in this Firestone/roll over fiasco, since I read an extensive article from an independent party that did some testing to see if it was anything wrong with the vehicle, their finding was that the roll overs were caused by driver error and I believe that too.
My son had an Explorer and I am familiar with it, I also own a 430ML and there is a big difference, mainly in the quality of ride, I tow a boat around 5000lbs and is silky smooth at 70mph, when the transmission is in low gear and in first the engine and transmission feels like an electric motor and just about sounds like it, when sitting at iddle in a light one can not tell if the engine is running, no puttering or vibrations, one has to look at the tachometer to realize that the engine is running. Some say that the ML looks like a minivan, maybe so, but beauty is more that skin deep, I am posting a picture of the transmission of an ML320 that I took at the Alabama plant, is a heafty unit, but more impresive was the fine craftmanship, at first we tought it was a plastic muck up, so finely it was crafted, independent suspesion with massive forged aluminun A frames, so is the engine, with three valves per cylinder and two spark plug per cylinder, each set with it's own voltage coil and drive by wire, all cradled in a beefy frame, at once one realizes that the internal parts are cut with even more precicion and highly engineered, since they have cut away sections for all to see in the technology museum. That is why the ML430 is a truck that rides like a car, despite having massive suspension components and tires, in its own rigth the ML is a good value for the money, if we consider the technology and crafmanship that is under the skin.
Contrary to a post above, the 2nd row seats do tilt forward in the MDX. Getting to the third row, is easier in the RDZ and the Explorer. But I sat in the third row of the RDZ, and had less legroom than in the MDX AND felt physically walled off from the rest of the vehicle with the 2nd row seatbacks upright. THe Explorer and MDX 3rd rows were much more comfortable to me, at 6"0" and 185 lbs. I'm not aware of a weight limit on the MDX 3rd row, but if there is one, I would love to have documentation of that, as it would affect my decision on an SUV.
I realize that this doesn't comport with the published leg room for these vehicles, but this was my impression.
Also, I would not recommend the Volvo, Audi, or any other wagon with the so-called third seat for children.Those seats are far less useful than the SUV 3rd seats I've sat in, AND face backwards. We would not put our children in them.
I don't own any of these SUV's yet, and have no axe to grind for or against any of them. Just my observations.
Yes..I've driven 2002 Explorer, not the 2001. If you want to compare, drive them both..treviews are quite subjective. Test drives are free.
The Explorer Sport is a COMPLETELY different vehicle. Its a two door version of the 2001 model. The "sport" has a solid rear axle, different transmission, and has none of the safety or handling improvements of the 2002 Explorer...no comparison.
There is NO manual available in the 2002 Explorer.
Crash tests? I was using the IIHS figures, the 40mph offset crash and rollover test..far more "real world" IMO.
Why would you pay more for ML than for Explorer Limited? Drive one and find out. Same reason you'd pay more for a Porsche when a Mustang Cobra is just as fast. Same reason you'd buy a Lexus versus a Toyota.
Why the lower sales numbers?
1) Its a luxury vehicle...fewer people can afford em. Using your example, how many Explorer LTD/EB models sold vs the ML? Direct comparison please. The base model isn't even in the same class.
2) People (like you?) haven't driven the ML and don't know any better
I seriously wonder if you've actually driven the ML..take a look at Thor's pic above if you want to see an example of the design and quality of these vehicles. I suggest you actually drive the Mercedes before making comparisons.
Oh.. a final point...The free market seems to agree with me on Mercedes durability vs Ford. 4 year lease residuals are at 52% for ML320, and 40% for the Explorer (alg.com).
Just as an aside, I was in the same position as you. I came into this completely objectively. I've owned 1 Ford before (happily) and no GM, Mercedes, or Acura vehicles. I've driven and researched all the vehicles talked about here, and basically..I just call em like I see em. While I may upset some of the diehard "Ford Truck" purists here...so be it. I loved my Taurus SHO...Ford still sells quality cars..unfortunately they stay in Europe and never seem to make it over here..(Mondeo...sigh).
We just picked up our 2002 XLT tonight. V-8, tow pack, 3rd seat, premium sound (the one mistake the dealer made...we didn't order it), and side airbags. Got it for invoice, but had to wait 6 weeks. It was just a tad over $28K out the door, and given our needs and choice of finances, it was the best vehicle I could find to meet them. Now for my impression.
Fit and finish are excellent. Not a Benz, but I didn't expect that. Ride is very good, although admittedly I didn't take it over anything challenging. Acceleration felt very good...took it on the freeway, and although I didn't romp it, it got up to 70 quickly. It was very quiet...no squeaks or rattles. Handling and driver input/feedback were impressive. I noticed a little hesitation shifting occasionally, but have read it is common when they are new. Stereo is good for a factory unit, but I'm used to the tunes in my F-150 and Legend which are fairly high-dollar aftermarket units. But I guess the thing that suprised me the most was the 3rd seat. Although I had looked at them before we ordered, I had never actually sat in the rear seat. I was impressed. I'm 6' 2", and though the seat sits low, there was adequate legroom. My knees did not touch the 2nd row seats. I wouldn't want to ride in it for 1000 miles, but it's a good design for occasional use to carry more than 4 people. And as far as I'm concerned, the 2nd row tilt-forward design is very good.
Overall, I'm very impressed with the new design, as well as the build quality. This is my wife's car, and she likes it so far also. It will tow my boat, her hoss trailer (in fact, probably both at the same time), and a gaggle o' kids once or twice a year to birthday parties or Whitewater Bay. I can't say I drove a Benz to compare it to...it simply didn't meet our needs, nor would it fit my budget. I could afford it...I simply chose not to. Now for the killer...
It's got a V-8, that WONDERFUL new car smell, and I don't get to drive it!!!
I have no love for Explorers, don't trust them, wouldn't own one. However, I am beginning to feel a little sorry for them, and wondering how a truck got sucked into a comparison with a bunch of very nice minivans. Didn't seem fair. Oh yeah, that's right, it's because they tried to be something they weren't by adding a third row seat. Oh well, maybe I don't feel so bad for them after all seeing they brought it on themselves.
Also, can't deny the recall, it happened. I also got a kick out of some of the posts, as a few people sure didn't take it very well. Personally, I think it was great! The net effect to me was I had to drive a brand new 2001 instead of a 2002 for 21 days, got a free extension of my bumper to bumper warranty to 5 years/60000 miles, and free service for two years to top things off. Sorry, but you are not going to get any defensive reaction from me over the recall.