By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
definitely will be putting snow tires on, but the michelins have got to be better than the lousy continentals we had on the xc70 that wore out after 20-25k...
Steve, Host
About 4 weeks to the East Coast.
6-8 weeks to the West Coast.
I always look into the unique characteristics of the vehicle that I buy.
So, XC90 provides
- unique safety features (not available on ANY other vehicle)
- style that I like the most (not available on any other vehicle)
- unique Overseas delivery program with a lot of incentives (is not available for any other vehicle in the competitive range).
- right "status" statement (unique or similar to just a few vehicles)
- unique engineering innovations (very important to me)
etc.
MDX
- best Navigation system (maybe...)
and that is it!!!
So, why in a world will I chose the MDX?
Reliability? Too lame. Plus, I am pretty sure that XC90 will last for 150K miles, based on my experience with S80 (87K miles currently), which is aging very little.
I can relate myself to the people that buy BMW - ultimate driving machine, large SUV's - the biggest available, Land Rover or Jeep - the wild nature explorers, but MDX and Lexus RX - it's like a commodity.
If I want to settle for commodity, I will buy their "native" counterparts - Pilot and Highlander.
And actually, I have found a highway driving very good. The DSTC was managing the ever-changing traction conditions superbly, and at 30-40 MPH you have enough momentum not to worry about the tire grip. You go fast enough to break through the occasional piles, and you do not drive too fast to have any problems to stop, if you brake a bit in advance.
Count me as another fool, as well. I've got the Michelin 4x4 Synchrones and have driven in 4 - 8 inches of snow here at home this year and as much as 12 inches plus last year. From a stop, I definitely seemed to have better traction than many others in SUV's and I haven't encountered the sliding stops that others have mentioned. I've been able to negotiate curves at 30 mph+ with hardly a hint of lateral movement.
I've got proper winter tires now and everything is fine.
Acceleration in the V8 was quite good, but not so spectacular as to be in a different league than the MDX or GX470. The X5 4.4 I drove a couple of months ago seemed considerably more powerful. However, I had the sales manager with me in the car and did not abuse it, given that it only had 300 miles on it. Bottom line, the acceleration is more than good enough for my wife and good enough for me.
The transmission was smooth and quiet although it seemed to go through a lot of gear changes at every occasion - like going from 35 to 50 under moderate acceleration. I felt it kick down twice (two gears) for all of 10-15 seconds of moderate acceleration and then shift back into the higher gears in two steps once I was cruising at 50 (which only showed about 1,600 rpm). I am wondering if, with the 6-speed transmission, volvo hasn't programmed a few too many gear changes to try to balance acceleration with fuel efficiency. In my manual transmission TL, I'd be in 4th gear at 50 mph rather than 6th to keep the rpms in a range that permitted moderate acceleration without dropping two gears. The XC90 apperaed anxiousl to get to 6th gear, perhaps a bit too soon. I did not try using the manual geartronic.
The interior of the (loaded) XC90 V8 is exceptional - best ergonomics in the business, IMO. Seat comfort was exceptional. Even the pop up nav system wasn't as bad as I thought, although far behind Acura's system.
As far as other comments above, a couple of reponses: (1) "Status" has little value to me in car purchases. I bought a Honda S2000 over a Boxster S, in part because I wanted to avoid false pretenses. (2) Third row / size vs. MDX: My (our) position is, that if we are going to get a SUV with a third row, it should be "reasonably" functional. That ruled out the GX470 for us. The MDX is indeed easier to get in and out of and the extra width in the second row (3" +/-) is fairly meaningful. Whether that rules out th XC90 is to be determined. However, if we didn't want a third row, then we'd get the Cayenne S and have the best handleing SUV on the planet. You can't have it both ways. The XC90, for us, needs to have a little more "U" than "S".
Overall, at OSD prices, I think the XC90 V8 is an exceptional vehicle. Wish the Volvo "safety engineers" would have thought to add a rear camera in the nav system and bluetooth phone (like Acura), but these are not deal killers. Wish they also would have included XM in the overpriced upgraded stereo. But as far as a solid vehicle that drives and handles well, hard to find much to fault.
I'd like to hear comments form others on the transmission "shiftiness".
When I road tested a 2004 MDX prior to my XC90 purchase I found it "shifty" too. It would downshift at the slightest pressure on the gas pedal. If that annoys you, make sure to road test the MDX again and check for that. Another point is that modern transmissions "learn" to shift according to the driving style of the driver. On a demo, with different drivers every 10 miles, the transmission ECU may have some difficulties handling this. Maybe it affected the MDX I drove too.
Another point, I still don't understand how you can prefer the 3rd row of the MDX over the XC. When I tried the MDX 3rd row, I felt like sitting on the floor with my chin between my knees. Honestly, I don't recall if getting in the 3rd row was easier in the MDX or the XC, but for me, sitting comfortably and safely is more important than ease of ingress. I don't use the 3rd row often and when I do, it's mostly for long distance. I found the 3rd row in the MDX to be useless and considered the Pilot at one point because it has about 1.5" more kneeroom than the MDX in the 3rd row; due the the Pilot more "square" design in the back.
I made a 4 hour round trip around Christmas with my wife and my 73 year old mother in the 3rd row and they were very comfortable.
I'll grant you the MDX is wider, so if you plan to sit 3 across in the 2nd row, it may be an issue.
Decisions, decisions....
Enjoy your shopping!
Meaning they will try to get to the highest gear possible as quickly as possible.
Volvo claims a 0-60 time of 6.9 sec w/ a full throttle launch.
Having driven the car hard I think that is certainly doable.
That time is equal to the X5 and better than the GX470 or V8 Cayenne.
1. If a status is not an issue, then why MDX and GX470 but not the Pilot and 4Runner. Both of the low end vehicles are better in the areas of your preference - Pilot is boxier and roomier than MDX, and 4Runner is even better "all-terrain" vehicle than GX470.
2. The difference between the traction and stability system of the XC90 and MDX in favor of XC90 is much bigger than the 3" difference in the second row width. We have been using the XC90 for 6 month already and nobody ever complained about the second row room. It is wider than the S80's and there is more leg room there. And over almost 5 years of driving I have heard nothing but the compliments on the roominess of the S80's back seat. At such overall size, the 3" difference is mostly academic, while the unique behavior of the XC90's roll-over protection system can save your life.
3. The XC90 is very much more "U" than the MDX, just look at the cargo space and the flexibility of the seating arrangements. The safety driven extended space behind the third row of seats is not just going to save the life of your loved one in case of the rear-end impact, but also provides a nice additional "U" benefit.
(1) Status is not an issue, but amenities and features are. The Pilot is probably about the best SUV bang for the buck out there and I have no baised preference for Acura over Honda. However, the MDX offers just enough over the Pilot to make the price difference worth it to me - side curtain airbags, much better nav system, quieter/smoother ride, memory seats, bluetooth phone, XM radio, better stereo, etc. etc. As for the GX470 vs. the 4Runner, same situation, plus I just never liked the looks of the 4-Runner (interior or exterior). Can't get over that one.
(2) The 3" width difference and the stability control system differences are apples and oranges. For some folks, the extra 3" may be of little value, for others much more important. I sent my wife to the Volvo dealership with our two kids, two car seats and playmate cooler. That's what we put across the back row of our Trooper on our frequent 750 mile rountrips to visit my family and the less frequent 1,400 mile roundtrip to visit my wife's. I'm guessing 40%+ of our actual mileage in any given year is with that configuration.
(3) Again, I'll be getting my wife's report when I get home in about an hour, but "cubic feet" of cargo space is not how life works. The MDX has at least 2-3" more second row travel resulting in a 2-3" wider opening for ingress and egress to the rear seat. The relative simplicity of folding the MDX third row and second row seats is superior to the 1-2 extra steps required by the XC90. I'll grant you that once seated in the third row of the XC90, it is reasonably comfortable. But getting in and out of it is NOT anywhere near as easy as the MDX. Take your tape measure and verify the difference if you don't believe me - I did.
I've put the ball in my wife's court. She is going to have to live with either most of the time. I'm not sure I have a strong preference as to what she picks, since they are both excellent vehicles with different trade offs.
Every time I read your posts I think man I gotta get one of those.
End of 2006 I’ll be shopping
But on the practical side you can always find decent budget room for two @ $75-100, and you can live on $100 - 150 per day for the food and entertainment for two.
My actual budget normally (and I have been in Europe 6 or 7 times in last 15 years)for the family of 4 adults is $500 per day, including accommodations, food, gas, incidentals, gifts and entertainment. I am not a budget traveler, I am traveling slightly above of the "normal" level, described by Rick Steves.
So, $300 - 350 for two per day should satisfy most of the travelers.
Read Rick Steves - he is right on money in most cases (he is just a bit too on budget with the hotels for my taste. I am always going one star or diamond higher.)
To summarize - 1 week - $2K, 2weeks - $4K. And remember, that the air fare and transportation in Europe - two major-major expenses are free.
The trips that are advertised by the OSD program are overpriced. They are for people with real money, who value comfort more than I do. You can do much better, investing a little bit of time on Internet.
I book my trips completely from my computer and phone - air tickets, hotels, show tickets, restaurant reservations, local tours, etc., and would not mind to share the tips.
One interesting observation I made is that despite the fact that I keep cars for as long as they last and you change them frequently, I am more attuned to the immediate needs than you, or at least that is what you claim.
The size of the second row seems to be a real-real value for you - you went as far as sending your wife with two car seats and a cooler to the several dealers ( I would have to be really determined trying to convince my wife to endure this much), and yet - you even do not consider the full size SUV. If that was a priority for me at the least degree - I would be driving Ford Expedition Eddie Bauer or Limited by now (as I had a great experience with the F-150 five years ago.)
And Navigator and high level Expeditions are getting that wonderful traction, stability and roll-over control, that was pioneered on XC90.
And if I do (I believe I have to) - how I can get it done? Dealer? Downloadable software upgrades?
In 2003 Volvo had 16,17 and 18" wheel options for the XC90. Same odo's and speedo settings on all of them.
I change cars frequently? My 1995 Nissan Maxima has 153k miles and the 1996 Trooper we are replacing has 83,000 miles. Prior to that I had an Acura for 117,000 miles and a Datsun for 101,000 miles. Only the Honda S2000, my "splurge" was purchased with the anticipation of keeping it for less than it's useful life - and it has the highest resale of any vehicle, save the Porsche 911.
A "full size" SUV in the Sequoia range is not want we need or want. If I told you I chose a TL over a BMW 3 series because of size, would you have tried to talk me into an S class or 7 series?
And I only sent my wife to two dealerships - Acura and Volvo that are both within 2-3 miles of our home. And I reminded her that I carried my golf clubs around when I was shopping roadsters. Not much "fun" driving with the top up or clubs in the passenger seat, so the "larger" Boxster lost out to the S2000.
Later.
But why did you argue with my suggestions to buy the last year model and keep a car for as long as it lasts? Remember, I am not your neighbor, and can only rely on your postings.
When it come to the size, I am just trying to get the real reasons from you. You emphasize the 3" difference so much, while discarding much greater differences in much more important ares, so it either
- there are some other reasons against the XC90 that you do not want to tell us,
- or you should buy a full size SUV. And when it comes to the amenities - they are sooo nice - the new Infinity Q56, mmmm...
The rear seat ingress and egress issue was tested by the kids. Sorry, on that point there was no dispute that the MDX was easier to get in and out of. The comfort of the 3rd row once you were in it was a toss up. But, as my wife pointed out, the frequency with which we will be needing to cart around 4-5 kids is increasing. I coach both of my daughters basketball teams and we do an increasing amount of car pooling.
The idea of getting an 8 passenger Sequoia that can carry a boat inside the rear cargo are was discussed, but rejected by both of us. Neither one of us likes driving a huge vehicle. That was the biggest positive going for the XC90 V8 - without a doubt, it is the best performing, most sports sedan like drive of any 7 passenger SUV that we considered.
If it's any consolation, I struggled with the preference of getting a BMW 330i instead of the Acura TL last spring. But the 2" difference in rear seat width and leg room meant that the TL - albeit a little tight tight - can cart my family on long highway trips. The MDX vs. XC90 trade-off was similarly difficult.
Take some consolation that my respect for the XC90 (with V8) is considerably higher today than wnen we started casually shopping many months ago. I do think it is an extraordinary vehicle that I would be proud to own. I can recommend it without reservation to anyone. they can decide for themselves whether or not the size and third row ingress is acceptable. And if it is, congratulations to them, because the rest of the vehicle is without fault and it drives exceptionally well.
Can I though offer some suggestive questions that you can ask your wife and maybe will change her mind in favor of XC90 (I hope you do not read this board together)?
The main one would be - Do you know, that if we will chose the XC90 we will drive much more safer vehicle than MDX? (I personally truly believe that, so my entire family.)
Other one would be - Given that the MDX is wider, does it really matter? Isn't the second row of the XC90 wide enough for us? (Remember, it is considerably wider than your TL already).
Another one - Don't you like the styling and appearance of XC90 more?
- Do you think that the better traction control will give us more convenient winter drive? Etc., etc.
If she likes the MDX and it's her call, Ed only muddies the issue by planting doubt in her mind. Say she backs out on the MDX for something else - and wishes she stuck with her original final choice. Ed is in dog house hell for quite awhile.
Congrats on making a final decision Ed.
I believe, that Volvo does very poor job promoting their advances in the area of active safety. I bet that very few people know how does the DSTC on RSC system work, and why RSS is unique and does what no other system do.
And that "something different" could be the decisive factor between the car remaining on the road or rolling down the cliff or highway embankment.
So, I can only speculate, but given the discussions that we had with habitat, these advances might not be brought yet into his wife's buying reasoning.
And after all, I hope we all have fun conversing here.
http://www.swedespeed.com/news/publish/Volvo_News/article_442.htm- l
Steve, Host
If you have American Airlines miles, transfer them to Hilton points (1 mile = 2 points). When I picked up my XC90 in 11/2003 the only thing I paid for was food and gas. 3.8 litres per U.S. Gallon so you can expect to pay roughly 4x the U.S. cost in gas expenses.
If you're planning you're own trip go to www.viamichelin.com Those maps and directions are pretty accurate. I also bought a spiral bound Michelin Europe map at Rand McNally. My trip was from Gothenburg to Budapest with a dropoff in Belgium. Only had to call the Volvo helpdesk twice during the trip.
I look at things differently, no knowledge on mechanics, power, AWD, RSC. Believe this world is all about BRANDing (I misused "status" word) when choices now are abound, affordable, competent. Every car projects its image, all car designers have in their mind the target audience(look at BMW’s flip-flop on 7s). A $40k+ auto that sits on your driveway in front of your beautiful home, projects your taste, preference, family life-style. Euro brands have their core followers, they are hard to steal (convince realtors dump their terrible MB E320 for a Lexus?). Acura and low-end Lexus are meant to be bland, neutral, to attract crowd across all base (socially, culturally, and economically) into a luxury cost-efficient name-plate. XC90 and MDX are fighting the turf-war among image-conscious, safety-minded soccer-mom crowd, XC90 seems winning.
Apologize for off the topic. Just observations as a businessman.
Just look at the list of features that many people describe as the required on this and other Edmunds boards (including habitat1) - Bluetooth, wireless MP3, best nav. systems on one side - all that alphabetical soup that you have described, the advanced automotive technology, on other side.
Japan is ahead of the game in the area of affordable reliable consumer electronics, therefore this is their marketing tool in the auto as well. Europe is way ahead in the automotive technology, therefore they have different approaches.
I was LOL reading about the wonderful traction and stability system finally available on a new super Acura RL. Better systems are available on Volvo, MB and BMW since late 90's.
I think, Japan has right approach appealing to millions of computer-bound crowd. But there are people like me, who do not want to be one of the crowd, and it seems to be enough to support the European makers. Remember, Volvo is very small manufacturer, relatively, and already has difficulties to keep-up with the demand on XC90.
And please, next time, when someone will say long-term reliability in relation to Japanese cars, I am going to puke. Define long-term then...
All the statistics relate that "long" terms to the terms of auto loan, so 5-6 years is very long.
Out of all world brands only Toyota makes a list of longevity champions from Japan, but you will find a lot of Volvo, BMW and MB there. The whole idea of producing millions of cars every year implies that the car has to replaced every few years.
Pcbfl, Would you agree as a businessman?
I have a strong psychological resentment against Acura, some of Infinity and some of Lexus (where there is a Toyota or Nissan counterpart). I feel cheated. What manufacturer does, is the addition of a few techno/pseudo-luxury gadgets, worth of maybe a grand, and jack the base price up 5 to 10K.
I always have a question - if you have this technology available, why don't you put it as an option to the "standard brand" car? The only answer I have - it's a little marketing trick, pretending that the car is better than it is, because it bears a different badge. And millions buy it. So, I have to admit, it's a smart trick.
One of the reasons I like Volvo, is that there is no "cheaper" version of it. All the technology was designed for the car I buy. It is more straight forward, and therefore more appealing to me. Same as with BMW and MB, the car is designed to be upscale and utilize everything the engineers have available at that point.
All this is just MHO.
lol, it's a Ford, right?
Steve, Host
Lexus is my pet peeve. A few years ago (2002 or so) I drove an ES300 back to back with a Jetta and S70. S70 was WAY above the ES300 in every regard (Jetta was second place).
Around the same time period I drove an LS400 and SC400 and my only impression was “is that it?”
A co-worker recently purchased a GX470. All I could think was “wow, 60K for a Toyota with leather seats”.
I can’t confirm this, but I swear that the LS400 ventilation controls are the same as the ones used in the Corolla. The Corolla’s may be perfect, but at 50K plus I want something different.
It reminds me of a commercial I seen in the late 80’s comparing a chevy (think it was a cavalier) to a Mercedes. The commercial said it had leather seats and a CD player like a Mercedes. I wondered how many people were swayed
Back on topic; Volvo’s have always felt right. Everything from the switches, to the comfortable seats to the safety.
Amazing what you can buy (Volvo) buy selling a bunch of F150's
And you probably could switch badges on many cars today and fool a lot of people that the Hyundai they are testing is really a Mercedes. That would make an interesting marketing study experiment.
Steve, Host
Just don't point at a Jag and ask the owner how their Ford is running. <g>
Steve, Host
I was always suspicious about Mitsubishi Carisma based S40, and was really glad that the new S40 is based on the original design, Even if it was a joint effort, Volvo has put a lot of its trademarked solution into the new C1/P1 platform, especially into the S40 itself.
I hope, that Ford will not follow the suicidal trade of GM/SAAB relationship, and will keep PAG distant enough from the lower markets.
The Contour based Jag was a desperate effort to keep Jag alive. And I should say, it is working, ay least to the extend of reanimation.
To the bean counters at Ford and Volvo, parts is parts. :-)
Steve, Host
If you remember, Ford always had strictly European models, and it would always take a desperate situation to bring them here (Contour, Focus)
So, I will not expect a lot of part sharing between Ford and Volvo.
And I was not present at the merger signing ceremony, so I do not know, whether the terms were the same as with Daimler Chrysler. I just know that it was not a straight buy-out.
you've got to admit, ford leveraging yamaha back into their plans with volvo looks pretty good after those great engines from the past that were just too expensive for ford models. they knew they had a good thing, it just took time to figure out the right fit.
Good point about the metric/standard parts stuff Lev.
When I drove Volvos back in the early 70's, it seemed that their marketing focus tended towards school teachers. Then it was safety. Safety is still associated with Volvo, but performance, style and status seems to be getting more emphasis. Probably because many (most?) people pay lip service to safety but buy horsepower.
Steve, Host
One of the problems is that the technology behind the safety becomes so sophisticated, that you literally need a graduate degree in engineering, and , preferably another degree in computer science to understand it. So all that many (most) people know, is the meaningless abbreviations. And they do not know why DSTC + RSC is so much better VSC. And who would? The info is so well hidden...
But everyone knows that 270 HP is better than 208 HP.
It was also a pointless acquistion.
Chrysler needed Daimlers stability. But Chrysler had nothing to teach Daimler and nothing to offer in an engineering sense.
AB Volvo needed to get rid of the car division, it simply couldn't compete w/ the Germans any longer.
Ford needed Volvo's engineering know how and European market penetration.
Ford has not disembowled Volvo. the chassis difference between a Volvo and a Ford product is immense.
Parts are not just parts to Volvo. Ford can't use alot of Volvo's systems due to their cost to produce. The P2 chassis for Ford has been so watered down that its almost impossible to see the Volvo influence. But even a watered down P2 chassis is still light years ahead of what Ford has been able to produce.
Pardon my rant, but a moderator should be more informed.
Not everyone agrees with your DC assessment (Seattle Post-Intelligencer), and then there's that Kerkorian suit hanging out there as well. But that thread is better suited for a Chrysler discussion.
Surely you don't propose that Ford and Volvo have nothing to teach each other?
One parts bin example: the Five Hundred, Montego and Freestyle are built in Chicago on a Volvo made chassis (Business Week). I'm assuming this is your watered down P2? It may take a few years, but I think more sharing will be in the pipeline. What impact this will have on people's perceptions of the badging on a Volvo vs. a Ford remains to be seen.
Steve, Host
However, I would like to point out a very important distinction between the Ford/Volvo merger and, say, Benz/Chrysler. Ford does not own the Volvo brand outright. The brand is owned jointly with Volvo Group (trucks, buses, marine, aerospace, etc) and is managed by a separate third company. I don't know the ownership split, or the specific assets included in the brand.
Regardless, Ford doesn't have a completely free hand to take the Volvo brand wherever it chooses. This means Volvo should retain a unique identity and core values for the foreseeable future. I don't expect to see Fords, Mazdas or Jaguars rebadged as Volvos.