Howdy, Stranger!

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





Howdy, Stranger!

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

Acura MDX vs BMW X5

tidestertidester Posts: 10,059
Compare them here!
«134

Comments

  • A comparison of the two 7 passenger luxury SUV's
  • seen much on the X5 other than some specs, is their a road test that I missed or something?
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    I think Tidester has got the jump on things. Not enough out there regarding the X5 for us to compare.
  • tidestertidester Posts: 10,059
    I understand they have been released but I have yet to hear of anyone who has actually seen or test driven one. As they say, "any day now!" :)

    tidester, host
  • about 25 months out until a new car for my wife but these two along with the Q7 will be battling it out as far as I am concerned Maybe the M class benz but I drove it and I was under whelmed. I continue to be a little "nonplussed" with the mercedes that I test drive, Is there something I'm missing? They just don't seem to do much of anything. [Sshhhhh, don't tell merc 1 ;) ]
  • tidestertidester Posts: 10,059
    [Sshhhhh, don't tell merc 1 ;) ]

    My lips are sealed!

    tidester, host
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    Once both are on the road, I'm sure things will get busy in here. But I know the MDX isn't being released until mid-October. I was under the impression that the X5 isn't due until later in the year.
  • We'll be looking at the two. We have an 03 MDX and test drove the X5 then but it lacked two critical features - 3rd row seats and a rear entertainment system.

    I think the new X5 will be a little pricier comparably equipped but BMW has a much better overall feel and ride.

    K
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    When comparing these two, one would expect the BMW to offer the handling and performance panache while the MDX would be the one offering the roomy interior and value. That would be the expectation - it's almost cliche.

    It's way too soon to say for certain given that neither vehicle has been heavily tested. But what I'm reading so far suggests the cliche isn't appropriate this time around. For example...

    "At the track, Acura reps assembled the aforementioned BMW X5 3.0i and Porsche Cayenne V6, and threw in a V8-powered Volvo XC90 to add insult to injury. Granted, there were no representatives from the other vehicles' manufacturers to prepare, observe or defend the contest, so it falls short of an authorized comparison. The unofficial results, however, indicate the MDX was the superior vehicle. It was easily quicker, more controlled and entertaining when compared to the BMW or Volvo. Where the X5 and XC90 summoned either overzealous stability-control intervention or developed terminal understeer entering a corner, the MDX simply dove in and powered out of those same corners.

    The Cayenne behaved like a Porsche should, rewarding an aggressive driving style with precise steering and a balanced chassis that would allow some sideways antics in both on- and off-throttle situations. It was a willing dance partner to be sure; however, the MDX was still the quicker, more confidence-inspiring vehicle — with the Porsche's stability control turned off and the MDX's still on."
    - Edmunds.com

    The words are always different, but most every reviewer has reported more or less the same thing - the MDX has succeeded in its mission of dethroning the current X5 in the twisties.

    Meanwhile, this is what BMW has to say about the 2007 X5.

    ""It's not the most comfortable in the class, but we're confident the handling is as good as, or better than, the outgoing model," says one BMW executive." - Edmunds.com

    "As good as, or better than..." Now, I'm not one to put words under the microscope, but that's not inspiring talk. If this BMW exec is correct, the new X5 isn't significantly better on the track than the outgoing model.

    In the grand scheme of things, that's not bad. There's nothing wrong with the current X5's level of performance. And I'm certain the X5 will have the advantage when it comes to braking and perhaps steering feel. It just sounds like the MDX has a very good chance of matching or bettering the new X5 in terms of outright handling performance.

    End of the cliche? Too soon to say, but a question worth investigating.
  • dhamiltondhamilton Posts: 878
    you have thrown down the gauntlet, you have glove slapped BMW. How dare you. LOL, this could be a great comparo. I was actually hoping it would be in my latest edition of road&track but alas, it was the third or fourth write up I've seen on the mazda speed 3. [albeit a compelling car in it's own right]
    If it comes close, and I mean it would have to be whisker close to the BMW on handling, then I think on content, [value] and superior electronics it would win the crown as best all around SAV in that price range.
    Excellent post Varmint, and way to stir the pot...
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    There was already quite a bit of comparing going on over in the 2007 MDX thread. I figured this was the better place for it and did a little cross-linking.

    Anyway... I thought the BMW exec's quote was the closest thing we've got to a review thus far. But it'll be a better comparison when we have more than just his single-sentence opinion on the subject.
  • dhamiltondhamilton Posts: 878
    exec needs to be censored by his own company. That sounds like something someone would say from one of the big 3 [ok I'll say it... GM] "Well it's as good as the last one, isn't that ok? Maybe it's a little better". Luckily BMW can afford a few missteps here and there.
    FWIW I think the Q7 is a great whip as well and will try to get the wife to take a look at it. Like I said before, the ML doesn't seem to have much going for it. It's an ergonomic train wreck, it doesn't ride better than a RX 330, it doesn't handle as well as the current X5, and their isn't much value like the MDX. It sure isn't as elegant as the Q7 on the inside or outside for that matter.
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    The quote was probably in the context of concerns over the increase in size. As in... "Yeah, it's bigger, but that hasn't hurt performance."

    I've seen quite a few folks shopping the Q7, but I personally don't get it. Other than the fact that the X5, MDX, and Q7 are all new, they seem to have little else in common.

    I honestly can't figure out MB's strategy for the ML. When it was first introduced, it was a class leader. But it quickly got undercut in price and utility by the MDX. Then it took a hit performance and snob appeal from the X5 less than a year later. Every since, it's been touring with the big hair bands of the 80's on the "where are they now" lists.
  • Maybe it's just in Canada...but the 2007 MDX with tech package is around Cdn$56k. The 06 X5 (not the new one) lists in Canada at around Cdn$65k and it isn't equipped like a base MDX. An 06 X5 with 4.8 l engine and loaded is...wait for it...Cnd$98k!!! Notwithstanding performance and handling comparisons, for us Canuks, these two vehicles aren't even in the same league.
  • lornedlorned Posts: 8
    Consider buying the BMW in the US. BMW North America honours warranty on both sides of the border, unlike Acura. You will lose the free scheduled maintenance but save close to $10K.
  • Is that correct? Acura Canada won't honor a US Acura warranty. I talked with a dealership in Spokane and nothing I heard or read suggested that. Not surprising...but if you've got a source, etc, I'd love to get it.
  • mdxmommdxmom Posts: 6
    Page from Honda Canada that talks about warranty. I would think this applies to Acura.
    It seems to suggest that depending on how the US vehicle arrived in Canada the warranty terms are different.

    Honda Canada Faq
  • Does anyone have any computations of their 07 mileage for comparison? Thanks!! :shades:
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    No offense, but you appear to be a bit obsessed with minor differences in fuel efficiency amoung $40k to nearly $60k vehicles.

    The X5 3.0 and MDX are rated virtually identically - both 17 mpg city, with the MDX 22 mpg and X5 23 mpg highway. We have a 2005 MDX and friends have a 2004 X5 3.0 and, in reality, they get almost identical mileage.

    My intial point, however, is that even if one got 10% better fuel econmy than the other - say 20 combined vs. 22 combined - and you drove a rather generous 15,000 miles per year, the difference in gas costs would be less than $200 per year (68 gallons @ $2.85). I can think of about a dozen factors that would be significantly more important in deciding between a $45k MDX and a $50-$55k X5 3.0 than $200 per year in gas. Like third row convenience/use, long term maintenance costs, preference for sport vs. utility, etc., etc. And in reality, I doubt the gas expense would be more than $50-100 difference, probably in favor of the 6-speed X5.

    I certainly applaud prudence. I have commended those that exercise restraint and get a perfectly fine Honda Pilot over (the previous generation) MDX when their budget didn't allow an extra $7,000 for extra do-dads and luxury items. But you are already shopping in the luxury segment, and if a few pennies in gas makes a difference, you may be being penny wise and pound foolish. You could easily save $10-$20k shopping that same Honda Pilot - the equivalent of enough gas to go around the world about 4-5 times.

    P.S. I partially rescind my comments if you get down to deciding between an X5 3.0 and X5 4.8. In that case, the vehicle is the same and the only trade offs are extra luxury features, performance and fuel economy. And the difference in the latter will likely be closer to 20%. But even then, check with your insurance company. I'll bet the difference in annual premiums is graeter between these models than the gas cost difference.
  • to habitat 1 - my question about mileage is not related to financial issues. If it was, I would be crazy to look at premium consuming SUVs, let alone the cost of these luxury vehicles. I am very concerned with environment and pollution aspects however. I believe the MDX is rated either as a LEV or ULEV, but the lower than estimated mileage efficiency has cut in to the overall effect of the low emissions rating. Very few MDX drivers in the past got out of the 17-18 mpg range for combined street/city, so I am interested in whether the new gearing has improved this (should help). I talked with a BMW salesperson who checked emissions control ratings, now posted on the invoice form, and BMW has gotten 'greener' with the new X5's lowered emissions ratings.

    I would never buy an 8 cylinder; no need, and it just brings on more global warming. I get enough teasing from my teens and friends who are more inclined to get a hybrid. I tried a Highlander hybrid and couldn't handle the drive feel, and can't get a smaller than 7 seater, so I'm back to the bigger gas vehicles. I was interested in the new turbo diesel mercedes (20-25 mpg), but can't buy one new in CA until diesel is cleaned up and the laws change.

    BTW - AAA doesn't discriminate between luxury suv's - all are the most expensive to insure from what my agent told me.

    I would still be interested in any other responses - a driver in reviews said he was getting 17 mixed - anyone else have any computations? Thanks... :shades:
  • Edmunds hasn't posted them yet, but NHTSA has them on their web site - 5 stars in all crash tests!!
  • wmquanwmquan Posts: 1,817
    The MDX did well in the IIHS front crash test too. Unfortunately, it didn't do as well in the whiplash test:

    http://www.iihs.org/ratings/summary.aspx?class=50
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    http://www.epa.gov/greenvehicle/E-ACURA-MDX-07.htm

    http://www.epa.gov/greenvehicle/E-BMW-X5-07.htm

    Note that several of the scores are based on pollution per mile, the fuel mileage differences are already taken into account.
  • These links were just the info I needed and was looking for. Thanks varmint and wmquan, for myself and all others who read these posts. It's great to have knowledgeable owners like both of you to help with this research!! I wasn't aware of either of these sites. BTW, have either of you decided which vehicle you prefer, or already bought one or the other? With emissions being equal, and price point being very close, we're still trying to evaluate the best option for us. thanks again! :shades:
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    Cigars all around!

    I went with an MDX more than a year ago. Mostly because I liked the fact that it had the cargo space I need and the suspension is tight enough to feel safe, stable, and kinda fun.

    The BMW of the day was too small and not in consideration. (Thought I wouldn't mind having its suspension.)

    With these redesigned models, the decision would not be so easy.
  • wmquanwmquan Posts: 1,817
    I bought my MDX back in 2000. The X5 was just too pricey back then. I'd still be leery about "the German car ownership experience" if I was buying today.

    Good luck!
  • Thanks for the info. on your MDX choices, varmint and wmquan! I don't have background on the reference to German car ownership experience - does that have to do with either build quality or social status? I know that BMW is the vehicle of choice for wealthy high school students - my relatives just got an X3 for their junior son, who is keeping up with his peers at his school in a wealthy area of New York (our son got a Corolla!). I worry that a Bimer would be perceived as a symbol of 'upper class', while the Acura is more 'high tech' luxury, at least in the perceptions of Northern CA folks. Any thoughts on image? Thanks again....
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    I think no matter where you go in the US, BMW will have the edge in terms of prestige. BMW wins that category, hands down. About the only thing that can be said in defense of the Acura in this regard is that people can't miss the grille on it. Meanwhile, the BMW looks a little too much like the last generation.

    German car ownership? Generally, the trade-off is something like this. With most German cars, you get outstanding performance, oodles of envy from your neighbors, and equally plentiful repair bills. I suspect that's what he means by the ownership experience.

    That's a generalization, though. Both of these vehicles were redesigned for this year and both will have their share of first year bugs. I'd trust the Acura to have fewer of them, but some people will get lucky with the Bimmer and some will be unlucky with their Acura. There are no guarantees.
  • Thanks again, Varmint, for the words of wisdom. BMW does have the prestige, but also seems to come with a reputation for 'tude', as my kids say. I wonder if there is a higher theft rate with BMW's, given the prestige factor? Hmmmmm....anyone know a link to a site that has that info? Thanks again!
  • I sat in the new X5 and the new MDX at the DC auto show yesterday. The front seats were nice in both vehicles, but I found a big difference in the rear seats (not the 3rd row seat).

    Rear seat of the X5 was very unsupportive and uncomfortable. It felt like the seat cushion was too short and too low, almost as if I was an adult sitting on a child's seat.

    By comparison, the rear seat in the MDX was very nice and very comfortable. The fit and feel was very similar to the front seat.

    I don't know if the rear seat of the X5 is adjustable in any way, as several kids had been climbing around in the vehicle before I sat in it. But I was surprised to find that in a vehicle in the price range of the X5.

    Bruce
  • I currently own a 2000 Toyota Landcruiser that I love, but can no longer take the bulky 3rd row (that I need for carpooling the kids). So I'm in the market for a smaller SUV with a 3rd row and have narrowed down the options to the X5 and the MDX. I also considered the Mercedes GL450 and Audi Q7, but they are both 8 inches longer than my Landcruiser.

    On the MDX, everything but the new exterior look was great (smooth drive, awesome features, decent price range). Then we went to see the X5. The 3rd row and back seat feel tighter than the MDX, but kids are young, so not a deal breaker. Handling was excellent and features were comparable to the MDX. Pricing net net was about $10k more for the BMW, but 4 years of maintenance was included, making the difference closer to $7.5k.

    What surprised me was what the BMW sales guy told me about the 3rd row. According to him, the MDX 3rd row is in the crumple zone (along with most Japanese cars including my current Landcruiser). The BMW chassis actually includes the 3rd row and is apparently safer. Has anyone heard this?

    In the end, safety for all passengers is our top priority. Handling, features, price next.

    Does anyone have any further info on this? Suggestions?
  • cericceric Posts: 1,092
    If you do maintanence according to BMW's computer, your first oil change should arrives at ... 10K-14K miles.

    No way I am going to maintain my baby that way. Just make sure you know what BMW mean when they say "full-maintanence included.". Yes, I own a BMW '98 540iA since it was new. BMW make safe but unreliable vehicles. If you must own a BMW, please lease it (yes, for 4 yrs same as the warranty), don't buy it. Especially for people like you coming from Toyota, you would be better off with Acura.

    I have had more than 20 problems (averaging 2-3 problems per year). The worst being the radiator rapture at 55K miles on highway. I don't think ANYONE desire to experience that! The whole cooling system (in addition to the radiator) was subsequently replaced within 20K miles (water pump, reservoir tank, thermo-stat, hoses). Trust me, that costed a lot of $$$ (especially with BMW's parts and hour rate).
  • drtraveldrtravel Posts: 395
    Pricing net net was about $10k more for the BMW, but 4 years of maintenance was included, making the difference closer to $7.5k.

    When I did my price comparison, the net difference was closer to $13K especially considering equipment levels. I doubt that 4 years of MDX maintenance will cost you $2,500 plus the included BMW maintenance is really not that much. You'll probbly want to do more service than is included, expecially after dropping $55K on the SUV.
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    While this reviewer makes a pretty obvious case for the MDX in his review of the X5, it's also clear that he thinks the Acura isn't quite in the same class as the Bimmer. Props for both.

    http://www.businessweek.com/autos/content/feb2007/bw20070206_635813.htm?campaign- _id=yhoo
  • Researched the BMW X5 a lot while car shopping recently. I ended up narrowing down my search to the BMW X5, Acura MDX and Volvo XC90. I have to admit I was kind of rooting for the BMW. But after sifting through the smoke and mirrors of the good looks and the "just for show" maintenance plan I couldn't get myself to buy the Bimmer. There are numerous reasons, For example: third row is a joke and as an added insult has to be added on as an option which results in BMW removing the spare tire! I couldn't believe they wanted me to pay extra money for a useless third row and then they have the nerve to tell me that they are going to remove the spare tire (because there isn't enough room). I take my family on long road trips and not having a spare (even with overpriced run flats) makes me very nervous. After realizing how much extra I would have had to pay and knowing the low reliabilty of bimmers, I just couldn't justify the purchase of the X5. My wife and I finally came to the conclusion that the '07 X5 is more about the looks and name and less about the performance and technology we wanted. Proud to say that we have a 2007 MDX parked in my garage as we speak. It has been a lot of fun so far!! No regrets!
  • cabluecablue Posts: 48
    I'd narrowed down my choices to the xc90, mdx and x5, all 2007's. I liked the xc90 front seat area, back seat (2nd row) was just too cramped. I really don't need a third row as we have a Suburban for that. Some feel the interior is too plain. I feel it's serene, not too fussy. But it's been eliminated. Then we checked out the mdx. Sharp looking inside, roomy interior. Did not like the exterior, just okay looking, looks like too many others. Driving it was good but not great to me. Although, now I drive a bmw 530 sport with manual. Big change to an suv. I tried to like the mdx, but it just felt like a Toyota. Also, both times I took it for a test drive, my back hurt. Then I went to look at the 2007 530 to see if they've increased interior space - not noticeable if they did. Decided to look at the new x5. Once I got in that and took it for a drive, I was sold. To me, it's just in a different league than the mdx and xc90. You're right, the 3rd row is laughable, which is what I did when I saw it. Again, I don't need the 3rd row. Loved the interior! It reeks of quality. Very comfortable, roomy, love the panoramic sunroof. Maybe I'm just used to the feel of bmw, but I felt there just wasn't any comparison. Again, it's pricier, but I believe worth it. Btw, my 2001 530 has been a great car. I keep hearing about reliability with bmw's, but mine has been wonderful, except for the cupholders! I have 77,000 miles on mine now and would not hesitate to get another bmw. :shades:
  • anon3anon3 Posts: 147
    I trust my personal experience over the anecdotal complaints of this or that person who had a bad experience with an 8 year old BMW. The fact is that newer BMWs are extremely reliable. My family has had 11 BMWs in 10 years, including 5 X5's. With the exception of my 2002 745i, they have all been extremely reliable. None of my X5's has ever gone back to the dealer for warranty repair. The MOST unreliable car I've ever owned was an Acura; not a month passed without a warranty repair visit to the dealer. Further example: the Acura RL has a miserable repair record.

    The problem here is that Japanese car buyers are used to buying whatever mass-produced-truck-dressed-up-as-a-luxury-SUV happens to be on the lot with options chosen by someone else. It's just a car, so why put any thought into it? Just buy one of the hundreds of cars just like it on the lot.

    The X5's rear seat is an option because not everyone wants one, so they give you a choice. I ordered an X5 without a 3rd row seat. You could have done the same. (This isn't a mini-van. I agree that the 3rd-row seat is pointless in a vehicle like this.)

    Every BMW is made to order either to a customer's or dealer's option spec. You can have a custom-optioned X5 delivered in as little as 6 weeks if you can't find one on the lot that fits your needs. When your X5 moves along the assembly line in Spartanburg, SC, it has your name and your option choices attached to it from beginning to end. At any time, your sales person can tell you which stage of production your car is in, when it's on the truck, and which day it will arrive for delivery. (Try custom ordering an Acura or Lexus and see how long you wait and whether they can do the same.)

    You must be the only person on the planet who thinks the X5 is NOT about performance. The choice of an Acura over a BMW is never about BMW performance shortcomings. It's usually about price. And it's about buying a dressed up Honda (Acura) off the lot cheap and quick because it's good enough. Anyone who is happy with cars that are just "good enough" would be smart not to pay the premium for a BMW.
  • tidestertidester Posts: 10,059
    You must be the only person on the planet ...

    Marginalizing the opposition isn't a particularly persuasive argument. Certainly you can come up with something more convincing. Or maybe not. :)

    tidester, host
    SUVs and Smart Shopper
  • justg0justg0 Posts: 70
    The fact is that newer BMWs are extremely reliable

    I will let the results speak for themselves:

    http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/which-companies-make-the-best-cars/autom- aker-report-cards/0407rep.htm

    BMW: BMWs are sporty, ride well, and have good crash-test results. Reliability is inconsistent.

    Acura/Honda: Hondas and Acuras have the best reliability overall in our survey and consistently high test scores.

    I have nothing against BMWs - I really like the way they drive. In fact the next car I lease (not buy) will probably be a BMW. But I have to say I am very happy with my 07 MDX. When I compared it to 07 X5, the ride/handling in 07 MDX was better (my opinion). Yeah, the 4.8 X5 is quicker due to its V8, but that's about it. The sh-awd system in MDX makes all the difference. I can take corners as if I am riding a sports car. Just amazing.

    And BTW, what's wrong with Honda - I would have still bought it if it was called Honda MDX 07 - in fact one of the reasons I did buy it was because its a Honda! Just because Honda makes economy cars, does not mean they cannot also build luxury/performance oriented vehicles.
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    "You must be the only person on the planet who thinks the X5 is NOT about performance."

    Everyone has different criteria when determining performance needs. For example, I know many enthusiasts who would say that anyone serious about performance would never buy an SUV, no matter which company builds it. They'd be towing an S2000 behind a beater K5 Blazer, or something. Even if they had the "one vehicle with cargo space" dilemma, they'd go with a sport wagon instead of an SUV.

    I haven't seen the new MDX go head to head with the new X5, so there is plenty left to be seen. However, I've read several reports, from different events, where the only SUV posting laps faster than the MDX is the Cayenne. If that level of performance is merely "good enough", we're going to need much, much better roads in the US.
  • anon3anon3 Posts: 147
    As I said in my original statement, I will trust my personal experience about BMW reliability. Since I've owned 5 X5's since 2001, I'd say my personal experience is pretty significant. Can you or the original poster can say the same?

    (Have you been to the factories where your cars are built? Have you taken them out on a track and run them at the limit? I have. And everyone who buys a new BMW has an opportunity to do the same, in many cases with free hotel, meals, and driving instructor at the BMW performance center.)

    I've also read Consumer Reports ratings over the years. My personal experience directly contradicts their statements. And, their analysis methodology is flawed. In one new car edition, they pronounced the 2002 X5 a used vehicle to avoid and "not reliable". Yet, their detailed chart on another page stated that they had "insufficient data" to assess the 2002 X5. That is not fact-based analysis. So as I originally stated, I will trust my own experience with BMW over the media and Joe Schmoe's posting.

    Honda/Acura, Toyota/Lexus SUVs are great vehicles, but they mass produce their upscale vehicles on the same platforms as their economy vehicles. For example, a Lexus SUV is NOT purpose-built from the ground up to be a Lexus. It's a truck (or car in a couple cases) dressed up with wood and leather. Although the X5 shares corporate engines, transmissions, etc, its platform is built to be an X5 and not shared with other vehicles (like the 5 series, contrary to popular misconception). BMW doesn't have an economy division that supplies the platforms, steering components, suspensions, etc for its upscale vehicles. That makes a big difference to me.

    It's all a matter of personal requirements and preferences. If you don't care about the subtleties of chassis dynamics or performance at the limits, or if BMW's brand of driving dynamics is not worth the premium price, then an Acura or Lexus is a fine choice.
  • anon3anon3 Posts: 147
    Well, Tidester, it seems to me that citing my personal experience with 5 X5s since 2001 (plus an M3, an M5, a 645ci, a 745i, a 325xi, and an X3 3.0i) should qualify as "something convincing". How many readers/posters can claim the same level of personal experience with BMW reliability?

    I stand by my statement that "newer" BMWs are reliable in my experience and that BMW is a performance brand by definition.

    I also don't consider the original poster to be "the opposition".
  • tidestertidester Posts: 10,059
    ...citing my personal experience ... should qualify as "something convincing".

    I wasn't suggesting otherwise. I was commenting specifically on your "You must be the only person on the planet ..." comment.

    tidester, host
    SUVs and Smart Shopper
  • anon3anon3 Posts: 147
    The emissions ratings are confusing. EPA links show the new X5 to be worse than average for pollution and greenhouse gases in cars with non-California emissions.

    Yet the V8 engine in the new X5 is ULEV-II compliant (second generation ultra-low emissions vehicle) and European level 4 emissions, which is the cleanest rating until levels 5/6 go into effect in 2009.

    (Ultra-Low Emissions Vehicle is a vehicle that has been verified by the California Air Resources Board to emit 50% less polluting emissions than the average for new cars released in that model year.)

    So, either the EPA ratings are wrong. Or, X5s sold outside California are not ULEV-II compliant. Anyone know which is true?
  • justg0justg0 Posts: 70
    Ok, you had a great experience with BMW, that's great. But I would rather take Consumer Reports opinion over your's or anyone's else, just because that's going to be more statistically sound. You may choose to disregard Consumer Reports and that's your choice.

    As far as diving is concerned, I really do not understand or care if Acura does platform sharing or BMW does not make economy cars - at the end of the day it comes down to how I feel when I am behind the wheel. I don't care about names or labels or prestige, ...

    I do not at all doubt BMW makes great handling cars - love the 3 series and M3/5. And yes, I do care about "subtleties of chassis dynamics or performance at the limits", but then people who care about those don't drive a SUV. Just because X5 is a BMW (drum roll - the ultimate driving machine) does not overcome the fact that is still a big heavy vehicle. At that size, it's really hard to talk about things like "driving dynamics".

    I would have very gladly paid about 15K more for an equivalent X5, but I think MDX with the sh-awd handles much better. Take note, I am not talking about Lexus SUV or any other Acura/Honda vehicle - all I am saying is that 07 MDX with handles much better than 07 X5. That's my opinion - you have yours.
  • anon3anon3 Posts: 147
    So here's a question for you, justg0. You say that "that 07 MDX with handles much better than 07 X5." That's a very dramatic statement.

    How do you know? How many miles have you logged behind the wheel of an X5? Which packages did it have (sport package, active steering, etc)?

    You have your opinion, but what's it based on? Personal experience or an article that you read in a magazine? Every statement that I've made in defense of the X5 is made from personal experience or personal knowledge of the vehicle.

    And, by the way, chassis dynamics apply to every car, even if it is an SUV.
  • teamyonexteamyonex Posts: 42
    Someone probably paid California Air Resources Board for the certification. CARB is subject to so much industry and political pressure they aren't objective.
  • justg0justg0 Posts: 70
    So here's a question for you, justg0. You say that "that 07 MDX with handles much better than 07 X5." That's a very dramatic statement.

    Got your attention, didn't I :D

    I have read most of the articles/reviews that are out there on both MDX and X5, but I always take them with a grain of salt. I have worked quite closely with marketing groups and I know how the so called impartial reviews can be guided one way or the other.

    My opinion is based on my personal experience I have had driving X5 and MDX. Obviously I have driven MDX more, since I ended up buying it, so I am definitely biased, but who isn't? You are also biased since you own a X5.
  • dt63944dt63944 Posts: 66
    A loaded MDX will cost about 20-24K less than a loaded X5. That's a significant issue for many who might be considering both vehicles. I agree with you that the latest variation of third-row seating is ridiculous and I believe they should be a no-cost option. I disagree with you that a typical "Japanese car buyer" will just pick a car off the lot with options that "someone else" picked; every car dealer has product on the lot that they ordered for stock with their selection of options. I happen to have a Subaru and a BMW; I could get 3 Subaru's for the price of the one BMW, but I don't have to worry about where I park the Subaru as often, it does all the "dirty work" of hauling things for me, gets me where I want to go and it's fun to drive but the road noise is annoying at times - that's how they help keep the cost down. I haven't had the BMW long enough to judge reliability, but in many ways it is superior to the Subaru and yet I tell people all the time, that if they want many of the same qualities of a BMW in a more affordable package, to make sure they thoroughly check out every model of Subaru. I'm sure that Acura is trying their best to be considered the best choice for the customers they are wooing. It creates a volatile, competitive environment; little wonder there is so much disagreement across the many discussions here. My next vehicle almost certainly will be either an Acura, BMW or Subaru, whichever one has more benefits than drawbacks - for me. Cars are too expensive to not take seriously; I'm always looking at alternatives no matter whether I'm in the market for a new one or not. Good luck finding the perfect one for you!

    ------------------------------------------------------------

    "I trust my personal experience over the anecdotal complaints of this or that person who had a bad experience with an 8 year old BMW. The fact is that newer BMWs are extremely reliable. My family has had 11 BMWs in 10 years, including 5 X5's. With the exception of my 2002 745i, they have all been extremely reliable. None of my X5's has ever gone back to the dealer for warranty repair. The MOST unreliable car I've ever owned was an Acura; not a month passed without a warranty repair visit to the dealer. Further example: the Acura RL has a miserable repair record.

    The problem here is that Japanese car buyers are used to buying whatever mass-produced-truck-dressed-up-as-a-luxury-SUV happens to be on the lot with options chosen by someone else. It's just a car, so why put any thought into it? Just buy one of the hundreds of cars just like it on the lot.

    The X5's rear seat is an option because not everyone wants one, so they give you a choice. I ordered an X5 without a 3rd row seat. You could have done the same. (This isn't a mini-van. I agree that the 3rd-row seat is pointless in a vehicle like this.)

    Every BMW is made to order either to a customer's or dealer's option spec. You can have a custom-optioned X5 delivered in as little as 6 weeks if you can't find one on the lot that fits your needs. When your X5 moves along the assembly line in Spartanburg, SC, it has your name and your option choices attached to it from beginning to end. At any time, your sales person can tell you which stage of production your car is in, when it's on the truck, and which day it will arrive for delivery. (Try custom ordering an Acura or Lexus and see how long you wait and whether they can do the same.)

    You must be the only person on the planet who thinks the X5 is NOT about performance. The choice of an Acura over a BMW is never about BMW performance shortcomings. It's usually about price. And it's about buying a dressed up Honda (Acura) off the lot cheap and quick because it's good enough. Anyone who is happy with cars that are just "good enough" would be smart not to pay the premium for a BMW.
    "
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,450
    I was checking out the SUVs at Mercedes and stopped into the Acura dealer close by. The first thing I noticed when I sat in the MDX is how hard and uncomfortable the drivers seat is. That was enough for me to write them off. I hear the same complaints on the 2007 Escalade. Is this a trend?
Sign In or Register to comment.