Howdy, Stranger!

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

Hyundai Veracruz vs Audi Q7 vs Acura MDX



  • I have had an MDX for 8 years and looking for a new 7 seater that drives more like a car than a truck. I have narrowed it down to an Audi Q7 and Buick Enclave. have tset driven both...problem is Audi seems to have more trouble and a higher price. Enclave seems more "reliable" but is a GM so a little cautious. Any thoughts??
  • 1. Is new AUDI Q7 2011 premium-base + NAV pkg worth it? vs Acura MDX Tech-pkg with a 4K difference?

    - Note Acura has higher HP 300 hp vs Q7 272 HP but AUDI has Higher Torque with new Turbo/SuperCharger (T) engines with 8 Tras

    2. Is it true I have to spend 3K every 10-15K miles to change tires/break-pads/sensors for Q7 and not for MDX/BMW-X5? Audi's reliability issues?

    Any thoughts & inputs are highly appreciated for experienced audi-lovers!
  • I've got a 2008 Audi Q7, and based on reliability I'd reccomend the Acura. I have no experience with the Acura, but it's got to be better then the Audi. Mine has been in the shop for a bunch of things, had to replace tires at 19k miles, blind spot system module needed to be replaced, MMI has had glitches and been update three times already, electrical system is out of whack, to many to list.
  • I never had an Acura so can't really say anything on that but I have a 2008 Audi Q7 and I am very happy with it. I am now at 42K miles and have not yet replaced the tires or brakes. It did have some electrical problems but were repaired within warranty. Oil changes are done every 10K miles which is great. I also have a 2009 infinity G35 XS and that one needs its oil changed every 3,5 K miles so I 'm at that dealership every 2 months. I've heard people having prob;ems with the 2008 Q7 but I really haven't had many problems with it.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    No question, MDX, NOT the Audi.

    There appears to be no easy answer to the problem of improving the abysmal safety record of FWD on an adverse condition roadbed. But everyone seems to keep trying. Now we have all these new pre-emptive F/awd systems, seemingly adopted throughout the FWD manufacturing industry.

    You can either have one of these, mostly obsolete, reactive F/awd systems, TC activation ONLY once wheelspin/slip is detected, AFTER THE FACT. Or you can have one of these new Pre-Emptive F/awd systems that always default to the rear drive coupling mode under low speed acceleration and/or when turning, even on the most highly tractive roadbed that exists today.

    Any experienced 4WD owner will tell you that it is not a good idea to have the "center diff'l" locked, front and rear drives coupled, on a highly tractive roadbed. Doing so will often result in pre-mature failures of driveline components due to the stresses, HEAT buildup, arising from driveline windup and/or tire scrubbing.

    The Acura MDX engineers have seemingly addressed this issue more adequately than elsewhere by switching from the old VTM-4 F/awd system to the newer SH-AWD system. The earlier MDX's had an unusually high transaxle failure rate.

    Ford, with 10 years or more of driveline failures of this type on the Escape and Mariner F/awd system, is now trying out a water cooling method to combat all these premature driveline failures with Pre-Emptive F/awd in the 2011 FWD -F/awd Ford Explorer. The driveline STRESS will still be present but hopefully without the gear tooth OVER-heating and subsequent failures that would otherwise occur.

    Tire wear due to inordinate tire scrubbing in turns might well still be an issue.
  • wwest,

    I am not sure i understand your reply.

    New 2011 Audi Q7 has AWD so as MDX SH-AWD

    and Safely Ratings of Audi 2011/2010 Q7 is much better than MDX

    Are you saying Audi doesnot have AWD? just have FWD?
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    Rather than be negative on the Audi I was being POSITIVE on the MDX. Yes, Audi has some sort of F/awd system, yours to decide if it justifies not buying an MDX.
  • goldsuvgoldsuv Posts: 51
    To add to wwest's points, here is a good video comparing the 2 awd systems.
  • thanks wwest , the youtube vd is confusing b/c looks like audi's EDS was not turned on while driving up the hill (just open diff T quatro was on)
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    That's quite possible. On my '01 RX300 if I do not disable TC, Traction Control (and by default VSC), the RX's engine gets so thoroughly dethrottled that no forward motion can be attained.

    That will be true of almost ALL "reactive" F/awd systems. "Reactive" systems that use TC are really "one-wheel-drive" systems the instant any wheel or wheels slip. Loss of traction on a FWD or F/awd vehicle is such a great threat to life and limb traction must be restored URGENTLY, SOP.

    So to make the RX or the Audi even look as if some effort is being made to climb that slope the nanny's MUST be disabled. Strange, isn't it. But that's why so many of these vehicle's have a TC "off" switch.

    The SH-AWD system is unique in many ways, the majority of engine torque can be automatically routed to the rear leaving LOTS of front traction to be allocated for directional control. Then if needed up to 80% of that rear torque can be routed to any one of the two rear wheel. No torque stear nor plowing/understearing with an SH-AWD system.

    Bottom line...If the majority of engine torque must remain on those front drive wheels, leaving little to no traction for directional control, then a compromise MUST be made, KILL the engine torque.
This discussion has been closed.