Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options

Crossover SUV Comparison

11718202223142

Comments

  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/expedition/features/specs/

    Your numbers were from the Expedition that's only 206" long, and while 4" longer then the Acadia also has 37" of 3rd row legroom.

    Cargo capacities for the Expedition EL are 42.6, 85.5, and 130.8 CuFt behind the 3rd, 2nd & 1st rows.
  • cxccxc Member Posts: 122
    Here is what a Washington Post news man said after driving 2007 Hyundai Veracruz and 2007 Lexus RX350 for a day.

    "In an event that once would have been viewed as an act of corporate suicide, the company invited a group of international journalists here to do a head-to-head comparison of the new Hyundai Veracruz against the renowned Lexus RX350 mid-size crossover sport utility, which costs about $11,000 more.

    I will give full details of the Veracruz-RX50 drive-off in a forthcoming On Wheels review. But here is an initial reading: After a day-long drive of both vehicles over many twisty California roads, most of us left the event wondering why any consumer would pay more for the Lexus RX350."
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Here's the link:

    Hyundai's Mission Possible: Beat the Luxury Brands (Washington Post)
  • nxs138nxs138 Member Posts: 481
    I noticed the article was published on April 1st, ha ha.
  • parker4551parker4551 Member Posts: 58
    Well I was curious so I went down to the local GMC dealership and ended up buying an Acadia. Was curious how the capacity of the vehicle is more than the capacity of a large SUV. However, now as as owner of an Acadia and an Armada I don't know where these numbers are coming from, Acadia is significantly smaller behind the third row seat then the Armada and the Expedition. Possibly due to measuring the vehicle without the seats, or measuring the floor without considering how the vehicle rounds inward at the top. There are many things that can go behind the third seat in the Expedition and the Armada that will not go behind my wife's new Acadia. Case in point, my grandmother's wheelchair, unable to go in the Acadia without putting the seat down, fits without any problems behind the seat of the two larger SUV's in the family.
    Quoting numbers at this point does no good, go and look.
    I didn't buy it to be a big SUV or carry a lot of stuff, I bought it for passenger seating that my wife would be able to drive with little or no problem. Not to mention the great design of the vehicle, and the fantastic gas mileage, although I am going by the sticker at this time.
    If you are looking for cargo space though, it has plenty, a minivan does have more, if and only if, you take the seats out or they fold into the floor creating a level surface. If you are tall the Acadia will have your knees a little closer to your chest then a minivan, but the seats are better, although not as good as those in the nicer larger SUV's.
    Both vehicles have their places, but when it comes to five of us driving to Florida this summer, both the wife and I agree it will be the Armada, especially since we won't be hauling just cargo. We love the Acadia, it is great vehicle for my wife to pick up the kids in, much better option in my opinion than a minivan.
  • joe97joe97 Member Posts: 2,248
    Maybe for your personally, but since each person has different things they're looking for in a CUV, there can never be a single "best."

    And you quoted what I said.

    "I came away with the conclusion the Veracruz is the overall winner."

    I specifically mentioned the combination of various factors gives the Veracruz the edge. The Veracruz excels in many areas but also has its shortfalls (not many), similar to most other SUV/CUVs in the class. The VC doesn't do one thing best, it does (almost) everything well.

    Of course everyone's preference is different. I was merely posting how I felt and what I liked. I hope you are seeing a trend in my post...
  • carlitos92carlitos92 Member Posts: 458
    Agreed, and it was intentional. The EL doesn't compare to any of the vehicles mentioned, as it is about 20" longer.
  • hardhawkhardhawk Member Posts: 702
    Got to sit in a VC yesterday as the closest dealer finally got one in. It was an SE with the leather interior. With the driver's seat all the way back my knees were brushing the bottom of the dash. The second row had decent legroom, but the seat was too low. The third row was awful. I had my knees spread as wide as I could in order to be able to move the second row seat back to its original position and when the salesman lowered the rear hatch it whacked my head with the glass. The whole interior seemed claustrophobic compared to the Acadia's, even when the VC interior was light grey and the Acadia we drove was the dark graphite (black). we did not even drive the VC as just sitting in it eliminated it from contention. Now, if you don't need the legroom our family needs, then the VC is probably an excellent choice. For us, if we are going to get a crossover with three rows, the GM triplets appear at this point to be the best way to go.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    Acadia is only 201 inches.
  • prosource1prosource1 Member Posts: 234
    I have a 2006 EX-LRES and it has a manual passenger seat. I don't believe the 2007 has it either.
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    The lesson here is that efficient engineering can compensate for "size" when it comes to interior space

    Then I guess I'm confused by your previous post. Yes, the Expedition is 5" longer, but it has 4" more 3rd row legroom and more space behind the 3rd row then the Acadia, so for some folks, that extra 5" in length is worth it.

    I don't see how the Acadia is that much more efficient...it's shorter on the outside then the Expedition but has less interior space.

    But that's okay. There's the Pilot that's shorter than the Acadia with less interior space, and the Expedition that's longer but has more interior space. Just depends on people's priorities.
  • winedogswinedogs Member Posts: 102
    hardhawk,

    How tall are you, that your legs brushed the dash in a VC?
  • carlitos92carlitos92 Member Posts: 458
    Well, the point was that the Expedition does NOT have more room behind the third row than the Acadia, even though it is longer. Check the numbers in the original post.

    But you are correct in that Ford apparently prioritized seat/cargo differently than GMC. However, look at it this way... Now that we've established the Ford is 5" longer, and has more 2nd/3rd row leg room, and that the front-seat leg room is pretty much identical, fold the back two rows down:

    Cargo volume behind 1st row:
    Acadia 116.9, Ford 108.3.

    Still think efficiency has nothing to do with it?
  • hardhawkhardhawk Member Posts: 702
    I am 6'4" and my inseam is 36" My wife is 6'0" and her inseam is 36" as well. With 2 sons ages 12 and 9, both growing like weeds, we need that legroom! (and headroom)
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    Well, the point was that the Expedition does NOT have more room behind the third row than the Acadia, even though it is longer.

    That may be correct but the third row leg room in the Expedition is downright luxurious. I'm 6' and was able to stretch my legs out in the back of the Expy. I haven't yet sat in row three of the Acadia, however I have seen it live and in person, and I don't see how it would be nearly as comfortable.
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    maybe the expedition has 7% less room behind row 1 because the 3rd row seats are thicker & more comfortable...see post 980 ;)

    So since the FS is 1" shorter than the Acadia & has more legroom, I guess it's the most efficient.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    So since the FS is 1" shorter than the Acadia & has more legroom, I guess it's the most efficient.
    No- since third row leg room in acadia is better and cargo space is 30 cu ft larger. So Acadia gets this one.
    You guys realize that for 20 inches more (EL) you only get 10 more cu ft of space? That's inefficient!
  • arumagearumage Member Posts: 922
    For the extra cubic footage in the Acadia, you add nearly 800 lbs of weight, drop 2mpg city and 1 mpg highway, gain absolutely no performance advantage since both hit 0-60 at 8.4 seconds despite the 70hp difference, and add atleast $3k in price. On the other hand, the Freestyle is no looker, it can't tow much, all items behind the 3rd row have to be removed to fold the 3rd row, and the current model is missing a few amenities on the Acadia. It's a moot argument for me because I don't really care for either one of them, but it seems you could argue inefficiencies on both sides... or on any vehicle for that matter.
  • rossdmrossdm Member Posts: 56
    Looking for a replacement for my 2003 Pilot EX-L. I have 78K miles on it and I've had a few transmission slips in the past month or two. Based on the history of the tranny in this vehicle, I've decided to RUN AWAY QUICKLY (hey, it's an excuse to buy something new, right? - I've got the itch BAD!). We travel 1200 miles loaded up to Pennsylvania every summer and I really don't want to be stranded somewhere in the hills of West Virginia by the side of the road...

    Anyway, was interested in the CX-9, Veracruz, Acadia, and of course another Pilot (have had no problems other than recent tranny hiccups).

    Drove the CX-9 last weekend. Great driving vehicle. Two issues: 1) the center console is GIGANTIC. We're used to all that open console space in our Pilot (with the column-mounted shifter) - we use that space a LOT when we travel. Not only is it not there in the CX-9, but the console is so large and obtrusive that we felt cramped in the front seats. I felt like I was sitting in a deep well. 2) The leather was VERY hard - it felt cheap. We crawled in and out of several CX-9s with leather. The leather was rock hard in every one of them - not comfortable at all like in our Pilot. Based on those two issues we eliminated the CX-9 from consideration. Otherwise it was a fine vehicle.

    We looked at the Veracruz - will probably go back tonight and drive it. I was worried that it was not big enough inside, especially cargo room behind the 2nd and 3rd seats, of which there is slightly less than in the Pilot. I think it will be big enough. Unlike the CX-9, the leather was glove-soft. Very nice! I was very impressed. The Limited comes with all the bells and whistles. I'll have to see how it drives. I'll admit there is a part of me that is hesitant to pay $33K for a Hyundai. Gotta love the warranty, though.

    I'll also go look at an Acadia this week. Saw one on the GMC lot, but they were closed. Beautiful vehicle on the outside. My concern is that it will be a little too big - more space than we need. It's also a tad more expensive. But I'll check it out.

    The '07 Pilots are practically the same as our '03, which is good and bad. The good is that we love our Pilot - it's just right for us. The bad is that the newer competitors have passed it by a bit in terms of features, styling, etc. Another good thing is that it's at the end of the current design cycle, so it seems like folks are getting great deals on them. But if I'm gonna spend $30K, I feel like I want something "new and better". I almost hate to spend that much for the exact same vehicle, even though we love it.

    Price may be the deciding factor. I know we could get a killer deal on a Pilot. There would be enough savings to buy an extended warranty to bring it up to Hyundai's (heck, I could probably get them to throw it in). It doesn't seem like dealers are too eager to discount much on the Veracruz or Acadia since they are brand new models. It will probably come down to the Veracruz and another Pilot. We'll see how much they will discount the VC. Then I'll decide if paying the extra $$ is worth having a car that's a few years newer in design vs. something I know is a solid, if unexciting, vehicle.

    BTW, I'm assuming the tranny problems in today's Pilots are long in the past, correct?

    Thanks,
    Dave
  • parker4551parker4551 Member Posts: 58
    Well I think we are going to have to start going and looking at the vehicles, go look, you will find the Expedition larger behind the third row than the Acadia, also much more passenger room, accent by larger seats. You are doing yourself a huge disservice if you don't understand what you are buying first hand. I have both an Acadia and and Armada, my father has an Expedition. I have no reason to tell you wrong information. GO and look and stop relying on numbers that aren't understood due to the lack of information on how they are obtained.
    Of course maybe you are still expecting 60 miles per gallon out of your Prius, when in reality you are getting 45 which the sticker will reflect this coming year. But keep harping that your Prius will get 60.
    Engineering stadards have also decide to calculate horsepower different this year, case in point, a Acura TL that had 270 hp last year now has 258, some cars are lower now and some cars are more. Of course you can still say you have 270, but you don't.
    Go and look and drive, and buy, in some cases, to figure out what you have.
    If you wish though, keep harping on the numbers, however, you will be surprised if you go from an Expedition to a Acadia, you will not be able to fit your Grandmothers wheel chair behing the third row of the Acadia. :)
  • winedogswinedogs Member Posts: 102
    Is there a way to figure out which vehicle (Arcadia, Pilot, CX9 or Veracruz) will hold it's value the longest/depreciate the least? I'm hoping to keep one of these six to eight years? Then again, after eight years, it might not matter!
  • deerlake7deerlake7 Member Posts: 176
    We are in a similar situation. It's time to trade off our '03 Pilot EX w/44K miles. Despite being an early new model, it's been perfect. The Pilot is also an excellent size with very efficient packaging for us as the last of our three kids left for college last fall. My wife likes the Pilot's open center area for all her teacher related stuff and it's going to take some work to get her to give that up as she's the primary driver of that vehicle. The Outlook was just too big and we found the CX-9 too hard riding. At this point, we're going to drive the Veracruz, the '08 Tribeca, or the '08 Highlander. We could drift back to the Pilot if Honda offers the $4000 manufacturer to dealer incentives they offered last summer.
  • arumagearumage Member Posts: 922
    The Pilot will probably keeps it's value the longest according to the current market, followed by the CX-9, Acadia, and Veracruz in that order if I had to guess. After 8 years, it probably won't matter though because the average person's mileage will be between 90k and 100k miles. Most of resale value in the case of these vehicles is based on brand perception rahter than quality.
  • carlitos92carlitos92 Member Posts: 458
    Actually, I'm in the market for none of these vehicles. But "bigger," as in the case of your father's Expedition, is subjective unless you back it up with numbers.

    If you're not believing the EPA cargo volume numbers I've reported here, you'll have to take that up with the government... although unlike mileage, I'm not sure how many different ways there are to measure volume.

    Like I said before, maybe the Expedition's space is more usable. That's a good thing for consumers to know. But by the book, the Ford is longer, heavier, and has less cargo space. Also, remember that whatever space configuration might make it easier to fit that wheelchair might also make it more difficult to fit cases of beer... ;)
  • kalhkalh Member Posts: 3
    I am trying to decide between the two although I will admit the CX-9 was much funner to drive, but I love the captain's chairs in the second row of the Acadia. We also tried our Britax Marathon in the 3rd row and it would only fit in the middle so it may be a deal breaker for us.
    I don't know what to do! We have a 3 yr old and a 4 month old and travel by car frequently.
    Thoughts?
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    it seems you could argue inefficiencies on both sides... or on any vehicle for that matter.
    True- the Vera Cruz has little third row room, no cargo space, and a cramped interior. And mileage isn't the best in the group, but from the numbers, it does have a peppy engine.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    if you go from an Expedition to a Acadia, you will not be able to fit your Grandmothers wheel chair behing the third row of the Acadia.
    I've compared both (in person) and the Expedition has less room. I can visually tell. as for the Armada, that has even less cargo space-20 cu ft less than the Acadia. I think it might be a good idea to take the Acadia on the vacation to FL- as there is more space in all three rows- especially the third. But that's just me...
    Engineering stadards have also decide to calculate horsepower different this year, case in point, a Acura TL that had 270 hp last year now has 258
    As for that- I don't know if you are trying to prove a point or just getting off topic- but the Acadia does have 275 hp- by new standards- and gas mileage probably won't change too much either. As for the Armada, i think the powere did drop.
  • nxs138nxs138 Member Posts: 481
    Just leave the kids in the second row. Why bother putting them in the 3rd row, it's way more hassle and bending over. And if you have to fold down that 3rd row, then you have to take all the car seats out.

    On the rare chance that you do have to sit 2 other (or maybe 3) other people in the car, let them rot in the 3rd row!

    Unless, of course, you are planning to have more kids, in which case a minivan might be more useful ;)
  • kalhkalh Member Posts: 3
    I will only put them in the third row when the grandparents are visiting (too old to get in the third row) and I need AWD and haven't found a minivan that has AWD (I think there is one, but only one).
    so are the captains chairs in the 2nd row worth it in the long run for the Acadia?
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    You guys realize that for 20 inches more (EL) you only get 10 more cu ft of space? That's inefficient!

    Wrong...from 18 to 42 CuFt of space behind the 3rd row for that 20"

    http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/expedition/features/specs/
  • nxs138nxs138 Member Posts: 481
    Captain's chairs are nice, but won't do me any good in the second row since I usually drive. Although they might be nice to keep the kids from hitting each other when they get older. So I guess "long run" they might be worth it. That and being able to put stuff between the seats (i.e. maybe skis, etc) without having to fold down the second row.

    I would say that having to buy a bigger, heaver CUV to get captain's chairs isn't really worth it for me, however I do believe the Acadia gets better gas mileage than the CX-9, so go figure!
  • arumagearumage Member Posts: 922
    Actually, I thought third row room was better than the CX-9 and nearly equal to that of the Acadia, but it was much closer to the floor than the Acadia which made it a little less comfortable for long hauls. I don't understand how you could think the interior was cramped as each row has more room, except the 3rd row, has more legroom and only 1" less shoulder room. I can't disagree about cargo room behind the 3rd row though. Peppy engine as in over a 1/2" second quicker than the Acadia. :)
  • arumagearumage Member Posts: 922
    The CX-9 is geared a bit differently. I think that accounts mostly for the mpg difference. One of the magazines tested the CX-9 at 7.7 seconds to 60 which is .7 seconds faster than the Acadia. It will also turn circles around the Acadia so I guess it depends on preference.
  • tjw68tjw68 Member Posts: 10
    What is PLG?
  • tjw68tjw68 Member Posts: 10
    We've owned our Freestyle AWD Limited for 20 months now.
    I personally like the looks - no nonsense, all business.
    I'm not sure why you need stability control in a vehicle that handles as well as this one. My wife drives like she thinks she's Mario Andretti. I watch her zip down the street going to work and take the corner at the end of the block without breaking. The Freestyle doesn't lean a bit, yet the ride is comfortable.
    The interior layout gives you maximum volume for the size. Making it more stylish would only compromise the usable volume. My family of 5 packs this thing to the gills for trips, including a stroller, Pack'N'Play, pillows for everyone, a crapload of toys to keep them busy, and, finally, the usual luggage.
    The load floor when the seats are down is as close to flat as I've seen in any SUV/CUV. Much better than the other vehicles discussed here.
    The vehicle is "underpowered", as least by today's standards; but it's really more than you need.
    I am glad they're ditching the CVT. I'd prefer a standard auto.
    The only things I really wish it had are a power hatch, rearview camera, and a sunroof like the Acadia.
    Regarding the name change to "Taurus X"...YUCK!!!
  • arumagearumage Member Posts: 922
    probably Power Liftgate
  • arumagearumage Member Posts: 922
    The Taurus X gets a power liftgate, 3.5L V6, standard 6-speed auto, and power folding 2nd row seats. It sounds like it addresses several of your dislikes.
  • tjw68tjw68 Member Posts: 10
    Yea...maybe.
    But still no rearview camera, which the Acadia is also lacking.
    The new Freestyle I saw at the Chicago Auto Show looked even more bland than mine.
    While defending my current family hauler, I'm actually more interested in the Acadia than getting another Freestyle.
    The seats in the Acadia felt more comfortable, and the numbers show WAY MORE cargo capacity with the seats down, which I tend to use quite often.
  • tjw68tjw68 Member Posts: 10
    "Also, according to Edmunds, the Freestyle has 17.6 cu. ft. behind the 3rd row."

    For some dumb reason, Edmunds doesn't count the available space in the seat well, where the 3rd row seats store.

    Counting that space, which is obviously available when you're measuring space behind the 3rd row, it's 22 cubic ft.
  • You obviously like your vehicle. It should also be obvious that lots of people don't wish to drive something that looks like the Freestyle. To each his/her own. The Taurus X is a decent name and will do the product ok, but putting a new grill on that body ain't gonna change the looks/road presence much...the old grill wasn't the problem. The Taurus will have stability control. Doesn't matter if you don't want it...this vehicle class demands it, and Ford is providing it, albeit late.

    BTW, the 08 Tribeca needs to be added to this discussion. The new grill, rear end changes and rear side window modifications make it about as attractive as any CUV out there. Plus more hp and better mileage. For those who like a shorter vehicle, it offers optional 3 row seating at a length closer to the Pilot and Veracruz.
  • blurrybillblurrybill Member Posts: 3
    I have been ghosting for some time with interest re comments about the CUV entries this year. For me, the Enclave is at the head of the list, even including GL and M class Mercedes, Volvo, Mazda and others. At 6-2 I was uncomfortable in the new Mazda, especially with the large center console rubbing against my leg -- also had to contort to get through the door. Loved the amenities in that car, but it just didn't fit. Liked the interior of the Mercedes cars, along with the Volvo, but reliability is an issue. My background is driving a 1992 Trooper -- purchased new, almost 200K miles with no problems. It's time to upgrade. Want a car with reliability, but also nice features, safety and utility. Dollar for dollar, the new Lamda platform fits the bill. Actually like the Outlook better than the Acadia, due to the sqweaky trim rings around the center vents in the Acadia (press them with a finger). While I haven't seen an Enclave yet, feature for feature, it surpasses the other cars in its class. I tried to compare apples to apples -- the Enclave is cheaper than all the others mentioned with the exception of the other 2 Lambda cars (but within 2000K of the Outlook). I am really impressed with available options -- of course, it's a crapshoot in terms of reliability. I have purchased Japanese cars since the mid70s and am ready I think to give GM a try. They spared no expense on the Enclave brochure. I am hopeful the car will look as good in person. Sorry to be so wordy for this first post, but thought others may want to check out the Enclave and compare price for the features.
  • arumagearumage Member Posts: 922
    Unless they changed it for 2008, 3rd row legroom and headroom is really poor in the Tribeca, but if fuel consumption improves 10% across the board like they say, it will get about 20 city and 25/26 highway with AWD, which is impressive to say the least

    image
  • tjw68tjw68 Member Posts: 10
    After reading through this entire thread this morning, I've come to the depressing conclusion that the responsible and reasonable thing to do is to swallow my pride, shelve my stones for later revival, and buy a minivan.

    Everything argued over in this thread is done better by a minivan. (Except AWD availability, which few people really need, unless you live in the UP.)

    Bottom line, the only thing any of these CUVs have going for them is that they aren't minivans.
    Only in America could an entire class of vehicles be successful based purely on their appeal to a consumer's ego.

    That all being said, I'll still probably end up buying one, thereby keeping my self respect, and the boys from shrivelling away in embarrassment.
  • arumagearumage Member Posts: 922
    Minivans aren't the best of on-road handlers either or poor road condition vehicles, ie. low ground clearance... but you can get a Toyota Sienna with AWD if that's what you were wanting, although it seems to be a $3k option. I've actually seen some minivans I like. It's actually my wife who seems afraid of the minivan "stigma". :P
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    That's what I've always said, although it wouldn't be the popular thing to say on this forum. But, if I'm 19 and don't hide my face in shame when driving my aunt's Odyssey (and I learned to drive in my family's 2000 Odyssey - that made driving my Accords seem easy since they were smaller!), surely you can get a van too if it fits your needs (and not necessarily just your ego).
  • drewbadrewba Member Posts: 154
    We're right there with you. The Odyssey/Sienna are a better fit for everything that we need in a new vehicle right now. The minivan stigma is the only reason that we've even looked at the Outlook and CX-9.

    Honestly, if we had a bigger garage, the Outlook/Acadia might well win out. We don't, so the sliding doors of the minivans will probably tip the balance in their favor.
  • arumagearumage Member Posts: 922
    The Outlook's doors aren't too bad, but the CX-9's are huge! My Intrepid's rear doors are like that, and I'm constantly worried my passengers are going to hit someone else's car with them.
  • tjw68tjw68 Member Posts: 10
    Why doesn't anyone put sliding doors on cars other than minivans?
    Why couldn't you put them on the Acadia, for instance?

    I thought they would have been standard on luxury cars long ago, so the rich b**** with the fur coat can get in the back of her stretch luxo-mobile without brushing against the door.
    But it never happened.
    Any thoughts?
  • stevedebistevedebi Member Posts: 4,098
    "Why doesn't anyone put sliding doors on cars other than minivans?
    Why couldn't you put them on the Acadia, for instance?

    I thought they would have been standard on luxury cars long ago, so the rich b**** with the fur coat can get in the back of her stretch luxo-mobile without brushing against the door.
    But it never happened.
    Any thoughts?"

    Because most of these "CUV"s would look like a minivan if they had sliding doors. It entails some design features to the rear of the car, i.e., "minivan like".

    For those with extreme space needs, nothing beats a box, errr, I mean, minivan. :P
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    Wrong...from 18 to 42 CuFt of space behind the 3rd row for that 20"
    /it has that much?! It didn't look that much to me when i saw it. But the number still standes. only 10 more cuft of cargo for a vehicle that's over 20 inches longer!
    i aggree the Tribeca (so glad B9 is gone!) should be in this thread as most improved. As for third row, I know it was small, but numbers are posted (if I remember correctly) at 34! can't be right!
Sign In or Register to comment.