Crossover SUV Comparison

freealfas

after having the lambda's 3 years in the market you can make that statement fairly as opposed to your usual apples to oranges comparison.

freealfas

actually what it has turned into is not a beat up session but the coronation of self appointed dictator's of style and statistic's as the all knowing and all being with little or no ability to see either flaws or inconsistencies in their own thinking or a point other than their own regardless.

you complain that it was a FS love fest around here, now its a lambda love fest, what's the difference, none. what's it prove, nothing other than it's always easier to go along with the crowd.

I'm labled the apologist yet you are the same zealot's in your own regard.

I've had 2 points in all of this that continue to confound your sensibilities,

1. the FS(not T-reX) is the best "balance" of space, price, mpg in a safe package for hauling families about. I NEVER said it was the best overall CUV for all.

2. the lambda's would be better vehicles with less weight to haul around. I still cannot fathom how anyone can argue with that statement intelligently.

It does not "need" to be as heavy as it is. You are all convinced that that weight comes with no penalties and no cost. take the FS comparison baggage out of the equation and tell me that lambda A(4700lbs) would not perform better than lambda B(3900lbs) in handling, acceleration, mpg, and safety all else(drivetrain, dimensions & interior/exterior envelope) being the same. And on top of that, potentially cost less to produce.

carlitos92

And as a casual observer, I think what is confounding your sensibilities is that weight and even efficiency is not as high on everyone else's priority list as it is yours. I agree with you in principle; less weight is almost always better all around. However, while most people would take an extra MPG or two if they could get it, vehicle mass is clearly not high on the list of consumer issues when shopping around. Maybe someday this will change, but in the meantime, you berating everybody for being part of "the masses" and repeatedly trying to drive the point home ad nauseum will probably have little positive effect.

It probably boils down to the fact that all of us around here are pretty good thinkers, and the market is chock-full of decent choices. Lively debate is good, and if there was a clear-cut winner, there might be 20 posts here rather than 2800.

freealfas

very good and valid points...

maybe if the whole weight argument wasn't held out as a point of "good design" the debate wouldn't have raged as long.

albook

Heh- and you say now it's a lambda love fest around here. All you say is "The FS is the best rounded vehicle in this comparison". What's wrong with the TX? You obviously have something against it, or you wouldn't give it a childish name. Are we 12?

Here are 2 of my own points. As soon as you read them, you will want to fight me, as it seems you think your FS is the perfect vehicle.

1) the Lambdas are definitely the best rounded crossovers on the road. They have the best balance in cargo/ passenger space, power, efficiency, safety, and price. This is because you don't really have to give up anything.

2) The FSS/TX would be better vehicles if they gave you at least 100cuft of cargo space.

You are completely correct that the lambdas would perform better if they weighed less. But other vehicles this size weigh close to 4700lbs. The CX9 is 45-4600. The Honda Pilot is 4400, and it is a foot shorter. Every vehicle has short comings, even your precious FS.

nastacio

Noooo...what are you doing albook? The discussion didn't rage over because people held weight as point of good design, but because we kept trying to make your point above to FS fans.

The new Highlander came out relatively lighter-weight at 4112 lbs for the top-of-the-line. One interesting aspect of the Toyota website is that they list the different weights for the different models, with 113 lbs separating the entry model from the Limited edition.

Other manufacturers, Ford/GM/Mazda included, don't seem to split the data. We all know that upgrade wheels, leather, moonroofs, seat heaters, and pueblo gold-painted bodyside cladding also leave a dent on the pavement.

The CX9 is listed at at 4312, 4500+ is for the AWD model.

The CX9 lists 100 cu.ft for passenger volume. I can accept that the CX9 has less interior space than a lambda, but not that it has more than the FS. At the same time, I cannot accept that Ford willfully bungled the measurement of the FS interior space and didn't bother to restate it for three years in a row.

To end the discussion for once and for all, could an FS owner (freealfas?) measure the dimensions of the FS cargo area (length x width x height from folded seats to roof) ? I would suggest measuring the height at the back and right behind first row (maybe it in angles up a couple of inches.)

bobw3

Ground clearance is definitely an advantage. If you have kids, you know balls get stuck under your car in the driveway (though thats not the only benefit). and if you get the captains, you actually get armrests- and the center console doesn't cut it), plus, you can carry their stuff.

So the benefit of the lambda extra ground clearance is that less balls will get stuck under the car...WOW! But I’m not sure why a 2nd row console isn’t as comfortable as an armrest?

bobw3

Middle seat thingy in the middle row is completely uninviting. Thought it would only be fit for a child seat or booster, but then there is no way to access the cramped rear seat, because a fixed seat in the middle prevents folding the outside seats and blocks the tiny walk through.

I think the purpose was to give folks the option of seating 5 in the Highlander if they wanted to fold the back row for more cargo space.

In your review of the Highlander, how were you planning on using it? How big is your family. I think the Highlander is designed for a family of 4 who need the occasionaly use of the 3rd row for carpooling. They have the Sienna for those with a bigger family.

bobw3

It's the FS. What's wrong? How can such a long vehicle have so little cargo space? Let me answer that. It's a station wagon! Don't think this is the answer? Look at the Pacifica- another station wagon. Cargo space is terrible. It's as simple as that.

Why all the discussion on this issue?? It's not so complicated. The FS is not as tall, nor as wide as the lambdas. It has really thick doors, and the flipNfold 3rd row makes the area behind the 2nd row go up a little to make for a flat floor. And the roof slopes down from back to front. Add these things all up and you get less cargo space. If you just park one besided the other you could see...the FS is smaller! However, there's plenty of space for 6 adults with a good-sized cargo area behind the 3rd row.

bobw3

1) the Lambdas are definitely the best rounded crossovers on the road. They have the best balance in cargo/ passenger space, power, efficiency, safety, and price. This is because you don't really have to give up anything.

When making overgeneralized statements such as this one, you should at least specify your vehicle needs (ie...number of projected passengers, cargo usage, need for AWD, price range, etc...)

I agree with your statement if you're talking about for people needing at times to carry 8 passengers, needing AWD, needing a high towing capability.

However, if your CUV need was for your family of four who occasionally needed to carry a couple of more people on occasion, then I'd say the lambda was not the best CUV.

So it depends on your needs.

nastacio

the lambda's would be better vehicles with less weight to haul around. I still cannot fathom how anyone can argue with that statement intelligently.

Does that mean you think they are good vehicles that could be made even better with less weight? :shades:

Isn't it commendable that GM can put out vehicle that is dimensionally larger, handles like a smaller vehicle, and posts similar mpg to current offerings in the market (now that the FS is making room for the TX?)

Looking at Mazda and Honda numbers, even with 300+ lbs less to haul around, they are mostly tied with the lambda's performance/mpg numbers. They probably can sprint faster, but it seemed general consensus that straight line acceleration was not important to quibble over 10ths of seconds.

One could choose to pick at GM for not making them lighter or at Mazda/Honda/Ford for not making more efficient engines. Consistently making the first choice made it sound like anti-GM propaganda, even though that may not have been the intent.

People may have picked on the FS just for the fun of the argument (I certainly did,) but it is really not a vehicle that people wanted to discuss. Not because it is a bad vehicle - and I agree with you that it may be better than the TX and the lambda's in *some* aspects - but because it has been discontinued.

volkov

We are a family of 6 plus dog. Now, this new purchase is to be our second family vehicle. The first is our 04 Yukon XL equipped with 8.1L engine for heavy towing. New purchase would be used for short haul urban driving only. Dropping off at school, skating, tae-kwon do etc. Idea is to reduce gas consumption and the fact that with both of us working, the person dropping off and the one picking up may not be the same.

I didn't like the use of the word 'flaws' in a previous thread, but I do think all CUV's make compromises of one kind or another and their success depends on the needs of the consumers. Unfortunately, sometimes the attempts to please all please end up pleasing very few. A family with 3 children sitting in the second row means someone always gets the hump seat. Not bad if they are in child seats, but that will completely block any use of the 3rd row for the rare times it's needed. Or you are using the 3rd row which is passable, but nowhere near as inviting as the FS/TX for example. My big disappointment was there was no functional improvement in passenger dynamics or comfort relative to the old rather utilitarian 3 seater. I had really hoped for more. It's still an option for us, but only because of the hybrid option to come.
You are correct, the Highlander would be fine for a family of 4 which is probably the norm today, but there are cheaper more fuel efficient choices. Toyota even makes one - the Rav 4 with available 6 cylinder and its own cramped 3rd row option.

bobw3

If it's really only for short drop-offs and pick-ups as a second vehicle, then did you consider a Kia Rondo or Mazda 5, or one of the smaller CUV? They may have small 3rd rows, but you can slide the 2nd row up as well. Especially for short trips I wouldn't think it would be too bad (of course it depends on the size of the occupants too...no offense ) It just seems like alamda with mid-teens urban MPG is a bit of an overkill for your needs, especially if MPG is a big concern. Especially since you have the big SUV for weekend road trips. Do you usually buy GM?

volkov

I forgot another thing. The new Highlander still has the solid folding bench in the 3rd row. So you can have passenger capacity or cargo room, not both. Split folding rear seats give so much more versatility. I know it is cost cutting, but I would certainly be willing to pay for it as an option. It is definately one of the things in the plus column for the FS/TX.

nastacio

I saw a Mazda 5 on the lot this weekend, somehow it looked better than I remembered it. I guess they restyled the nose on 07.

Didn't test-drive it though.

Are there Mazda 5 owners in this thread? I wonder what is the the depth of the space behind 3rd row (or maybe I should post the request to another thread.)

They are just a foot shorter than a CX-9, and the 3rd row is definitely for kids, but I would definitely consider one as as a 2nd vehicle...if they packed a detuned version of the turbo-4 from the Mazdaspeed 3 (maybe at 200hp). :shades:

bobw3

Exactly my point...if a family already has one big SUV/minivan and they're interested in MPG for their 2nd vehicle for running around town, then a lamda just seems too big.

volkov

We are up in snow country so do really want AWD. Rondo and Mazda 5 fit the bill of what I need perfectly except for the FWD and short ground clearance. I know they are within 1" of the FS, but looking at them in person, seems hard to believe. Side sills must be the lowest point on the Rondo and Mazda. FS must have some parts hanging down under the chassis.

volkov

Not interested in a Lambda at all. Then again, its MPG numbers don't pay the price for its size. Keep in mind the XL gets 9-10mpg city driving so it's only a matter of degree when looking at gas savings.
If Ford had maintained the mpg of the FS with the new engine/tranny in the T-X I'm pretty sure I would have bought one because the interior layout and seating versatility are great for us. My one concern with going too small is that the whining and complaining and fighting over seatbelts from 3 growing boys may make us drive the truck more and underuse the new vehicle.

nastacio

If Ford had maintained the mpg of the FS with the new engine/tranny in the T-X...

Why not an FS 07 then? I am sure there has to be a few still sitting on the lots.

If you are not shopping for right now, there are rumors of a V6 diesel for the new Pilot (2009/2010?)

volkov

Yes, it is still a front-runner. Just waiting for Ford and the dealers to get hungry with FS still sitting on lots next to Taurus X's. In Canada they actually had a bigger factory rebate and lower interest rates 2 months ago than they do now. Ford marketing genius strikes yet again!

albook

So the benefit of the lambda extra ground clearance is that less balls will get stuck under the car...WOW!

There's other stuff, like being able to clear tall snow, or deep pddles of water- and that's common driving- not real SUV off roading.

But I’m not sure why a 2nd row console isn’t as comfortable as an armrest?

If you compare the first row console of an FS to an armrest in a minivan, you will be more comfortable resting your arm in the minivan. Just the way it is.

albook

I admit I did make an overgeneralized statement. Let me try to fix it:

If you want to to carry passengers (4-8) and their gear in comfort (you need a minivan) but you don't want a minivan, this is you. If you just want to run around town, and carry a few passengers (maybe 4) in total comfort, without burning money on gas, this is your vehicle.

THe thing with Lambdas vs the Freestyle is, what the FS does well, the lambdas do well (carrying paasengers in comfort, getting good gas mileage). In my oppinion, there is just more the the lambdas do well that the FS doesn't (like having more cargo space). They are about the same size (L X W) so by getting an FS, you don't really downsize by any means. SO why not get the most interior for that amount of vehicle?

You could argue that for the price, the FS wins, but that's because right now, you can't get a rebate or incentive on any of the lambdas. That's just the demand factor. In my local paper, they don't even advertise the price of the Acadia/Enclave! If it was about MSRP vs MSRP, the two would be nearly head to head.

albook

Since you already have the Yukon, you probably wouldn't consider the lambdas for the comfort of long trips. I'm guessing you want to move all vehicles of that size out of the equation. I'd suggest the Pilot or Veracruz. The problem with the small vehicles like MAz.5 and Rondo is they are small vehicles. The third rows are small . I tried. THey are small even for kids.

Then again, price wise, A Pilot or Veracruz would cost the same as an Outlook or CX9 (and you definitely get more car) and Ford will practically give you an FS. So maybe you should consider bigger CUVs. They will give you comfortable ride for six, and if you want to save gas on a long trip, you could leave your Yukon at home.

albook

If you need ground clearnce, FS won't work, as groundclearnce is like 5 inches (carlike).

volkov

Yes another case where the what your eye sees seems imcompatible with the numbers. WRX (my current car which does fine in snow) Rondo and MZ 5 all have 6.1" ground clearance. They certainly don't look an inch higher than the FS!
The Santa Fe was on the list - slightly smaller, good mpg, decent clearance. Just not as functional. Kids were flipping seats up and down for fun after their first attempt on the FS. The salesperson took 5 minutes to get the 2nd row seat to tumble in the Santa Fe!

bobw3

There's other stuff, like being able to clear tall snow, or deep pddles of water- and that's common driving- not real SUV off roading.

I guess where I live I've never seen cars stuck in deep puddles of water or tall snow, so I wasn't too concerned about high ground clearance. To me it's a disadvantage of having to climb up higher.

If you compare the first row console of an FS to an armrest in a minivan, you will be more comfortable resting your arm in the minivan. Just the way it is.

Too me the wider center console is much more comfortable than the narrow armrest.

bobw3

). They are about the same size (L X W) Park a FS by a lamda you wouldn't say that!

albook

The FS is taller than Rondo/5/WRX. Plus, you probably can't judge an inch just by eyeing it.
If you want a real dicount, look at an '07 Rendezvous. at 186in, it's small on the outside, but has the largest third row in this comparison. Also 108 cubes of cargo space. only thing is it's UGLY.
Now, what was the reason you didn't like the lambdas? At first I was thinking they would be too big for you, but if your looking at the FS, it's the same length. It will get about the same gas mileage (maybe a little less). Plus, nothing's big to you-I mean you drive a Yukon XL.

albook

Only noticable difference is height.

bobw3

There's a lot more to value than just size.

freealfas

"If you want a real dicount, look at an '07 Rendezvous"

let's not forget the renezvous' stellar 3/4/5/5 star safety rating...

http://www.safercar.gov/Index2.cfm?myClass=SUV&myYear=2007&myMake=Buick&myModel=- - Rendezvous&GoButton=View+specific+vehicle&myMake2=&myModel2=

I may not agree with everybody around here, but I sure would want to see anyone of you driving one after reading those results... with all the other options available with much better safety ratings for the family schlep I just couldn't see one of those in my driveway.

nastacio

You could argue that for the price, the FS wins, but that's because right now, you can't get a rebate or incentive on any of the lambdas.

Saturn has a $1000 customer cash allowance for 2007 Outlook models until 9/4.

Speaking of prices, in our area, Hertz has 06' FS going for under $17K, so that paying much more than $23-24K on a new 07 may not be the best deal in town.

Lambdas may depreciate badly too; Automotive Lease Guide forecasts a worse depreciation for it than for the FS

nastacio

All cars ground clearances are measured at the lowest point relative to the ground, which tends to be the differential.

A better indication of true ground clearance, unless you are planning some serious off-roading where the wheels may find themselves on different planes, should be measured at the center of the vehicle.

However, if you are going to hit some snow with an FS, 5.1" is the ground clearance you should account for when deciding if you can clear a rough patch, lest you find the bottom of your transmission meeting the white stuff.

volkov

I dropped my bike off a friend's house for work on the fork seals and there's a Mazda5 in his driveway. I started to laugh because I'd seen it repeatedly in the parking lot at work and never realized it belonged to his SO. She loves it and has driven it through a winter here with no complaint. She traded in an old Subaru Legacy to buy it so she is used to full-time AWD.
I have to say I was really impressed. At first sit, the rear row is slightly better for knee room than the Highlander, but then pushing the second row forward a little gives excellent legroom for small people in both rows. The last row is split folding, so I could put one boy in the back row, along with all their required sports gear and two boys in front. That, and the shape of the rear seats has it all over the bigger Toyota's third row. Small footprint, but it feels very spacious due to the height.
It does only seat 6 max which will mean some compromises until the baby graduates to a booster but it isn't any worse than the Highlander in that regard (seating compromises due to solid rear bench). Price and MPG are excellent and I'm more willing to make compromises for those strengths. Now I need to think very hard whether or not I can go back to FWD.

freealfas

a good set of mounted snows can solve the fwd/winter issue for you if you like the 5 that much...

volkov

Short answer is that I didn't want another big GM SUV, albeit car based. Lambdas were just getting a little big for what I thought I was looking for. Was basically willing to step up bigger to the FS while still maintaining good MPG. Danger here is that I start inching bigger and bigger and losing sight of the original intent. Then I start losing more fuel economy relative to my current WRX than I save relative to the XL. That is why I have given up on the new T-X as an option. Bargain clearout FS is still on the table.
A second reason is that I don't want another first year out GM product. Too much beta testing for my taste.

mrblonde49

Lambdas may depreciate badly too; Automotive Lease Guide forecasts a worse depreciation for it than for the FS "

Though it's not good for GM, I wouldn't mind that as I may be in the market for a slightly used one in a few years...

ateixeira

I love how just because the EPA numbers don't make sense to you, you say they are "debunked". In your mind, sure.

Then you dismiss CR's accident avoidance manuever entirely, even though several Fords perform just fine in that test. Why can't the Freestlye do as well as the Explorer?

You say other publications slaloms are more meaningful, yet you're too lazy to look them up and provide an alternate source.

Fact is, you often dismiss sources of information that you simply don't like.

How 'bout coming up with sources of your own if you don't like the information posted?

You go on and on about the space issue, break out a tape measure if you think Ford/Saturn are publishing bad data. At least show us length/width/height or something.

ateixeira

I take it back. I think some auto makers do cook numbers. If I remember correctly, Subaru Tribeca has 34 in of legroom? Yeah right.

The 2nd row has 8 inches of fore/aft travel. If you slide it back normally it only goes back 4".

You get another 4" of travel once you hit a red release lever. The back of the 2nd row seat touches the 3rd row and the foot well disappears entirely.

Enough people had problems finding this release knob that Subaru removed it from the 5 seat models. Now the 2nd row goes back the full 8" without that knob.

The 5+2 model still has that knob, and it continues to confuse dumbfounded auto editors that don't know it's there.

Just thought I'd point that out. I do not believe Subaru is cooking the numbers in this case.

ateixeira

I think the answer here is simple - Toyota kept their minivan in production, so it made sense to keep the Highlander a bit smaller, medium-sized. The RAV4 is just a roomy compact, but it's too narrow to be a true mid-sizer.

GM dropped the minivans, so the Outlook had to replace the Relay. The Enclave replaced the Terraza and Rendezvous, I suppose.

nastacio

31.8 cubic feet more total cargo volume - debunked

Not so fast Jimmy :-)

Would you mind providing us with the interior measurements of the cargo hold for the FS? I did concede to the point that the FS/TX *may have* more than 85 cu.ft. because *I did not have the data* myself. Since then others have added that 85 cu.ft. is plausible due to the seats folding a bit higher than usual and the roof slopping towards the front.

I did leave the question on the table on why would Ford bungle the initial measurement and give a free-pass for competitors to claim such a big advantage after all these years. As you asked others many times: does that make sense?

Not that you have to go out and measure your car, but at least you could acknowledge that you don't have the data and *might also be wrong* (as I did) or at least not gloat that *you* debunked anything.

A beefier chassis, not suspension, will reduce torsion and bending movements during cornering, allowing the suspension to do a better job. Suspension bits and large wheels are unsprung mass and will actually reduce a vehicles' responsiveness during high-speed maneuvers.

If you trust those bozos at MT better than CR - remember, these are guys that tossed a GTO against an E-Series, their tests showed the FS 60-0 braking distance at 132 ft, 0.78g on the skipdad, and 28.4 seconds in their figure eight test.

For the Acadia, they got 138 ft, 0.79g, and 28.2 seconds. Both beat the Edge by at least 10ft in braking performance.

For all intents and purposes, even with the higher ground clearance, bigger interior volume, and additional mass, a lambda's agility is virtually identical to the FS. Those seem to be good credentials in your book, so why not be gracious and acknowledge that the GM folks did a good job instead of leaving behind these sour notes about gullible people believing everything they read.

nastacio

EPA test procedures

As for better numbers, the bozos at MT also threw an Acadia against an Edge and an XL7. The Edge, with 400lbs less and the same engine as the TX, was able to break the quarter mile half a second (16.5 vs 16.0) ahead of the Acadia. The CX-9, also with 400lbs less to haul, only started to break away from the Acadia over 80 mph.

Once again, I am not a big GM fan and had never stepped on a GM showroom before, but they got it right with the new V6 3.6. It is high on hp and a monster on low-end torque.

I hope I "debunked" the data-less "debunking" of the good dynamic capabilities of the lambdas.

freealfas

"I love how just because the EPA numbers don't make sense to you, you say they are "debunked". In your mind, sure."

If YOU read my other posts 2767 & 2773(after I took into account nastacio's point about interior measurements and expanded my argument to address them) about how I came to my conclusion you MIGHT understand my point.

"You say other publications slaloms are more meaningful, yet you're too lazy to look them up and provide an alternate source."

I said I TRIED to look up some alternate sources and admitted I was having trouble finding them and threw it out honestly, apparently that's not enough for you.

"How 'bout coming up with sources of your own if you don't like the information posted?

You go on and on about the space issue, break out a tape measure if you think Ford/Saturn are publishing bad data. At least show us length/width/height or something."

The fact is I did if you'd read my posts rather than react without doing so...

"Fact is, you often dismiss sources of information that you simply don't like."

As opposed to leaving no room for any other thought than your own. I've noticed your consistent lack of seeing the bigger points being discussed and focusing on the byte rather than the intent of a complete post. You might want to start taking ALL the words in a post into consideration as opposed to cherry picking the ones you take issue with.

You really don't like it when someone does not agree with you.

and why are we dredging this up 4 days after the posts ran their course???

ateixeira

So in the 2 tests that measure agility, skid pad and figure 8, the Freestyle doesn't measure up.

freealfas mentions the 800lb weight discrepancy quite often, yet it is out-manuevered by the supposedly cumbersome, overweight Lambdas in real-world tests.

Plus, didn't he say he needed space for 3 people and cargo? Seems like a Prius or Focus wagon would be plenty if you want to be efficient about it.

In other words, why is 4000 lbs OK for 3 people, and 4800 lbs not OK? 2300 lbs would seem more reasonable to me.

Needs more cargo room? Get one of these:

ateixeira

Sadly, I did waste my time reading those posts, and seem to recall and lot of hypotheticals.

Not much substance or alternate sources.

Fortunately nastacio is more resourceful than you and provided another source. Can't wait to see how you try to dismiss this one. :P

freealfas

"Would you mind providing us with the interior measurements of the cargo hold for the FS? I did concede to the point that the FS/TX *may have* more than 85 cu.ft. because *I did not have the data* myself. Since then others have added that 85 cu.ft. is plausible due to the seats folding a bit higher than usual and the roof slopping towards the front.

I did leave the question on the table on why would Ford bungle the initial measurement and give a free-pass for competitors to claim such a big advantage after all these years. As you asked others many times: does that make sense?

Not that you have to go out and measure your car, but at least you could acknowledge that you don't have the data and *might also be wrong* (as I did) or at least not gloat that *you* debunked anything."

I took into account the numbers you deemed accurrate and based A LOT of you assements and thoughts about the advantage of one vs. the other. I never once said the FS was bigger, I just merely was trying to point out what I saw were inconsistencies in the advantage being touted and why and ran into proverbial walls with a few around here. I went on to illustrate my point after respectfully taking into account some of your expanded thoughts on the measurement process and got at least you to come around to the idea that something in the numbers smelled funny.

I think ford underestimated and potentially GM overestimated their cargo numbers each contributing to the lack of clarity in this debate.

so I'd argue that with a little logic I did debunk the advantage numbers you were touting and while it is clear that the lambda's win, it's not at a 37% advantage over the FS.

thanks for finding the MT results which as you said make for all intents and purposes a dead heat in the objective measurements.

Never once said the gm was junk, and you can look at my posts to see that out. I only ever said the lambdas would be better and have a clearer advantage over the other cuv's if they weighed significantly less. To me it seems the job they did to give it a interior advantage is tempered by the weight disadvantage. what I really started taking issue with was that this weight issue was being described as "good design", I still and won't ever consider that much of a weight discrepancy "good design" and I think the customers are incorrect to do so as well. If you like this that or the other thing about the lambda's don't tell me its a better vehicle because of the fact it weighs as much as it does.

They could have had a clearer winner on all fronts if that had been addressed a little more thoughtfully and I would have had conceded that point as I have said in other posts.

"instead of leaving behind these sour notes about gullible people believing everything they read."

because if I didn't argue my point you and others still might believe that you had a 37% advantage over the FS and would take the mfr numbers as fact as opposed to fact with a touch of fiction when it serves them in the marketplace and realizing that not in all instances are things being evaluated or represented on equal terms.

nxs138

but they got it right with the new V6 3.6. It is high on hp and a monster on low-end torque.

Your definition of "monster on low-end torque" is much different than mine: I found that the Acadia hesitated up the hills, and had to nearly floor it to get it to downshift since I was losing speed. With monster torque, that would have never happened (e.g. I can keep my Audi in 6th gear the whole way up the same hills).

Granted, this might be a transmission programming issue, but nevertheless when I test drove the Acadia my wife and I definitely did not feel this monster torque you are talking about. I really does make me think the one I drove was never reflashed properly.

freealfas

your arrogance is unbounded and apparently critical thought is lost on you.

as usual the only opinion you seem interested in is your own as how dare anyone challenge your clear and erudite thinking on all matters regarding style and automotive...

freealfas

"Granted, this might be a transmission programming issue"

or a 5000lb issue...

CVT takes care of all of this for you...

it was too easy, sorry nastacio but that was more for ateixeira's benefit not you...

tidester

Please, let's not make it personal. This is about cars and not people.

tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper