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.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossover_SUV">link title
And the RX handles well- no argument there. NONE. I know for a fact Toyota wouldn't let their minivan handle better than their Luxury SUV. That- and the experience of driving the two.
Again, you're bringing up some pricey luxury crossovers, and I thought the focus of this topic was the mainstream ones (Pilot, Highlander, CX9, Outlook, etc.).
MDX has been in this discussion, and Q7 has been in and out.
I doubt that. They will get 39 out of someone. And the MDX starts at 39g-MSRP. with negotiations maybe 1500 to 2g less.
has laser cruise control, HIDs, AWD, DVD and GPS, heated leather, power folding 3rd row, power sliding doors and power tailgate
And the Acura has all of this minus the DVD and power third row, and certainly more. I mean it's an Acura- with the badge. For 42 you get the DVD and even more toys.
Not exactly the same, but last week I saw the first Acaida price advertised in a paper. The listed MSRP said 32000, and the sale price was 29500. Looks like GM's doing good in the game.
ANd on forums like these, you have to use MSRP, because that's universal. We don't know- your brother Bo of Big Bo's Ford could have given you that Freestyle for 10 grand. And we wouldn't even know ( :P )
MDX is part of this discussion, you got me.
You sure the starting MSRP is $39k? I thought it started over $40. Did they come out with a lower content base model? Lemme check...OK, I'm including freight and you are not. That explains the difference. Starting list price is actually $40,665 with freight.
To get the Entertainment package you also have the get the tech or sport package, and that pushes the MSRP to $46,365 at least. Perhaps they sell the DVD seperately? :confuse:
$42k MSRP no way, now you're the one using prices paid instead of MSRP.
Fitzgerald is a no-haggle dealer, they put the prices right on the windshield. We have bought a couple of cars from them. Prices are the real deal, so I feel comfortable recommending them. I guess you could pay more if you buy an extended warranty or pre-pay maintenance, something like that.
For Big Bo, I suggest getting regional TMV pricing. Tell Bo I said hi. I actually have a distant cousin by that name. Didn't realize he owned a dealership.
Big Bo's Ford could have given you that Freestyle for 10 grand
LOL!
(at that price we'd own two!)
PS I didn't mention a van once! Are you proud of me? :P
For example:
1.CX-9 share same platform with Ford Fusion and Mazda 6, and Ford Edge. That platform was design for 5 passenger car. That why CX-9 very tight with space.
By the way, the CX-7 receives an all-new platform instead of sharing the Ford/Mazda CD3 platform used by the larger Mazda CX-9/Ford Edge/Lincoln MKX crossovers as well as the Mazda6. It uses the front suspension of the Mazda MPV minivan, with the rear suspension from the Mazda5.
2. Acura MDX and Honda Pilot share platform from Honda Accord, also tight for SUV class.
3.Hyundai Veracruz and Hyundai Santa Fe share with Hyundai Sonata, same above.
4. Ford Freestyle/X/ Volvo S60/XC90 share platform with original Volvo S80 and Taurus.
5. Toyota Highlander/Lexus RX share with Toyota Camry.
Well I concluded that all this car are sedan base SUV's, meaning hybrid SUV. Their were design as a sedan, car sitting low from the ground. So, it handles like a car but less maneuverable, because sits high and not enough cargo space with 3rd row up.
OK, about Acadia/Outlook/ Enclave their platform has been design for these cars only. So, it's originally crossovers , not a car base SUV's. That why you cannot compare any above C/SUV's to these cars.
The Acadia is the largest of the group you mentioned, so obviously it should have more space. However if you feel that the CX-9 is "very tight" on space, then by default you should also feel the Acadia is tight on space, since the CX-9 is only 1 inch shorter in length and 2 inches shorter in width than the Acadia. Interior dimensions are also just a tad smaller than the Acadia, typically 1-2" smaller in headroom/legroom space.
By the way, the CX-9 has a smaller turning circle than the Acadia, so that would make it more maneuverable, in theory.
So it shows that the CX-9 has shortest wheelbase and it had same time in second for test drive by Motor Trend which it makes less feeling speed.
I drove both vehicles three time each to decide which one is mine and I will tell you, cockpit of Acadia (seat and position between door and center organizer) is larger and wider. Also, cargo space with 3rd seat up in CX-9 only 19 cu ft, compare with almost 26cu ft in Acadia. Also, CX-9 drive with a lot bumps, same as a CX-7. If I want drive 100% sport car I will buy corvette or something like that.
IT"S A FAMILY CAR, NOT A RACE CAR.
Nope- 39. And 42 is the price for the touring.
I know you can actually pay over 39 grand for a Sienna- but we're talking about MSRP, and you have some bargaining room with the MDX, too.
PS I didn't mention a van once! Are you proud of me?
One step at a time, bud. You're getting there.
The only thing I really hate about the CX-9 styling is that they ignore the short front overhang rule, that a modern car's front over hangs must be short, or it will look awkward (see FX, G8, CTS etc.). It's like wearing white after labor day :P !
But nevertheless, the Acadia does feel more airy. I think it's because it has more headroom (just like a house with tall ceilings makes it look bigger).
leg room, CX9, Acadia
front, 40.9, 41.3
second, 39.8, 36.9
third, 32.4, 33.2
Test drove Acadia, Outlook and Outlander. Would not change my TX for any of those. Sat in CX-9, sorry, but Taurus X inside is way more comfy. The only problems is anoying small fit and finish problems - otherwise easily the best crossover.
That's why Motor Trend is wrong by comparing these vehicles.
Thank goodness we can all have different choices and opinions.
While I think making a stink over car-based platforms or not is completely ludicrous, I'd like to point out that they do in fact cross SUV abilities (sitting higher than a sedan, more cargo room, AWD and soft-road capabilities) and Car abilities (better ride, handling, and fuel economy than a truck), making them crossover vehicles. They are all unibody vehicles, not truck-like body-on-frame (as in, say, a Ford Explorer). Even the beloved Lambdas are Unibody I believe, just like a Cobalt or a Malibu... or Pilot or CX-9.
Source? I don't even think there is a touring model, is there?
Edmunds.com lists the MDX starting at $40,665 with no options, and they don't list any Touring model, just 3 packages (Sport, Entertainment, and Technology).
Let me check a 2nd source, just to make sure...
Kelley Blue Book lists the same MSRP for the MDX w/o any of the 3 packages, $40,665. They list the same pricing except they use different names for the packages - Tech, Sport, and DVD. Still no Touring model listed. $46,365 to get the DVD, because you're forced to buy 2 packages.
So I'm not sure what you're referring to. :confuse:
Can you list a source, perhaps? Are there models in your region that are not sold nationwide?
Let me check a 3rd source: Acura.com. One would hope they would get it right.
They list the starting price at $40,195 plus $715 freight in small print, so $40,910 for the base model with no options. This is for a 2008 model, so prices went up a tad compared to the 2007s.
here link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossover_SUV
Scroll down and see a table.
link here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_Lambda_platform
or http://autos.aol.com/article/general/v2/_a/gm-crosses-over/20071010145109990001
My bad! Starts at 40. Next step up is technology which is 43695.
But my argument is still proven, because I said the MSRP of an MDX is lower than that of a topline Sienna.
I was thinking of the 2006 models, when there was a Touring package (39g), and MDX started at 37g. So if it were 2006, you'd really be set straight. But times change
WRONG!
Pilot is on the former Odessey minivan platform. CX-9 is on a platform that was developed WITH Ford for its Edge-not for the Edge.
First of all, its really just a 7 seat wagon (5in = car ground clearance). The TX does have a more comfortable interior than the CX-9, but doesn't match the Acadia/Outlook. Plus TX seriously lacks cargo room in comparison to the other two.
But for those who want a CAR- really want a car, but have to seat seven, this is the most car like choice available.
TX is a family hauler designed for city driving and long trips so I really do not care about ground clearance, I do not think you would use Acadia or Outlook on off roads very successfully either. MPG and price should be taken in account as well.
Honda's Global mid-size platform which underpins cars like the Honda Accord, Acura TL, Acura TSX and Honda Odyssey.
But, first generation of odyssey 1995-1998 built on the Accord platform and using a 4-cylinder engine like the Accord's.
Then since 1999, it was considerably larger than the car base it replaced, and adopted the traditional American minivan format- FF- layout.
About CX-9 platform again: it's CD3 (for "C/D-class") is a Ford global midsize car automobile platform. It was designed by Mazda in association with Ford and debuted with the Mazda 6 sedan in early 2003.
Vehicles currently using this platform include the following:
2003–present Mazda 6
2006–present Ford Fusion (CD338)
2006–present Lincoln Zephyr/MKZ (CD378)
2006–present Mercury Milan (CD338)
2007 Mazda CX-9 crossover SUV
2007 Ford Edge crossover SUV (U338)
2007 Lincoln MKX crossover SUV
The Tech package doesn't include the DVD player, AFAIK.
I've never had a car that got so many comments in the parking lots, even a thumbs up in traffic.
I'm guessing your goal was comfort over driving excellence... in that case I think you made a great choice. Congrats on the new wheels!
This is one area where the Freestyle absolutely shines. It is very large on the inside while being small on the outside and can haul an amazing number of people, cargo, or a combination of the both. Converting the flat load floor back to three rows of seating took less than a minute. I have been very impressed with Ford's engineering. I don't think they get the reputation they deserve, and this is coming from a guy who never would have imagined owning a Ford until the Freestyle came along.
Chad
While all GM vehicles have improved in reliability, I believe that Buick's perceived reliability is asque due to the fact that the majority of Buick buyers are retired senior citizens who rarely ever drive the speed limit, let alone test what the true limits of the vehicle are. Add the fact that these vehicles are usually not really driven the much, and have low mileage on them. This equates into a high customer satisfaction and reliability rating. Buicks share their engine/drivetrains with ever other GM vehicle that statistically rate near the bottom (Chevy, GMC, Pontiac).
I am not saying that the Enclave is not a good choice for a vehicle. They are very nice, elegant, lots of room, very comfortable ride. However, if you chose one strictly on a reliability survey, and you do not fit into the previous Buick customer demographic, or typical Buick-aged buyer, then I think that may have been a mistake. If you chose one for how it fits your needs, then you made the right choice.
Fill me in please, as I'm not sure what the Japanese are missing that you claim.
According to Motor Trend, and American company, they seem to think that Japanese build the best vehicle in this segment, Mazda CX-9 :P
They have everything what Japanese cars are missing, for first year in 10 years history
What? That sentence do not make any sence.
The Americans car is coming back strong and big, and reliable.
Well, American vehicles have been "big" for quite some time now! I did mention that they are getting more reliable but to think they are the most reliable is quite farce.
CX-9 = mazda6, ride like mazda6, with less control.
Highlander= looks same as 07.same 07, very soft.
One good crossover is Nissan Murano, but 5 passanger only and still sedan - Altima. Good design inside for 09' model.
First - never use wiki to prove a point. It's editable by anyone and can be written to say anything.
Second - because vehicles share platforms doesn't mean they are the same vehicle. A platform is basically a collection of hard points which allow the use of the same assembly line and results in similar crash characteristics. Those hard points are the ones that cannot be changed (ie windshield rake, suspension attachment points). The platform can be changed in all other ways to underpin different vehicles. This allows for cost sharing of the basic vehicle but allows for different engines, suspension, et al to be used.
To say an Odyssey is the same as an Accord would be like saying the Viper is the same as a Dakota just because they share the same basic platform.
CX-9 = mazda6, ride like mazda6, with less control.
Highlander= looks same as 07.same 07, very soft.
One good crossover is Nissan Murano, but 5 passanger only and still sedan - Altima. Good design inside for 09' model.
You didn't answer my question, vad. Different suspension tuning is not something to say one has over another. They all ride and handle differently. And, I must disagree that the Highlander looks the same as the 2007 model, which is a different topic altogether (one I'd be happy to pursue). They share resemblance (as do most cars that are redesigned) with each other, but after all, they also share the same nameplate.
My question still stands though. What, as you claim, are the Japanese missing?
CUVare sharing new platform, new idea of the SUV. Where japanese still using on theirSUV/CUV 08' models car base platform. Also, GM's is much roomy, and the sitting position more like SUV, where Japanese is more likes minivan. Of course, some people preferred minivan style over SUV. In my opinion, if I buy car looks like SUV, it should be have some driving experience as SUV.I don't want argue about it, I'm just share my opinion. If you have different opinion, please share it with us.
By the way above pictures of the Highlander are just confirmed 07 and 08 same cars. They just add more trim (plastic) to 08 models.
I don't want argue about it, I'm just share my opinion. If you have different opinion, please share it with us.
I'm not arguing with you, just discussing, and as a matter of fact I do have a differing opinion (big surprise, right?
It has been my experience that the driving experience of a true SUV (Tahoe, Jeep Cherokee/Liberty, Trailblazer) is pure truck. Numb steering, sluggish responses to steering input, brake response, bigger turning circle, etc.
I want the sharpest and most accurate steering and most car-like feel I can get in my vehicle.
I didn't notice or feel that the CX-9 and Enclave had driving positions that were different from each other. Both were about the same height. The same is true of the Pilot, IMO.
And, try sitting in a Highlander. You'll notice there is as much difference there as there is from a high-selling Silverado from generation to generation.
Same design, right down to vent, climate controls, and stereo placement, that has been in place since the mid 1990s, and it is in a 2008 Silverado.
Trust me, the Toyota is more different than I think you realize. In person especially. Gone is the boxy/square-jawed design of the first Highlander.
You're going to have to help me with this, too. I am not seeing your point about CUVs sharing a platform with a car. In what ways does GM excel because it does not share such a platform with other vehicles (in which someone has already explained how little a platform being shared actually affects a vehicle)?
If someone is guilty of sharing platforms a little too much it would be GM.
G6/Malibu/Malibu Maxx/Aura anyone? 4 cars in one price class that are essentially the same.
Tahoe/Yukon/Suburban/Yukon XL/Silverado/Sierra/Escalade/Escalade EXT/Escalade ESV/Denali... does sharing a platform between these cause problems? They are also the basis of many heavy duty vehicles that are used in commercial duty. Hasn't been a problem for them last I checked!
it's fine.
Tahoe/Yukon/Suburban/Yukon XL/Silverado/Sierra/Escalade/Escalade EXT/Escalade ESV/Denali... all these are trucks and also fine.
BUT DON'T TRY TO MAKE SUV FROM SEDAN. IT"S NOT A "MONSTER JAM".
I drove Highlander and I didn't find anything good about this car. CX-9 and Acadia have much better handling.
Crossovers blend carlike handling and larger cargo abilities. They aren't off-roaders.
1. CRV
2. RAV
3. Ford Edge
4.ford Escape
...... 8. Acadia.
it's not bad for full size SUV. The only CRV type winning because gas 3.$$. If you remember before that 05 or 06 Best SELLING SUV was Explorer.
I will never buy CRV. It's not a car. I'll better buy VW Passat wagon. It's more car for same money.
This is the third time I've asked this.
Sorry to burst your bubble. Follow this link and tell me what it says at the top right of the page:
http://www.gmc.com/acadia/acadia/index.jsp
I believe it says: "Acadia - The Crossover From GMC"
I win - I win - I win.
If they are no better or worse or different, then why shouldn't they be compared. They all have similar capabilities.
So it will use the multi-purpose platform to underpin a vehicle other than the Acadia trio. Just like the Pilot and the Odyssey. If I use your logic, we can't compare the GM minivan that is to come to other minivans because its platform is not exclusive to that vehicle.