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
We need to wait for about a year to see how reliable these vehicle are. Right now, basically everything Mazda builds that comes from Japan have been extremely reliable. Mazda3, Mazda5, MX-5, Mazda6 (built here in the US). The CX-7 seems to have it's first year issue solved, and the CX-9 has really had no common issues.
According to TrueDelta.com, which is a owner posting reliability site, the 2007 Lambdas were basically horrific, while the 2008's are much better. The 2007 CX-9 had an average rate, and currently no data for 2008.
I think they're more credible than CR. More in the Comments: Consumer Reports/JD Power Rankings discussion.
Also, I challenge anyone to sit in a Lexus sedan and tell me with a straight face that Buick's quality is on par. Lexus puts everyone to shame as far as quality, making everyone else's offerings feel cheap.
Buicks have improved, yes. I have yet to sit in the new Enclave, but, my mother drives a RX330, and I would love to see how the Buick stacks up. I am not willing to bet right now that Buick is tied with Lexus in build quality.
I have touched on that before. They have to be one of the oldest, if not the oldest, average age buyer. The Enclave seems to be the first Buick to stray from the senior citizen demographic. Lets see how it does.
Who is Truedelta.com? Some small organization.
Data from Truedelta.com CX-9 2007 54 trip per year from 27 customers.
Acadia 2007 98 trips per year from 95 customers.
it's almost 50% more trips, but data for Acadia/outlook alomost -75% more.
you can't compare this data. This data absolutly useless.
And about Lexus vs Buick. who's care about quality of the cabin? we re taking about REALIABILITY!!!!!
Vad1819 - I keep forgetting about True Delta. They really seem to be having trouble getting traction and hitting critical mass in people's consciousness. I like that the site owners explains the methodology there - but aren't the members there self-selected too? I'm not sure how they weed out the non-owners who may be dissing a brand they don't like.
I agree. The Enclave is a beautiful car and I would have bought one had it not been so hard to get. That's why I was very specific about 'sedans'. I think, with the Enclave, Buick has taken a HUGE leap forward in its quality reputation and demographic shift.
The Lucerne on the other hand...
Vad,
I never mentioned truedelta.com, and have never been to the site :surprise: . Don't be so quick to jump on people, especially when I think you've got the wrong guy. :sick:
Who cares about the quality of the cabin? Me, for one. I drive my car from the cabin 100% of the time, so I want my interior to be built with quality and be able to stand up to time. The last two GM trucks I was in (a 2005 Chevrolet 2500HD and a 2003 Tahoe) already had lights burned out in the stereo, hvac, and instrument panel. That's a lack of interior quality.
Anyway this discuss board is going nowhere, because a lot people like what marked Made in Japan. Let them have it. I will agree with reliability of the Toyota and may be Honda, but not a Mazda, or even Nissan. That last one much, much better car producer than Mazda. Mazda=Ford. GM at same time always have been very good American brand. GMC as a company always produced good and reliable trucks and SUV compare with even Toyota 4 runner or Nissan pathfinder, or Honda/ Isuzu SUV.
C'mon vad. You aren't happy because not everyone agrees with you. If you feel the forum is going nowhere, don't let the door hit you on the way out. As far as I'm concerned, I'd say we've had a lot of intelligent discussion. This forum is a lot more lively than many of the comparison threads out there.
I'm not trying to sound like a royal jerk here, but some people prefer vehicles other than those made by GM. Get over it, sheesh! :sick: There hasn't been any purely anti-GM bashing without credence going on here, but you seem to be getting your nose out of joint when someone mentions a vehicle other than the Acadia. GMC's Acadia is a fine vehicle, but there are other choices that happen to fit some people's needs/wants BETTER than General Motors Corporation builds!
A lot people chose a CX-9, because this car has less reported issues, but in real world, maybe because mazda has fewer sales, than GM. has anyone numbers for sales for both vehicles?
And apparently you didn't understand mine. Multiple times you say this conversation isn't going anywhere. In the most recent case, you say people want to buy things that are Japanese.
I'm not taking issue with Mazda or GM here, I'm just tired of hearing how the people who buy Japanese vehicles are ignorant, and ruining the thread. It sounds like little more than whining.
The purpose of the thread is to compare crossover vehicles. Most of them happen to be sold by brands that are NOT domestic. I'd like to respectfully ask that if there are problems with subject matter, take them to the hosts in e-mail. I also ask that you quit implying that discussion about people buying Japanese is keeping the forums from "getting anywhere."
Vad,
Why should anyone listen to you, let along agree with you when you make ignorant statements like this? Many people come in these forums for useful information, because they are seeking advise on a vehicle they are considering. When you say things like this you help no one. If anything, you upset people. Don't take this a an attack, because it is not.
We get it, you like GM. Good for you. That's great. Don't put down other brands if you are unfamiliar with them. Also, don't call Mazda, Ford, because that is incorrect as well. They are two different companies.
The GMC Acadia is not for everyone. Nor is the Mazda CX-9 for everyone. I am not saying it is. Many have been burned by GM over the years in terms of quality, reliability, and dependability, so, there is good reason for some to stay away from GM. There is an over abundance of documented proof of this. Have they gotten better? Yes. Many, including myself, do not think they are on par with the Honda's and Toyota's of the world. This does not make others "wrong" for buying them, or supporting them.
With most every Honda, Toyota, and even Mazda being recommended by almost every consumer publication, I cannot believe one can sit their and say they are not reliable. Also, most every consumer publication has also stated that most GM products have not been reliable, with the exception of Buick. We all know how I feel about that. But, all state the improvements they have made. They are what they are, improvements.
Could the Acadia/Enclave be very reliabile? Sure. But, there has not really been any history to think so, where, other companies have given you reason to think their products will be reliable.
So you haven't been in the 2007 Tahoe. Just to fill you in, it has the nicest interior in its class- unless you count the Yukon Denali (same car). Gm has HUGELY improved.
As were the Tribute and B-series
I challenge you to sit in a Benz and tell me they aren't on par.
Plus, as Lexus' quality has fallen, its not about how the interior looks, because the two makers are in a different class (though GM may be on the brink of successfully changing that ) but the actual quality. I can believe that. And you have no information that can disprove it. Only an "old people don't know what their talking about". Old people drives Camrys. What do you say to that?
To make vad happy, I suggest that anyone who has bought a non GM brand crossover recently should return or trade it in for an Acadia. In the mean time, the moderator should remove all comments about the Acadia that does not portray it as being the best in its class.
More eggnog anyone?
GM has improved their reliability greatly even in the past 2 years, so they should be on par with every one else. But true, perception takes a chage in reputation. And GM is still battling one that overshadows its large amount of great new models.
Overall, I'm happy with my purchase. I'll add my 2 cents when appropriate and continue to enjoy this forum.
I shocked you enjoy it. It's nothing but bickering.
Actually, the Tribute rates out very well in long term reliability, according to CR, excluding the first year.
I've already stated that the seat time I had in the NEW GM trucks illustrated an improved design, and modestly improved build quality. The reliability and resistance to wear will be the question as time passes.
Not what I remember reading.
Someone is definitely crazy (sorry-I couldn't resist
Not what I remember reading.
I meant the previous Tribute. CR and JD bashed both those models- as did many other testers.
this thread may be bickering (with some humor thrown in), but overall there is a lot of good information posted.
GMC Acadia: 65,372
Saturn Outlook: 31,591
Buick Enclave: 24,560
Mazda CX-9: 19,630
Only thing I cannot find is percentage of fleet sales. I know that the Outlook/Acadia have a lot of fleet sales, where as the Enclave and CX-9 really don't have any.
My brother is the manager of a very very busy Enterprise Rent-A-Car, and has a fleet of Acadia's and Outlook's. No Enclave's or CX-9's.
I posted for first time about my experience with Acadia and about MT article, and I disagree how they tested it, and some people jump on me. I drove myself 2-3 times each of following: Highlander, CX-9, CX-7, Acadia, Outlook, Enclave, Veracruz, Tribeca, Freestyle, Edge, Tahoe, Commander, Pacifica, Pilot, 08' CRV, Suzuki XL-7, 07-08' Pathfinder, Murano. I have done research before got myself in deal and I stopped on three vehicles: Acadia, CX-9 and Pathfinder (yes, pathfinder). The best deal I got from Nissan, but I chose Acadia even paying couple bucks more. Because space and quite ride. I don't care how many times I will go to dealer; I don't pay for the repairs. It’s beauty of the brand new car. It’s 100 000 of power train warranty.
What proof do you have to back that up? You cannot go from bottom of the barrel to king of the hill in two years.
that's exactly my point. I don't want to go to the dealer again, even if it's free. This car is for my family and putting in the shop is a major inconvenience. what happens after 100k - all problems stop? maybe you plan on selling it before then, I'm not. 100k is only half way there.
How is going look your CX-9 after 100k? Cheap plastic..a lot plastic and rubber trim around the car, they even use rubber seal on bottom of the door to protect from splashes. In good weather conditions(CA) it'll be ok, but in cold regions...........
It's the same material you find in a bumper, just unpainted because it looks better. There is nothing cheap about the CX-9.
From the sound of it, some people could use a bit of "spiked" eggnog! :P
Acadia 2007 98 trips per year from 95 customers.
you can't compare this data. This data absolutly useless.
Take a deep breath, and read more carefully: right at the top, it says "trips/year per 100 vehicles". So the data is already normalized for you out of 100 vehicles.
So for the CX-9, it's 54 trips per 100 vehicles, while for the Acadia, it's 98 trips per 100 vehicles. That's all you have to look at. The website has already factored in the # owners, etc, and uses a sample size that is large enough to be statistically significant.
So based on truedelta's results, odds are that if you own a 2007 Acadia, you'll be in the shop more often than if you owned the 2007 CX-9 (almost twice as likely being in the shop with the Acadia). Fortunately, the 2008 Acadia is faring much better, only 36 trips to the shop per 100 vehicles so far. That's great news, since it means GM has likely corrected a lot of the issues that plagued the 2007.
This is why I like Truedelta. You can actually see the numbers and see how the car improves or worsens as time goes by! And the Acadia is improving!
I really wanted to do. So, instead, I ended up with a new Armada LE.
Despite the gas mileage, it is an absolutely fabulous truck. None of the saturn
dealers I spoke with wanted to neogitate on anything other than 07s. Try
getting an 8ft christmas tree inside a CUV
By the way Acadia has more cargo space then Armada 97 vs 116 Acadia and second up third down Armada 56.7 vs 68.9 Acadia, second and third up Armada 20 vs 25.5 Acadia.
Mazda's never came up even close to numbers from GM or Nissan. It's my experience from Mazda dealership, not all dealership same.
I never heard anything from owners of the Veracruz. Are they happy? It's good car, but I still kind afraid pay for it. It's not about d.... reliability, it's about driving abilities.
It is a great deal of inconvienience to take a vehicle in to the dealer ship. No one can say different. However every vehicle has to go in once or twice during ownership. No one wants a total lemon, but as long as you take good care of your car and have regular service done, most cars should not have too many problems. Out of all of my previous automotive affairs- which include German, Japenese, Korean and American, I can't say I've had too many problems with any. These include sevveralgood encounters with American cars- like a Chrysler that went 10 years with only 3 non service shop stays. Maybe I'm lucky, and I know there may be Honda, Toyota or even American owners that do better, but I don't think anyone can tell me that is a ridicoulous number of times. If I really like the vehicle and know it's best for me, once every two years is fine with me. I rather have that then spending 2-3 years paying a note for a 40k+ investment for something only because Consumer reports or JD power says it will never have to go back to the shop on its fault. Its a perspective thing.
I don't think anyone should make a choice based soley on what any one magazine or internet or anyother source says about a vehicle because truely, they don't know how you drive your car. Only you do.
Armada is huge inside, I definitely should have driven the Acadia. what
stuck me were the mixed reports on gas mileage. I wouldn't have considered
the Mazda due to crappy 3rd row seat access. The Pathfinder in that regard
was HORRID. the driver and passenger seats were great, the back seats
sucked. my dad and I tried to get back there, forget it.
Do you know,that the Acadia has more cargo space than Tahoe.
You can, but you won't find a response you'll like when you say it. I for one find your statement completely silly, and nothing more than inflamatory bashing of everything-not-Acadia (which isn't really a surprise considering the source these days). The Acadia is a large CUV, and if bigger is always better, I say go for it vad. Some people will want a lighter car, however; or one that is easier to park, handles sharper, something that could actually fit in the garage, and that doesn't make them all inferior, or "mini" crossovers.
I agree that the Pathfinder's 3rd row is not comfy, way too upright IMO.
I drove an Armada after sampling a Quest but it got 13/17 mpg even before the EPA downrated the figures. Plus my kid could not reach the door handles.
That's the first one I've seen out of the auto show circuit.
Hehe, my thought exactly
Speaking of the one we are not allowed to speak of....I took a 2005 XLE on trade the other day, and the owner said they were trading out of it because the average fuel economy they were getting was 18mpg, and they had to use premium fuel. Is premium recommended? They traded into a Mazda3 5-door, BTW.
The new 2GR engine (3.5l V6) also only requires regular octane in Toyota models.
Some Lexus models (the 2GR-FSE in the IS350 comes to mind) add Direct Injection and over 300hp, and in those cases premium fuel is required.
Both engines power different years of the RX and the Highlander crossovers.
So it's pretty much what you'd expect, you can run 87 octane, but if you buy the high performance model expect to pay more for fuel as well.
Here is where it gets truly odd - Toyota uses the new 3.5l in the GS hybrid, but stayed with the 3.3l for the Highlander Hybrid and RX400H.
Meanwhile, the non-hybrid crossovers get the 3.5l 2GR V6.
Why they choose to continue building the 3.3l, which they say costs $1000 more to manufacture, is beyond me.