Acura MDX (pre-2007)

shopper8

in my experience, the MDX gets unusually good mileage on the highway and usually poor mileage in stop and go driving, 16 - 24 mpg. I recently took a trip through mid atlantic area with little traffic and was shocked at the 24 1/2 miles per gallon I got. Conversely, initially driving country roads - a far cry from city driving conditions, I averaged around 15 1/2 mpg. There doesn't seem to be a lot of middle ground or tight average. If economy driving is paramount, maybe a compact SUV is a better choice. I saw somewhere that Acura is coming out with a smaller version of the MDX in 06, probably to meet the needs of drivers with your concerns. Heck, if you are on a budget, maybe you are looking at the wrong car entirely.

habitat1

We experience the same Dr. Jekyll / Mr. Hyde with our MDX. 23-24 mpg on the highway @ constant 70 mph; 14-16 around town in light stop and go traffic.

If it's any consolation, my 2004 Acura TL 6-speed is worse. Rated at 20/30, it will get 29-30 on the highway at 70-75 mph (1-2 mpg better than my old Nissan Maxima). but in mixed drivign, the TL drops to 16-17 in the same conditions that my Maxima achieved 22+/-.

For whatever reason, our two Acura's give poor "mixed" mpg compared to any other car I've owned.

princessl

just great...none of those pages work and I want to buy this car today!!!

stever

Some of the old links got left behind when technical issues forced new URLs on them. But they are still there in the archives and you can find them with the Search Forums tool on the left.

Here's a few that should help:

ACURA MDX
ACURA MDX - II
ACURA MDX - III
ACURA MDX - IV

Steve, Host

varmint

Picked up a 2004 MDX-t last night. Drvier's seat cushion is a little flat, but I don't have a problem with the lumbar support or bolstering. Everything else is too nice for me to be driving.

Oh, and the trip 'puter tells me I'm averaging 19-20 mpg commuting on town roads. Of course, two drives is hardly scientific.

tahoeking

Try putting the vehicle in park and putting on your e-brake it should work fine.

suvtime

Congratulations on your new MDX. I think your going to love the luxury as compared to the CR-V. It should be better in almost every way , except at the pumps.

I hope you'll still drop in on the CR-V vs Escape thread though. No doubt Scape2 will still have to have you clear up a few things for him.

varmint

The difference in road noise is astounding when compared with my old CR-V. Partly because I'd scrubbed the CR-V's tires pretty good while wheeling it. That alone has made a big difference.

wmquan

Congratulations on your MDX!

anonymousposts

Bought it Monday. So far we love it. Much sportier than the 2004 Odyssey we traded. We do miss the DVD player from the Ody but the NAV is nice to have. Our 18 month old seems to like sitting up higher. In the van he was behind the passenger seat so he couldn't see much and our other cars are too low for him to have a good view.

varmint

wmquan - Hey there! Haven't crossed paths with you lately. Not much since the days of the original MDX thread with Drew and everyone else. I look forward to getting your perspective.

Anony - I envy you and your NAV. If only because it makes the dash look so much nicer.

To elaborate on my response from the other thread, I was looking for a silver vehicle. Kinda common as far as colors go, but my silver CR-V was incredibly easy to maintain. It got scratched. It got dirty (plenty dirty). But it never looked bad. By comparison, my wife's dark green TL never looks clean and all the scratches are obvious. Other than bright white, silver was the best light color option I had.

Anyway, we were looking for a 2003 or 2004 model and just happened to find a very clean one in the right color, with the right equipment, and got a fair deal very quickly with a salesman who was easy to work with. The pieces just fell into place.

So, everybody... When's the next off-roading trip? :shades:

anonymousposts

The NAV is nice to have. Is it a necessity? By no means. We would get more use out of the DVD system. But it came with it and it is neat so I'm not complaining.

Our MDX is the same color as the Odyssey was. Sage Brush which looks like dark gray in most lights with a greenish tint in others. It really is clean for 55,000 miles. And we couldn't beat it for the features and price. It was cheaper than a new CR-V or Element. I am looking forward to the AWD this winter. Atlanta doesn't really get snow (unless you count the 1/4" dusting once a year) but if we do I'm prepared

explorerx4

the rear hatch glass open on an mdx like it does on a crv? :shades:

vjcl

It doesn't work on my 05 MDX, can other peple verify?

Thanks.

varmint

Boston got plenty of snow last year, but, even so, I spend quite a bit of time in ski country. Even when I'm not skiing. So using the AWD is a given.

Honestly, I was more interested in the VSA. I was always able to get around just fine using the RT4WD system in the CR-V. If you were smart about your speed and momentum going forward was never a problem. It's when you start sliding that you get into big trouble. So, I'm more interested in seeing how VSA helps out with winter weather.

wmquan

the rear hatch glass open on an mdx like it does on a crv?

Afraid not. The rear hatch glass does not open, you have to open the hatch to get at the cargo area.

varmint

It is something I will miss. With two greyhounds (which can do 0-40mph in about 4 steps) it was nice to be able to open the glass, attach a leash, then swing open the door.

With the MDX, I'll probably have to attach the leashes by reaching over the 2nd row, walk around back, reach under the tailgate as I open it, and snag the leashes before they can bolt.

Hmmm... Now that I'm thinking about it, I wonder if I can install some kind of detachable pet barrier at the very back of the cargo area. Doesn't sound very convenient, but it might work.

varmint

I'm researching a hitch for this new beast I'm driving. It's just for rack-style accessories (basket). I won't be towing a trailer, but I want a class III just in case I need it for towing in the future. Anyway, I've narrowed things down to two hitches. I'm looking for feedback from anyone who happens to own one or the other.

Curt makes one (model # 13328) with three attachment points (left, right, and center). It "hides" fairly well under the bumper and will not get in the way when I install a full width spare under there. I've found it for as little as $147 on the web.

The other is a Valley hitch (not a brand name I am familiar with). Essentially similar, though it uses tube construction, rather than square rails. Hides well, fits with a full-size spare, and has three points for attachment. Somewhere around $130 or $134.

Less expensive is better, but I don't want "cheaper". I'm looking for feedback on rusting, ease of installation, and anything else you might have to offer (is the receiver housing loose, tight, just right?). Thanks in advance.

msu79gt82

just great...none of those pages work and I want to buy this car today!!!

Wow if you go back and read those early posts (late 2000 and early 2001) say hi to my old posts :shades: I was a very active poster in the MDX early days and still love the vehicle. Although I have slowed my posts here somewhat I still recommend the car. We are on MDX #2 - traded the old '01 for an '04 in early '04.

habitat1

I'm in the same boat (figuratively) as you. Want the hitch for carrying bikes, but not towing boats - at least not now.

I assume you are aware that the Acura tow hitch is only supposed to be sold/installed with the transmission and power steering coolers. That brings the total installed cost to $800 - 1,000 +/-, parts and labor. I have been told by two Acura factory representatives that a hitch - any brand - that has been installed on the vehicle without the two coolers will invalidate the warranty as it applies to the engine, drivetrain, power steering, etc.

Given Acura's past reluctance to acknowledge flaws in their automatic transmissions, it would not surprise me that they would indeed refuse to honor the warranty, even if all you ever did was use the hitch for a bike rack.

I am debating whether I want to go all the way and get the hitch and coolers. Had I known that the standard equiped MDX has virtually no towing ability, I might have leaned a little harder on my wife to consider the Volvo XC90 V8 or GX470. Between no towing capacity and 235 series tires that are narrower than the 245s on our TL, the MDX is looking more like a mini-van disguised as an SUV, than a real SUV. It is a good kid and cargo hauler, but not much more. Even with the additional equipment, we were advised by our dealer against hauling a boat/trailer close to the capacity for medium to long distances.

varmint

An (all-weather) kid and cargo carrier is exactly what I expected with this vehicle. I'm replacing a CR-V, after all. So the rest of the truckish attributes that come with many other SUVs are not a big concern.

That said, I'd forgotten about the warranty business. I suppose I'll have to un-install the hitch if I have engine troubles.

habitat1

And un-install the hitch it when you take the MDX in for any service. My hometown dealer has been asked by Acura to report any violations and note them on the permanant service record. Not sure if that's universal or dealer specific instructions.

anonymousposts

for service. Getting the tranny fluid, transfer assembly fluid, rear diff, and brake fluid changed along with the oil. I paid for the full 60,000 mile service so they inspected the vehicle as well and said that it looks fine. They just called to say it was ready but we are concerned as the service advisor said they topped off all of the fluids??? It is my understanding that they should have changed the fluids.

varmint

Habitat1 - I sort of expected that. However, I have my cars serviced by an independent mechanic. I suppose I would have to check with them before doing anything nefarious.

On the other hand, I could always sell the hitch basket I've got and put the cash toward a roof top carrier. Not ideal, but I can probably make it work.

Annony - Check your owner's manual (or is that in the vehicle?) It should list exactly what the service is supposed to include. Once you have that, call your service writer and check to make sure they're doing the work you're paying for.

anonymousposts

we requested the brake flush, tranny flush, transfer assembly case fluid change, and the rear differential fluid change. When Gee dropped it off the service advisor there told him just to go ahead and get the complete 60k service for only $100 more. Since we just bought it we thought it was a good idea to have it looked over so Gee agreed to it. When she called to say it was ready and told Gee that the "fluids were topped off" I called back to find out exactly what they did and didn't do. She said they did change all of the fluids wth the exception of the brake fluid so that would be another $139.95?!? So I calmly explained to her that the price she quoted for the services we specifically requested was $350. The 60k service the other advisor recommended was $450 and supposedly included everything we had asked for. She then told me she would check into it and call me back but that they would try to split the cost of the brake flush with me. I figured I would hold off on complaining further until she called back with their solution. Well, she called back and said that they would take care of the flush at no charge to me. Now Gee just has to check the fluid to make sure it was changed.

Not a very good first service experience with this Acura dealer. We may just take it to our Honda service department of choice from now on.

varmint

"Now Gee just has to check the fluid to make sure it was changed."

Make him give it the taste test.

anonymousposts

at least not and tell anyone I made him do it...

The service was worth it. We are still upset we didn't get quite what we asked for but the MDX is driving smoother now. It's purring like a kitten now.

blindbat

I am in the market to buy a MDX. I noticed a MDX parked next to a Pilot at work and couldn't help notice the similarity. They have different sheet medal, but the windshield, side mirrors, front windows, dash, steering wheel, and many other things are the same.

Besides exterior looks what warrants paying 8K more for the MDX. Is it really that much better?

habitat1

In order to decide for yourself, you really need to test drive both the MDX and Pilot (extensively, if possible, not just a 2 mile quickie).

We ended up with an 2005 MDX Touring Nav & RES ourselves. The MDX offered a few features the 2005 Pilot didn't have: Bluetooth, Stability Control, Curtain Airbags, XM, better Nav system, ability to get both Nav and RES, etc. I think some of those features made their way into the 2006 Pilot, so the difference may even be less now.

But the Pilot is a damn nice vehicle for the price and is probably a better "value" than the MDX, if you can get by without the extra features. I don't think you can go wrong with either vehicle, but the $8k difference is at least 50% subjective.

One thing I would not overestimate is the "prestige" factor of the Acura vs. Honda. Yes, the Acura offers a better warranty with Roadside Assistance. that's definitely worth something. But of our current 2004 TL, 2005 MDX and former 2002 Honda S2000, the S2000 was the best built and best engineered of all of them. That's not a shot against Acura, it's just that Honda is pretty damn good too. And there are definitely good and bad dealerships with both brands.

bkun

I have been wondering all these times on is MDX solely preferred by Females or it is driven by Males also. Is it 50-50. Out of 5 MDXs on the road that I see, only one is driven by a Male.
I just dont want to end up driving a vehicle that females prefer to drive. I hope MDX is not like Lexus RX300. Your opinion please.

transpower

Does anyone know of a practical interior bicycle carrier for the MDX? I never wanted to spend $1100 for the MDX tow hitch just to carry bicycles. What I do now is 1) remove the rear tonneau cover, 2) fold the rear seats down, 3) place a folded old mattress cover down, then 4) lay the bicycle on its left side on the mattress cover. I'd rather keep the bicycle somewhat upright, although I realize the tire angle will be rather great for any interior carrier. I know that the Nissan Xterra and the Chrysler minivans offer one, but I don't think they'll work in the MDX. There are interior carriers for truck beds, but again I don't think they'll work in the MDX. An exterior carrier attached to the cargo door seems too flimsy to me. So, any other ideas out there?

habitat1

So you are worried that your do-dads might fall off if you get an MDX? Don't worry, hasn't happened to me yet. Although, come to think of it, my wife does drive it 90% of the time.

If it's any consolation, there are 4-5 GX470's in our neighborhood driven almost exclusively by soccer Mom's, with hubby driving the sedan to work. And that wouldn't have deterred me from considering one of those. Fact is, a lot of MDX's serve as the family car and, fact is, more Moms than Dads play chauffer to the kids. But it's not a New Beetle (or even an RX330) if that's what you are worried about. Those vehicles were designed specifically to target women buyers. I wish the MDX had a little more style to it - as does say the XC90 - but I don't think of it as being overly femminine. That said, the wide body side molding and running boards we have on ours have the fringe benefit of making it look a little more like an SUV and a little less like a minivan.

mdxstatic

I just bought (1 week ago)a 2003 MDX and settled for one without navigation because of how clean it was. So far I love the car but keep thinking of the nav system. Does anyone know if you can add the Nav. module after the fact? I have seen used nav modules w/ 6 disc changers for $400-$500 on e-bay and other web sites. Is anything else required for the install? Are they plug and play? I am aware I will not have the rear camera function but can live without that. Thanks.

jspikey

Well I was at the dealer and was looking at the 2006 MDX brochure and came accross the power train and noticed that the horsepower for the 06 was less than what I have on my 04 MDX. So I was like, why is Acura going backwards? So I did some research and found out that it was not the case. See the note below:

The MDX's 3.5 liter, 24-valve, all-aluminum, VTEC(TM) V-6 engine utilizes a high flow dual exhaust system that helps to generate 253 horsepower SAT net (8/04)* and 250 lbs-ft of torque SAT net (8/04).

For the 2006 model year, all Acura horsepower and torque specifications have been updated to reflect revised Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) J1349 (Rev 8/04) net calculations that went into affect in January of 2005. These new calculations reflect a number of significant changes in the way horsepower and torque are measured and may cause SAE net horsepower and torque totals published in 2006 media materials to differ from the figures published in previous years. To avoid confusion, all 2006 Acura press materials will specify "SAE net (Rev 8/04)" after all horsepower and torque figures to denote adherence to the new standards.

varmint

I had a hard time justifying the price of an MDX over the Pilot, especially since one of the important buying criteria for me was extra cargo space. The fact that premium fuel is recommended for the MDX was another negative in its column.

That said, I picked the MDX-t based on the sportier suspension, style (interior and exterior), and the added luxuries. These things are not needs, they are wants. So, I agree with Habitat that the Pilot represents the better value.

I also agree with him about the dealership experience not being what a luxury car company should offer. But there is some prestige associated with the MDX. It's not like MB, Lexus, or BMW, but the MDX is probably the most prestigious of the Acura line. It is known as a very competent vehicle. Actually, respect might be a better word than prestige, but I can honestly report that co-workers have taken note of the vehicle... and these people aren't driving Corrollas themselves.

varmint

Yeah, the new SAE ratings were announced a little while back. Essentially, the old standards allowed manufacturers to "cheat" using tricks of the trade to inflate the HP beyond what most people would actually get when driving the car under normal conditions. For example, using less oil in the block reduced pumping losses and gained a few hp. That kind of stuff.

No one was breaking the rules, they were just taking advantage of loopholes.

Anyway, Honda and Toyota came clean with all their 2006 models. They retested every engine under the new (tighter) standards. A number of vehicles lost power as a result.

Many other manufacturers have pledged only to retest brand new engines or engines which get significant upgrades. This is true for Nissan, Mazda, Ford, GM, and others. We may never know exactly what the power ratings for current cars and trucks should be. In the future, once they've had a chance to tweak things, they will have to report according to the new standards.

That being said, some of the vehicles which they elected to retest actually showed gains with the new standards. Others did not. That suggests some inconsistencies in their testing, but could also mean their procedures did not include the creative use of loopholes as extensively as Toyota and Honda.

varmint

Oh, hey, I forgot to report in on something.

First full tank of gas turned in a (disappointing by my standards) 20.3 mpg average. While my commute is mostly highway driving, traffic that week was stop & go or slow-moving bumper to bumper. Of course, the vehicle is still new to me and the "go" pedal has been calling my name.

I was not expecting the trip computer to give an accurate accounting of my mileage. However, when I logged the miles and compared with the gallons used to refill the tank, the math came to exactly 20.3 mpg... same as the trip computer. Wacky.

About 200 miles into the second tank and I'm getting 22.1 mpg on the dash. I've had better driving conditions this week.

2002mdx50k

I own an Acura 2002 MDX with 50k on it. There is a reason why we purchased a Honda Acura, due to them being the most reliable cars on the road. Well, this is what I used to think.

My wife has driven this care like my grandmother and now it is having transmission problems.

Through my local shop, we got an IC code P1740 problem
"Problem in 4th Clutch Pressure Switch Circuit"

I have an appointment with the Acura dealer, to do their diagnostic test, to see if they can fix this problem.

If they are recalling for “overheating” problems and “oil cooler return line” problems, they better do the right thing here and fix the car.

“DUE TO OVERHEATING. IF DISCOLORATION EXISTS, THE TRANSMISSION WILL BE REPLACED IF DISCOLORATION IS NOT PRESENT, THE DEALER WILL PERFORM THE REVISION TO THE OIL COOLER RETURN LINE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON APRIL 21, 2004”
Recall ID Number: 04V176000

This comment here is reassuring: “Consequence: GEAR FAILURE COULD RESULT IN TRANSMISSION LOCKUP, WHICH COULD RESULT IN A CRASH.”

Has anyone gone through this recall process?

Cheers,
jp

bzh

Hi, new to this site. Help! @55,800 miles transmission gave out on 2002 MDX, and dealership agreed to replace it even though I am no long under warranty. However, according to them I need new engine mounts...at 56,000 mile?! Is this directly related to the transmission issue and should Acura be covering this as well if that is indeed the case? Opinions and any info is welcomed, c.

jcrawford999

We were actually comparing the 2005 MDX w/ Nav to the 2006 Pilot w/ Nav. We test drove them back-to-back.

The MDX was definitely sportier. It had a lot less lean on the turns and braking was more confident. The Pilot was squealing through some fast turns that the MDX had no problems with. This probably has more to do with the cheap Goodyears on the Pilot more than anything else (the MDX had Michelin Crossterrains). On the highway, the MDX was a little bumpier over the expansion joints, whereas the Pilot had a softer ride. Overall, the Pilot felt bulkier than the MDX.

As far as equipment is concerned, the 2005 MDX Touring Nav has the following equipment that the 2006 Pilot EX-L Nav doesn't have:
- Bluetooth
- OnStar
- Memory Seats/Mirror/lighting
- Bose System
- Rain sensing wipers
- Free Service Loaners
- 4/50 Warranty Bumper to Bumper (vs. 3/36 Basic,5/60 Pwrtrn)
- Roadside Assistance
- 17-inch wheels
- Footwell lights

The 2006 Pilot had these features the MDX didn't have:
- Seating for 8 (MDX only has 7)
- Sunglass Holder
- Center Console with tons of storage
- Lighted Side Markers
- Conversational Mirrors
- Standard Side Body Molding

The price difference between the two (with MDX rebate) was about $4,700. Are the features worth the difference? If you compare the feature list, probably not. However, my wife liked the way the MDX looked a lot more than the Pilot. We ended up with a 2005 MDX. It was a tough decision though, the Pilot was such a strong value proposition.

explorerx4

whenever i see post about cross terrains, i point out that there are 2 types. one has a 420 treadwear rating, the other has 700. you can check the side of the tire for that number.

hungp

I've gone through the same experience, and picked the MDX. Yes, if you negotiate well, the price difference should be somewhere 4k+. And price is not everything. I like the way MDX drives MUCH better than the pilot. Depending on your priorities, one will serve you better than the other. One thing to know is the transmission on MDX is different than that on the Pilot. Another cool feature on MDX with Nav is the passenger side's mirror tilts when you back up, not sure it's on Pilot. I did not test the Pilot with Nav. And my wife does like the look of the MDX a lot better than the Pilot, and she made the call!

sbcooke

Call your dealer. I added a hiddenhitch myself for $125. I asked them if I didn't tow if it made a difference. They told me if I didn't tow and it was only a bike rack it wouldn't matter.

varmint

I did a quick scan of the Pilot's features and didn't see the tilting side mirror on the list. So, I think you're right about that.

But you don't need to get the NAV on the MDX to get this feature. It's part of the touring package. (Just remember to have the left/right mirror selector set in the middle.) I don't do much parallel parking, so I hardly ever use it. But it would be a nice feature for city dwellers.

varmint

Thanks. I do plan on talking with them about it. Just haven't gotten around to it, yet.

I've got a buyer for the hitch basket I was planning to use. I might just sell it and use the cash to buy a roof-top carrier instead.

love2driveinct

Jumping in the conversation late here...

Just thought you might find it amusing that my husband drives an 05 Pilot and we are considering an 06 MDX for me, which would also be our main family vehicle. Are we crazy or what?

love2driveinct

Anyone have experience with changing your family vehicle from a minivan to an suv? I know I am probably overthinking this decision, but we are still in a quandry about whether we will regret making that move and giving up the extra space and utility of the minivan.

We have an 04 Odyssey right now and love it. The lease is up in the spring & I'd like to replace it with an 06 MDX. My husband just got an 05 Pilot in June with a 3-yr lease. It would probably seem a little silly to have both a Pilot and an MDX in our driveway, so sometimes I get tempted to look at the XC90 (my favorite for looks) or the X5 (I come from a BMW family, both parents drive 5 series). But I can't get around the incredible safety ratings and reliability that the MDX has. RX330 is not an option (no 3rd row) and GX470 is not as safe, a little pricey, and nearest dealer is 45 minutes away.

And to top it off, with MDX's redesign looming, there "should" be great lease deals on the 06's in the spring. We got an incredible deal on our 04 Odyssey for that reason.

So back to my question -- anyone made the transition and regretted it?

My reason for wanting to switch is purely selfish -- I love to drive. I spend a lot of time driving the kids around, etc, and I would like to drive something that I enjoy driving. Since I can't have a sports car until the kids are grown (youngest is 10 months -- yikes!), this is my alternative.

Thanks for your input. Sorry this rambled.

varmint

I can think of two or three things you might miss about the van. The lack of sliders on the side. And the third row isn't vey easy to get into.

I find it pretty easy to get my daughter (9 weeks) and her car seat into the second row of our MDX, but I have to imagine it's a whole lot easier with the larger sliding doors on a van.

The obvious advantage for the MDX is the AWD and ground clearance to get through deeper snow. But since you've already got a Pilot, I dunno if that's a factor.

nma

I made the transition from a Chrysler Town and Country LXi to Acura MDX (w/ dvd and navigation) in August. Had a lot of mechanical problems with the minivan and did not want to go through another Minnesota winter with a van that wasn't all that reliable. Love the MDX, except for the gas mileage, which is comparable to the van, but not up to what Acura advertises. I only have 2 kids, but needed the 3rd seat for carpooling. I planned to buy the Volvo XC90, but it drove like a truck, was smaller than the MDX, and more expensive. Loved the Toyota Sequoia, but was too big for my taste. My friend is on his second BMW X5, and had way too many problems with his first to make me comfortable about buying one. The MDX drives very nicely, is fun to drive, and if you're not real tall, very comfortable. If you are using the 3rd seat, there is not much cargo room. I know one person who regretted making the transition to the MDX, and that's because she often sat in the back with her kids during long trips. The back seat of the MDX is a little small for a full sized adult on a long trip.

dave210

We had 3 Chrysler minivans for 15 years, and in those 15 years, the '88 Grand Voyager, '96 Town & Country LXi, and '00 Town & Country Limited served their purpose very well for transporting two young kids, my wife and me, and the dog to and from Grandma's house in addition to years of shuttling people and family around comfortably and not cramped.

Our youngest is in college now and we don't really do those trips to Grandma's anymore, so the '03 MDX Touring/Nav was a great change of vehicle type.

With that said, knowing the amount of crap and people we used to carry in the vans, the MDX would have been a VERY tight fit. I don't know if we could have managed with an MDX without a rooftop box.

Plus, on family trips, the kids and dog would have been squished together in the middle row rather than spread out among the large back two rows of the vans.

You have a Pilot and an Odyssey, so you have a very good idea what you'd be giving up in your Odyssey by going to an MDX.

Who knows though, back when we got our first minivan, there weren't the family car choices they have today. If an MDX had been around in 1988, maybe we would have chosen that instead, managed with the smaller space, and never realized the practicality we were giving up by not getting a minivan.

So it's up to you...the MDX is great, but you can NOT beat the practicality of a minivan.