Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Mercedes-Benz M-class vs Ford Explorer/Mercury Mountaineer vs Buick Rendezvous vs Acura MDX

2456789

Comments

  • dindakdindak Member Posts: 6,632
    After a little bit of lurking I will say this..

    Best of the bunch is the Mercedes followed closely by the Acura.

    In terms of value, the new Rendezvous wins hands down. Although it doesn't have a sophisticated engine it does have great looks, space and quality (from what I hear). The 0-60 times really don't suffer much from the smaller engine which is surprising and you get the best gas mileage in class.

    Since I can not afford a Mercedes or an Acura, I will be looking at a base Rendezvous for sure when our next lease is due next spring.
  • proteus456proteus456 Member Posts: 65
    Well..it might be nice to keep things civilized here. I certainly would not call my comments blantantly misleading. Yes, I just now noticed the low end explorer has a manual..forgive me. I've been comparing with the Explorer LTD/EB editions, not the sport, and not the lower end trims, as they are not in the same class as the vehicles being discussed. The point I was making remains the same. The sport is based on the old live axle chassis. The gas milage I listed is completely accurate 15/20 for the Explorer, vs 17/21 for the ML. Finally..where a vehicle is made, or where the parts are made have little to do with the overall engineering and quality.
    Nobody denies that Ford/GM are entirely CAPABLE of providing quality engines/transmissions. For example, most BMW transmissions are manufactured by GM! Ford has been making excellent multivalve engines in Europe for a long time. For some reason however, perhaps cost, Ford and GM still insist on selling that obsolete pushrod designs that everyone dropped decades ago. Yes..the Explorer V6 is SOHC, but is still remarkably inefficient by modern standards. Its a bigger engine, gets worse milage, far less refined, and produces less power to boot.
  • barresa62barresa62 Member Posts: 1,379
    Just curious, do you have anything good to say about Fords or the 2002 Explorer/Moutaineer in particular? If you have already, I apologize. I must have missed it through the onslaught of ML comments you ceaselessly post.

    Stephen
  • proteus456proteus456 Member Posts: 65
    Actually I do. My biggest complaint with Ford is a lack of refinement, which is why they don't compete well in the luxury segment. Cheap plastic, fake wood, heck..the mountaineer has fake alumininum trim!. In the US, Ford is good at creating cheap vehicles that do the job for most people. Explorer XLT is a case in point...you get a lot of utility for your money. In the XLT price range (20-30) Explorer is a good deal. Mountaineer/EB/LTD? these are marketed as luxury brands, and priced that way (30K+). Ford is not competitive here, as people expect more. More refinement, more safety, more reliability and more luxury. Fords problem in this country is that they cut too many corners, leading to a lack of refinement. This is fine in the lower price ranges, but not acceptable in the luxury segment.
    Its not like Ford can't build world class cars. Ford Europe sells the Mondeo, and Cosworth Escort. They own Jaguar and Aston Martin...they have the ability, they just need the will!
    Anyway, to sum up?
    Explorer is a good vehicle in the 20-30 range, but there are much better choices in the 30K+ range.
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Member Posts: 3,118
    Just to keep things civil, lets agree that the ML320 only competes with the Explorer/Mountaineer in that they are both near-luxury SUV's capable of carrying 7 passengers. Otherwise, they aren't really peas from the same pod.

    Certainly the ML320 can match or exceed the performance of a similarly equipped Explorer/Mountaineer in most areas. However, a FULLY loaded EB Explorer/Mountaineer AWD can be purchased for just over invoice ($33,300 for audiophile sound, moonroof, luxury package, convenience group, and side airbags). A similarly equipped ML320 typically sells at or just slightly below MSRP (about $41,200 with similar equipment).

    Is the ML320 a more desireable SUV? Sure, it has VSC and has better crash test ratings. However, the Explorer/Mountaineer also has good crash test scores and safety features, and it costs about $8,000 less in the real world. (I won't address roll-over stats here, it is for consumers to decide if Ford has addressed those issues satisfactorily...and soon to arrive VSC should satisfy those concerns).

    I looked at both SUV's very closely and found both to be very well put together and desireable. Both vehicles look and feel the part of an upscale, near-luxury SUV. The ML has a great ride and a feeling of quality throughout. The ML320 "intangibles" were also superior and very real. The Mountaineer also me impressed with it's tremendous improvement over last year. It's ride was more truckish, but it was smooth and quiet by any standards, and the interior, while clearly not as nice as the Mercedes, was well executed and attractive (I liked the aluminum look no less than the wood in the ML, which looks fake to me).

    My local Mercedes dealer and I assembled a MINIMALLY equipped ML320 with 3rd row and it came to $38,500. That's as low as you can go with cloth seats and no luxury package. The Explorer/Mountaineer, nicely equipped, can be purchased for about $30,000.

    One caveat, if you want to lease, the Mercedes is probably a better value because of it's superior residual value. Monthly payments should be very similar to the Ford/Mercury, and the maintenance is included for 4 years (length of warranty). It's a good lease value.
  • proteus456proteus456 Member Posts: 65
    ML320 is now selling at invoice, due to model year changes. A loaded model can be had at 40K (My dealer tried this on me when I preordered a 2002 model). I personally would consider the ML320 in the luxury, as opposed to the near luxury catagory, other than that, your points are all very valid.
    Also note that considering trade in, you'll do much better as well. Explorers have MASSIVE depreciation, with 38-40% residuals after 4 years. ML and MDX are running at 51-53%.
    Mountaineer isn't bad for the money, but it does lack refinement. For some people, this may not be much of a concern. For me personally, I'm willing to pay more to get the better vehicle.
    Speaking of which, has anyone heard when the BMW X5L will be out?
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Member Posts: 3,118
    You're absolutely right about the Ford depreciation and the availability of MY 2001 ML320's at invoice. Getting a MY 2001 for invoice is a great opportunity to get a "bargain" on a new Mercedes...especially if you plan to keep it for many years. By keeping the car for a long time, you offset the end of model year depreciation that has already taken it's toll on your new, one year old, Mercedes.

    BTW, I think most would agree that buying a used Mercedes is much less risky than buying a used Ford. The comparative residual values of these two vehicles demonstrates the long-term value of the Mercedes (the longer you keep it, the better the value).
  • proteus456proteus456 Member Posts: 65
    Have to agree there...Rendezvous with that I6 engine would be a class leader. If they could keep it under 38K, it would be one of the best deals going! Unfortunately, it looks like the best Rendezvous will get is an 5cyl version of the same engine. Anyone sell a supercharger for the 3.4?..:-)
  • drew_drew_ Member Posts: 3,382
    There's a simple reason for that. The I6 engine is simply too long to fit in the Rendezvous or the Aztek. Fitting an I6 would also require a high hood line, and there just isn't enough space in the minivan platform to accomodate it.

    MB abandoned the I6 style (which they have been using for eons) for a V6 mainly because the I6 wouldn't fit underneath the hood of the M-class. They wanted to be able to have a short and slopping hood line (which is actually part of the reason why the ML looks a bit minivan-ish from some angles) for improved visibility and much improved packaging reasons. By better packaging I mean this...the BMW X5, which has an I6, is about a couple of inches longer than the ML, but yet has much less room inside. The long hood eats up a lot of what would've been cabin/cargo space. Fitting an I6 to the ML without compromising any interior room would've increased the overall length of the vehicle larger than what MB wanted.

    Hope this helps!

    Drew
    Host
    Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
  • proteus456proteus456 Member Posts: 65
    That explains it..I always wondered how Mercedes was able to fit 7 adult size seats in an SUV that was shorter than everyone elses. No wonder the X5 is so small inside!
  • pilot16pilot16 Member Posts: 10
    Thank you for getting this site going and breaking the Merceddes vs. Exploders away from the other site. Mercedes is a car, Ford is a truck. In Newport Beach, CA there are lots of cute MB SUV's at the Mall. I have yet to see one of those cute little things off-road or in serious snow. And I don't even like Fords but if I didn't have my SUV I would take a Ford over a MB, IF I was going to use it as an SUV. Thank you. Adios.
  • sirknightdsirknightd Member Posts: 96
    Anyone have any idea when MB will be integrating the Durango and Jeep parts in the ML? I m sure it will make for great efficiency in production.
  • bjk2001bjk2001 Member Posts: 358
    Test drove both RDV and 2002 Explorer/Mountaineer.

    RDV needs more than just a more powerful engine. It needs more truck space with 3rd row seat up. I am not talking about hundreds of cubic feet of truck space just a few inches longer to be able to put grocery bags back in there when you have 3rd row seat up. Explorer has more space behind 3rd row seat.
    Obviously RDV has a more versatile interior design. It's 50-50 split 2nd row design is better then Explorer's 40-20-40 split. It's easier to get into 3rd seat of RDV than Explorer. Explorer 2nd 20% portion is fixed not as smart as Buick.
    RDV has a step in height about 16 inches so no running board is required. Explorer has a step in height about 22".
    RDV needs to have rear bumper step protector so user can load stuffs without scratch the rear bumper. GM's minivan has rear bumper step protector, don't know why its not available for RDV?

    Quality RDV vs Explorer? Hmmm well RDV 1st year model vs Explorer 1st year mmmm? Well even ML first year sucked big time too. Why didn't Toyota put 3rd row seat in Highlander?
  • proteus456proteus456 Member Posts: 65
    Well..you wanted to see it...

    http://4x4abc.com/ML320/ml320_rubicon_trail.html


    ML in snow?

    http://www.whnet.com/4x4/

    ML is capable of doing everything the Explorer does. It has a full ladder frame, tows 5000lbs, and has decent offroad ability..what exactly does it not handle?


    MB has no need to use Durango parts. They designed the Jeep Liberty from the ground up, should be nice. They also design the worlds best offroad vehicle, the G-class.

  • drew_drew_ Member Posts: 3,382
    Other way around...if MB does integrate parts, it will be MB parts into the Chryslers. They would never degrade a MB vehicle/brand name by putting Chrysler parts into it.


    Drew
    Host
    Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
  • drew_drew_ Member Posts: 3,382
    A bunch of us did today, and in heavy fog too! ;-)


    image


    image


    image


    image

  • midnight_stangmidnight_stang Member Posts: 862
    I'd think you could see an Explorer getting some air on that last hill, that you wouldn't see in the ML for fear of breaking something expensive.

    Orders for 2002 Explorers have surpassed the 100,000 mark, Which is more than ML sold last year altogether.

    The estimated cost to service this vehicle for the next 5 years is $604/yr, almost 100 less per year than previous models. I would dread the cost of servicing the Mercedes, but if you got 8-12 thousand more to spend on the cost alone, you probably wouldn't sweat it.

    Alot of people are saying Ford's quality (in explorers) has gone down, saying they are cutting corners etc. etc. Ford is cutting corners, not for the sake of cheaper equipment, but cheaper in cost to build its vehicles. This is how Ford represents the best value or bang for the buck, that makes it's America's Best Selling SUV, hands down. Yes I think for most communters the ML might be the way to go, but if you're an mainstream american, you can appreciate the money saved and earned by a Ford Explorer. Just think of the Aftermarket parts you can get with the price tag difference alone. Ford is listening to it's customers, and delivering what they want, and at a cost that is easy to swallow.

    Customer-Driven Refinements of the 2002 Ford Explorer:

    Seven-passenger seating capability with an all-new optional third-row seat
    Wider coat hooks to accommodate large plastic hangers
    Interior grab handles moved to the door-pillars where they’re easier to see and grasp
    Grab-through exterior door handles, with finger grips on the back
    Larger door openings and lower step-in height
    Wider, more substantial optional running boards
    Adjustable safety belts in the first and second rows
    Power adjustable pedals and a tilting and telescoping steering wheel
    Larger radio buttons, and an optional six-disc, in-dash sound system
    Wider front-door map holders, designed to accommodate larger items – including water bottles or 20-ounce soft drinks
    Frequently used controls placed higher on the instrument panel, and color adjustments making panels easier to read for color blind drivers
    A larger fuel tank holding 1.5 more gallons of fuel

    Not because Ford's engineers thought "we can do it cheaper this way" but because the customers wanted it. I wish I could figure out how to post pictures directly here, as I'd offer plenty of examples of Ford's interior not being cheap or ill fitting. (That is GM's job anyway).
  • robsmithrobsmith Member Posts: 71
    Just curious what have RDV's been selling for excluding presells?

    I know the dealers in Cleveland, OH said they were going to try to charge MSRP but I've seen some Ads where one dealer has 27 and another 10.

    Somehow I don't think they're selling like they thought they would(at least at MSRP).
  • dindakdindak Member Posts: 6,632
    What are you, some kind of Ford salesman or something??

    Please don't tell us Ford has some big quality advantage over GM. With 5+ recalls on the Escape and 2 and counting on the new Explorer, Ford has nothing to brag about.
  • proteus456proteus456 Member Posts: 65
    On one point you get no arguement. The 2002 explorer is a huge improvement over earlier models. No denying that. As an everyday vehicle, its a good deal. Luxury buyers are simply looking for more luxury..and I think thats where the disagreement is.
  • sirknightdsirknightd Member Posts: 96
    pics looked great..especially the first group..nice poses...great photographic angles.

    oh..so you doubt that the durango parts will ever make it to the ml...or maybe slap some mb badges on some Chryslers...

    oh ok..maybe they ll employ that Chrysler engineering in the mb line..just hope i don t see an ml with the bright Dodge red..i dont know if I can take that.
  • thor8thor8 Member Posts: 303
    "Ford is a truck, Mercedes is a car"
    Why don't you take a look at my pic in post #41 and see if that tranny is not for a truck, sitting inside a heavy ladder frame.

    Mercedes also makes the Gwagen, by all means is the top off roading SUV. Also Mercedes makes the Unimog the top dog of all when it comes to go off the road. Here is a pic of my 406 next to our Passat, it is shorter but weighs almost 10,000lbs and can carry that much weight in the platform, it has an MB 6 cylinder diesel, 23 forward and 8 reverse, front and rear PTO, front and rear hydraulic PTO, seven and a half ft snorkel, air over hydraulic brakes, all synchronized, front and rear locks on the go, differential locks on the go, portal axles over coils, and rated at a 300 ton pull as a rail car.


    image
  • proteus456proteus456 Member Posts: 65
    As Time the "tool man" would say. My god thor, THATS a truck! I'm just curious though...what on earth do you use it for? And how much do they run?
    Thanks,
    Mitch
  • gpvsgpvs Member Posts: 214
    "The estimated cost to service this vehicle for the next 5 years is $604/yr . . ."

    Well, for the MB, it's $0 for the first 4 yrs/50k miles.
  • barresa62barresa62 Member Posts: 1,379
    Re post#77: Yeah, it's that 5th year or 51k miles when or if that first thing goes wrong w/the MB that the maintenance cost advantage gets wiped out in one deep dig into the owner's pocket. :-)

    Stephen
  • gpvsgpvs Member Posts: 214
    Well, if it's properly maintained, i don't see why it would be a problem. We've had MB's that lasted three times a long as five years that are still going, for that matter, we've also had Toyotas and Isuzus last that long. At the same token, we've had vehicles having problems within 3 years of ownership. I guess, it's the luck of the draw.
  • barresa62barresa62 Member Posts: 1,379
    Very true. Even the best vehicles have problems. Conversely, I've read of people owning traditionally poorly built vehicles having no significant problems. As you said it's the luck of the draw. The best one can do is purchase those vehicles that have demonstrated a propensity for being reliable. BTW, just for the record, I didn't mean to insinuate that MB's are unreliable vehicles. Just want to be clear. :-)

    Stephen
  • darrenjonesdarrenjones Member Posts: 6
    I have seen the gas mileage discussions in the past, where proteus has commented that the Mercedes ML320 "sucks FAR less gas" (at 17/21) than the V6 2002 Explorer 4x4 (at 15/20).

    One thing that bugs me about this point is that I would think most consumers would be more interested in how much _money_ they're going to have to spend on gas (miles per $), rather than how many miles they'll get per gallon.

    The reason there is a difference is because with the Mercedes high compression engine, you are forced to burn premium gas, while the Explorer can burn regular gas. In Atlanta, GA, that typically equates to about $0.20 difference per gallon (currently $1.389/gallon regular vs. $1.589/gallon premium).

    To give a real world example, here is what it would cost you to go 300 miles in each vehicle, using the average of city/highway mileage for each (17.5mpg for the Explorer, 19mpg for the ML320):

    Explorer: 300miles / 17.5mpg * $1.389 = $23.81
    ML320: 300miles / 19mpg * $1.589 = $25.09

    As you can see, the Explorer has an advantage in what it will actually cost you for gas. If proteus were arguing the point, he would say something like "the Explorer sucks FAR less dollars". But then again, he'd never say that, because it would be a positive statement for the Explorer.

    Just my 2 cents worth.
  • sirknightdsirknightd Member Posts: 96
    great post...i could never had said it better...

    its funny how things get spun....

    the side airbag curtain now on explorers on the road but not yet on the mercedes until 2002 doesnt get mentioned either...
  • nikorrnikorr Member Posts: 23
    First of all, you dont have to use the premium gas to ML ,OK ?

    I had a trip 650 mile trip from Salt Lake City to Yellowstone NP and back.I have been driven V6 2001 Explorer 4x4 and ML 320.First was Ford from rental com. at airport.With Ford it was 657 miles,41 gal. and 67,65 $ for regular gas.MB was trip 2 mo. later and it was 652 miles,34 gal. and 62,90 $ for premium.It was non hwy. driving.In the Ford was me and 100 pounds of photo stuff.In MB was me , my wife and 100 pounds of stuff.Average Ford 16,03 ------------ MB 19,20 mpg

    AND I count all the gas bills . So it's not car computer average.Both ,,trucks,, comp trips was wrong +/- 0.5 MPG

    << ,,Just my 2 cents worth ,, >> uh :[))
  • sirknightdsirknightd Member Posts: 96
    Ok..

    i m impressed with your accuracy.

    Seems like the Explorer costs 8.5% more in gas to operate for the city driving according to you.

    So for me, I drive about 10,000 miles per year.
    I use regular at about $1.80 per gallon.

    The Explorer will cost me $95 more per year for gas than an ML320

    To have the truck I want, I d pay the extra 95 per year.
  • darrenjonesdarrenjones Member Posts: 6
    Interesting that you were only able to get 16.03 mpg in the old V6 Explorer on a highway trip (if I understood correctly that this was a highway trip from SLC to Yellowstone NP). I have a 2002 Explorer with the V8 (not the V6) and get better highway mileage than that, every single time.

    So far I've gotten anywhere from 17.2 to 18.6 highway mpg in the first 2300 miles, and from 14.3 to 15.6 city mpg. The V8 is supposed to get 14 city/19 highway, so I guess what I've been getting seems to be pretty dead on with how it's rated.

    Also, FYI, I accelerate quickly and set my cruise on 80mph. If I accelerated slower and set my cruise on 65-70mph, I could easily get an extra 1-2 mpg for both city and highway.

    I also calculate my own mileage, rather than trusting the trip computer, which I have also observed to be +/- 0.5mpg. I would have thought that it would have been consistently low or consistently high, but I have seen it both ways.

    The mileage figures I used for my example were the average of the city and highway mpg for both vehicles. For the Explorer V6, the average of 15 city and 20 highway is 17.5 mpg. For the Mercedes, the average of 17 city and 21 highway is 19 mpg. I was just trying to make an objective comparison using the rated mpg for each. I think that is a more fair comparison than basing it on one trip by one person with a rental car vs. a car they owned.

    My point, however, was not to say that the Explorer will be greatly superior in how much it costs you for fuel. Rather, I was just trying to say that the two are in pretty much the same league. I think that in the long run you will spend a _little_ less on fuel with the Explorer than you will with the Mercedes. However, I would certainly not make my decision on which vehicle to buy based on this small difference.

    (If you drive 15,000 miles a year, with the current Atlanta costs of regular ($1.389) and premium ($1.589) gas, using the average mpgs for each, it would cost you $63.90 less per year for fuel for the Explorer -- not very significant on a $30,000 vehicle).

    I just get tired of proteus using the ML mpg as a huge bargaining point, as if it is SO wonderful, while the Explorer's is SO awful. In my opinion, the Explorer may win by a nose in overall fuel cost, but there's not a big enough difference for anyone buying a $30K (or $40K for the ML) vehicle to care.
  • nikorrnikorr Member Posts: 23
    HI , take my post as my experience. I dont post much , I just read them . THAT TRIP WAS NOT ON HWY . Both ,,cars ,, drive OK . But in the hills and mountains was biger diferent between them . The transmition was working not OK . It shifts on the way up to hill from 5 to 4 and you dont see any improvments in the speed or power .For exempl , driving on cru.control 50 MPH Ford shifted from 5 to 4 and to 3 to keep same speed . MB from 5 to 4 ,I think that is why Ford need more gasoline .I'm driving well above speed limit , and I speed up a lot , so I dont care about couple extra gal.of the gas .
    One more thing . You still mention PREMIUM and REGULAR . MB DON'T NEED PREMIUM ONLY . The comp. is ,,watching ,, for you what type of gas you put in . Not even manual says that you have to use premium . And I dont think manny people who wants to buy a truck thinking between EXPLORER or ML BECAUSE THAT 10 k MORE .I have been thinking between 4Runner and Outback and ML and Volvo and Audi and E - wagon .
    But I needed higher view and space inside where I can sleep . And car must drive in deep snow and mud too . For me is it just a car that I'm using to deth and than I get another one and another one....( I'm traveling a 60 mi./ year for nature photography )
    Anyway good luck with your ex. :-))

    PS : I dont like some things on ML , but I can live with them .

    I will try to post pictures from the trips , but maybe in couple weeks.. 3 or 4 I hope :-))) From SW wilderness
  • drew_drew_ Member Posts: 3,382
    True that the manual doesn't say that you HAVE to use premium, but that you should use premium. If that's not available it says that you can use regular octane, but you should switch back to premium as soon as possible. The retardation of the ignition and other adjustments that the computer makes causes the engine to run slightly less efficiently and hence the savings that you get from running regular will be none at all (or perhaps very little + you get slightly less power) so there's not much point anyway.

    All the best,

    Drew
    Host
    Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
  • nikorrnikorr Member Posts: 23
    Right , but what is PREMIUM ?????????
    Premium in Europe is 96 oct.
    Premium in Chicago is 91 to 93 oct. Premium in Iowa , Col , Utah and manny other places is 87 to 89 oct. So what you can do ? I'm using premium , but what is premium in Chicago is not premium over there.
  • drew_drew_ Member Posts: 3,382
    MB specifies premium as octane 91 and above. The different explanations are in the owner's manual. In Colorado and other high spots, 91 is not needed since the air is thinner up at those altitudes, and their 89 would surfice.


    Drew
    Host
    Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
  • luxiluxi Member Posts: 8
    Anyone?
  • cwjacobsencwjacobsen Member Posts: 293
  • tavgradtavgrad Member Posts: 201
    My turn.

    Remember, price is what you pay: value is what you receive in return.

    Looks, aftermarket friendly, and the ultimate reason, VALUE, are my reasons to my Suburban vessel. Safety, race car-like speed and drawing attention to yourself are not.
    A vehicle is only as safe as the driver. If you need all of those curtains and sensors to increase your confidence on the road, you have no reason behind the wheel.
    Resale: If you are leasing (of which, I know most of you guys will), It does not matter. If you intend to keep this thing longer than 5 or 6 years, who cares? It won't be worth much anyway.
    Gas? Most of these things suck gas (except for the worthless baby suv's). If you cannot afford to set aside $30 weekly on gas, you have no reason considering an SUV.
    Reliablility: C'mon people. No car lasts forever, they all need maintenance!
    SOmething that is based off of a TRUCK that costs luxo sedan price is a waste of money. It is not an SUV, it is a bloated ego soother.

    Your decisions of your consideration to purchase should not be based on others.

    My conclusions:
    ML: Looks like a minivan.
    Buick: It IS a minivan with 4 doors.
    Explorer: That box shape has grown old and dull. Needs more aftermarket stuff to spice it up.
    Mountaineer: It looks good from the front only. Other than that, see explorer.
    Acura: Looks like a minivan, but is a far better value than the ML.

    I wish the Industry would go back to the stone ages of 4x4's. Just like it used to be. Luxury was having your spare tire out of the rear!
  • dindakdindak Member Posts: 6,632
    Check out a 2002 Envoy. It will make ya smile.
  • tonychrystonychrys Member Posts: 1,310
    What's the envoy got to do with the comparo here? Doesn't have a third row.

    I did check out the Envoy. Hits include the 270hp V6, for once the General did something right. But for a vehicle that was supposedly "redesigned" they missed on the ergonomic factors again. Most notably trying to get into the back seat, almost half the door is over the wheel well. They could have lengthened the wheel base to get around this, in fact, if they had lengthened the wheel base then we might be talking about a third row
    ;-)
  • dindakdindak Member Posts: 6,632
    Extended wheel base models coming in the new year with 3rd row. From spy report I read, it should be quite a good third row also.
  • tonychrystonychrys Member Posts: 1,310
    That would be cool. Hopefully the quality will be there and I actually might get to use my GM Bucks in a couple of years.
  • dindakdindak Member Posts: 6,632
    Do you have a lot of kids? I would personally not have any need for a third row.
  • tonychrystonychrys Member Posts: 1,310
    No, one at the moment. But he has dozens of cousins (my wife comes from a big family) and he is that that age when we're starting to car pool other kids around (his classmates at pre-school).

    3rd row not a big need, but an Envoy with longer wheel base would be very nice. The current 2nd row stinks, like on the previous Jimmy/Blazer.
  • gpvsgpvs Member Posts: 214
    what you need is the Buseta for all those car pooling :)
  • tonychrystonychrys Member Posts: 1,310
    ...then I'd be arrested for child abuse.
  • kevin106kevin106 Member Posts: 13
    I agree with the article on the M-class! Talk about cheap looking. It's appalling to think that Mercedes would produce something of this nature, but even more appalling to think that people would spend that much for it. Maybe I have an eye for this stuff thank goodness. I hopped in the first time and it wreaked of plastic and lack of fit and finish. Just hop in an X5 and you'll see what I'm talking about. It is similarly priced, but BMW understands fit and finish. It's got an artistic contemporary flair with fit and finish that's expected of this company. I'm surprised nobody has mentioned them in their comparisons. You'd be hard pressed to beat their on-road handling and spirit. Would anyone agree?
  • ddl2ddl2 Member Posts: 1
    I have just recently been looking into the SUV market, and for me it seems to come down to the ML vs. the MDX. I lean toward the ML, but my wife thinks the 3rd row seat would be a useful extra (although I'm sure they would mostly be up). I'm concerned that they would take up too much cargo space when up/stored, and I definitely want them to be useable. Unfortunately, our dealer does not have a model with the 3rd row to look at, so I was hoping for some guidance. I saw your pictures from #28, but first-hand info is best. Thanks
This discussion has been closed.