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

2006 BMW X3 vs Acura RDX

12346

Comments

  • micckiemicckie Member Posts: 9
    Sorry again...I meant Over invoice...I'm just gonna go back to bed now :blush:
  • jblaze13jblaze13 Member Posts: 152
    It sounds like the options for this type of vehicle are going to increase in the next 18 months with entries from Volvo, Audi, Cadillac, Mercedes, Land Rover, Saab and others. I need to replace my leased vehicle in 9/2007 but I might hold out until 08 to see what happens.

    The X3 is a better vehicle than the RDX IMO but the BMW price is the question for me. You can buy an MDX, RX330 or an XC90 for the price of the X3. I think its overpriced for the class it is in. Lucky for BMW the other automakers have had their hands on the snooze button while they racked up sales. Once the other models start to hit the road the X3 will have less appeal. I would like nothing more than to trade my A4 for a Q5 next year. Audis aren't exactly cheap but the prices are better and the performance is typically comparable to a BMW.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    Any of those, MDX, RX350, or an XC90, would need to convert to a RWD "base" in order to be comparable to the X3, that's why BMW can hold, demand, that price premium.
  • jblaze13jblaze13 Member Posts: 152
    I wasn't comparing the X3 to those vehicles. In fact, those vehicles are in a different segment/class. My point is you can move up a class for the price of the X3. RWD "base" alone does not dictate such a large price premium. It changes the way the vehicle performs. Many people actually prefer full time AWD. The point of my post is that the X3 is not going to be worth such a premium when there are more alternatives. The X3 has already been rapackaged this year. We'll see how much price demanding there is for the X3 when there is competition.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Why bother with AWD? Make it 100% rear bias if that actually gets the premium.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    AWD's purpose, primarily, is to mitigate the wintertime, low traction roadbed hazards of FWD. Or in the majority of cases to at least convince the unknowledgeable general public of same.

    The RDX is the first example I have seen of a reasonably functional AWD system on a FWD base. But almost doesn't get them my cigar.

    While it doesn't hurt to have an AWD system in a RWD base it certainly isn't as necessary from a safety standpoint as adding a functional AWD capability to a FWD "base".

    I keep hoping the next version of the Lexus RX will have adopted the RDX AWD concept.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    AWD's purpose, primarily, is to mitigate the wintertime, low traction roadbed hazards of FWD.

    I wasn't talking about FWD but RWD. Apparently, according to you, there is no need to mitigate low traction roadbed hazards of RWD, so AWD is unnecessary. True?
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    No, an AWD system, front or rear "based", that NEVER compromises the driver's ability to maintain directional control, nor interferes with other control aspects such as VSC, TRAC & ABS, of the vehicle is undoubtedly an asset worth paying a substantial purchase premium for.

    Obviously the RDX is headed in the correct "direction" in those respects.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    Perhaps on a race track, but certainly not in the real world.

    Frankly, I'm not even sure about the race track as Mazda and Acura have been routinely beating BMWs in motorsports using FWD vehicles to do it.

    When comparing them from a market perspective (not as a race car driver), I think Jblaze has a point. It's not completely dissimilar to the sales floor competition between the RDX (mid-30K range) and the old MDX, which was also priced in that range. The larger market doesn't care about RWD-bias and will purchase as much vehicle as they can get for their dollar.

    The same will happen to the X3 and BMW will either need to offer better deals or allow sales to slump a wee bit until they give it a full redesign. Nothing wrong that that. It happens with just about every vehicle. The older a car gets, the more competitive the competition gets.

    To keep the drive train comparison alive for a second, the TL bested 3 series sales for almost two years until BMW refreshed it. And that was FWD vs RWD, not this over-blown AWD-bias debate.
  • beliasbelias Member Posts: 316
    I keep reading all of these points here about AWD bias, performance, luxury, etc. and though each of these items are pretty subjective, I think there are a few things I would tend to lean towards. First, having relatives that own X3s, they are beautiful vehicles inside and out. The biggest knocks to them that I can find are that they ride pretty stiff and the servicing from the dealerships are much below average (i.e. once they get your sale, they aren't too interested in helping you out). I also took a test drive of the RDX and find that it performs quite well and is certainly as much fun to drive as the X3. It is rare, if ever, that one would get into an actual driving situation where the difference between the performance of these two vehicles would be appreciated. So any real claimed advantage for X3 in performance may actually be a negative in real-world driving (i.e. not having all-wheel drive or not being able to utilize its full potential). The biggest difference though is UI (user interface). I don't know what it is about German cars, but even a boat-load of money can't buy you a car with a decent UI. I think it is a real shame. BMW and Mercedes both suck at this... their technology is just not well integrated or intuitive. How buyers put up with this for the price they pay is amazing. If the iDrive system were even remotely intuitive, they would get good marks and would definitely "rule the roost". But as physical performance in vehicles is only making refinements rather than "big" leaps, technology and the user's experience comes more into play. This is, ironically Acura's strength. Their navigation systems and overall audio/video integration with their vehicles are truly the best, no question. Even sitting in a Lexus, it was obvious to me that they were at least a year or two behind in this category. However, whether that is enough of a compelling selling point for the RDX is a big question. For me, the overall package for the RDX is still a little better than the X3. Contrary to some other comments here, the "wow" factor of technology may wear off initially, but the use of it actually grows as one learns more about the advantages offered. My only real major concern comes down to engines. Why Acura didn't lift the V6 from the TL I don't know. I much prefer BMW's X3 inline six to Acura's turbo-charged 4. The 2007 X3 has a much stronger and more fuel-efficient engine and the BMW's engine has proven itself over time to be quite reliable. Add to that no maintenance costs for 4 years, and the "gap" narrows considerably. If I could wrestle away an X3 for close to the RDX's price, I may do so, but honestly, it isn't going to happen and I like to be treated well at a dealership when I go in for servicing. Hopefully other options will pop up soon or more competition will keep them both on their toes. However, I don't think either vehicle is a bad choice. They are both, without a doubt, at the top of their class. Even the Lexus RX 350 is significantly less of a vehicle (lacks performance and handling though has a softer ride). So it is just a matter of what is going to be one's preference and how much they are willing to spend to get it.
  • bruceomegabruceomega Member Posts: 250
    belias,

    Interesting observations. I'm curious as to what the inside of an RDX looks and feels like, and plan to sit in one at the Washington DC Auto Show this week. We have a 2006 X3, and I'm having trouble figuring out what is not to like in the X3's interior!

    FWIW, we specifcally avoided the sport suspension, and I like the ride of our X3- controlled and responsive but not harsh.

    I would think another noticeable difference is the 6 speed auto in the X3 versus the 5 speed auto in the RDX. Our X3 has the 5 speed auto, we used to have a 2001 330Xi with a 5 speed auto, and we now have a 2006 330Xi with the 6 speed auto.

    I know its not strictly an apples to apples comparison, but I find the 6 speed auto much more responsive than the 5 speed auto, and to me much more desireable. I know it doesn't make good financial sense, but my wife and I have talked about trading our 2006 X3 for a 2007 X3 to get both the more powerful engine and the 6 speed auto.

    Thanks
    Bruce
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    Regardless of the number of gear ratios in each the RDX transaxle must be "tuned" for FWD "responsiveness" and for eliminating even minor levels of engine compression braking whereas the X3 can stick to the "old school" (no throttle lag) tuned firmware.
  • rickgarrickgar Member Posts: 8
    Do you think the issues with BMW service is unique to the dealership(s) in your area or throughout the BMW system? I have a friend with a 5 series in Illinois and he speaks very highly of the service.
  • beliasbelias Member Posts: 316
    Bruce,
    I definitely agree that not only is the 6-speed auto on the X3 superior to the 5-speed on the Acura, but it is superior to many other 6-speeds and definitely CVTs.
    As far as the interior goes, it is not so much that the X3 has a bad interior as it is that its implementation of technology is not as refined as Acura's. So, in terms of materials, build quality, seat comfort, etc. that is all perfectly fine in both cars and is more subjective and may come down to just personal perference.
    What I think is lacking in the X3 is a well-designed integration of the technology. It has to do with how you are able to get the vehicle to do what you want it to do easily and accurately. That is to say, things like voice-controlled features for the Navigation, the menu and subfolder structure of the control of electronics, preferences, and settings.
    You may not be able to see it when you go to the auto show, but if you get the chance to see it at an Acura dealer, take a good look at it. It will require you turning on the vehicle and actually going through the system.
    That said, the RDX is far from perfect... lack of memory seats, and a power passenger seat just boggles the mind. My only explanation is perhaps they are leaving that for a short-list of improvements for next year's model.
    So again, to summarize, it is really the integration of the technology (and especially the GUI) that is lacking in BMW products. Many people may or may not find that an important consideration. On the whole, it may not matter to many people. But for me, since I can't make as much use of the actual performance benefits during my drive (yes I must go through the D.C. beltway everyday), it is the other interior features and the convenience and comfort that they provide that matter to me more. That plus the price difference makes it harder for me to justify (though I will still take a test drive of the new 2007 model to make sure my comparisons are well thought out).
  • beliasbelias Member Posts: 316
    Good point rickgar,
    Here is my overall observation about service centers in general. Always talk to people at the dealership! In other words, go to the coffee room and ask people what their experience has been and what they think overall. You may be surprised at what you hear. Don't listen to the salespeople!! For one, they aren't working in the service department so they may not truly appreciate what the experience is like, and secondly what are they gonna tell you if it is bad? They want to sell you a vehicle, not turn you around and shove you out the door of the dealership. So, bias has a lot to do with it.
    Reading forums probably doesn't help because there is likely to be 10 complaints for every 1 positive experience... people tend to complain more than to praise more.
    Based on most people I know that have BMWs, including some relatives and very close friends, I have yet to hear of any truly above-average service at their dealerships. I think my wife gets better treatment at her Honda dealership and they don't compare with how I get treated at Acura. My sample size isn't great... around a dozen people, but that is from Maryland, D.C., North Carolina, and California.
    The best thing you can do is check out the dealership for yourself by asking others there who are getting serviced. Try to be discreet about it if you can... people won't tend to vocalize their feelings in public if they think they will embarass others or will be treated worse if the dealer hears about complaints (i.e. like complaining about food in a restaraunt before being served -- you don't want the cook to spit on your plate because you said he wasn't good).
  • bruceomegabruceomega Member Posts: 250
    belias,

    Thanks for the useful post. I really resonated with your comment ... "since I can't make as much use of the actual performance benefits during my drive (yes I must go through the D.C. beltway everyday)"!

    My wife and I are in a similar position vis a vis DC area rush hour traffic. One of our escapisms is frequenting our favorite B&B in West Virginia on weekend getaways as the roads are fun and uncrowded, and I don't think we've ever seen a patrol car or radar trap to inhibit our driving enjoyment.

    Thanks
    Bruce
  • beliasbelias Member Posts: 316
    Bruce,
    Yeah, there are certainly a lot of troopers here in MD, so the ability to have fun every once in a while is tempered by the fact that I don't want to get a speeding ticket! Of course the occasion is so rare anyway that you have to wonder what the speed limit signs are for anymore... traffic is the limiting factor now!
    I did want to ask you about what you thought of your 2006 X3? Is there anything in particular (other than the engine) that you want to get in the 2007 model that isn't available in the 2006? Are there particular features that you like/dislike (i.e. things that are definitely worth getting vs. things that you think aren't particularly useful to you)?
    I saw a pretty good deal for lease prices... I think $379/month for 24 months with ~ $2500 down. Of course that is for a base model, so options will definitely add to that. One thing I didn't mention in my previous posts that I should have mentioned is that the residual values for BMW are generally very good. That is especially true for the 3 series. The 5 and 7 series tend to depreciate faster, but that is pretty much true of all higher-end vehicles in that price bracket.
    Were you able to get any kind of significant deal on your X3? I priced out a 2007 model with a number of features online and it came out to about $46K + TTL. A lot higher then I wanted to be at, but if it were closer to $40K, I think that would be close to a deal closer. I'm in no rush right now though, I'm looking more closely near the end of the year or this time next year. I'm also hoping to find a dealer near my home that will treat both my wife and I well. That will take some scouting out and some time to invest in, but I believe in doing that before talking about any deals. That way, I don't get stuck with getting a great deal but having to drive a long way to get to a dealer that will service the car well and treat its customers properly.
  • bruceomegabruceomega Member Posts: 250
    belias,

    What I would really like is an X3 with the 3.0 liter twin turbo engine and 6 speed auto!

    In addition to the more powerful engine in the 2007 model, I would also like to have the 6 speed vice 5 speed auto.

    On our 2006 X3, the only thing I wish it had but does not is the premium sound system. I don't remember if the 2006 premium sound option included Logic 7 or not, but the system in my 2006 330Xi (premium sound and Logic 7) is definitely better than the standard audio system in our X3.

    I would have also preferred to have had the satellite radio already installed as that gives you a 1 year pre-paid subscription. We added Sirius about 5 months after purchase.

    Of the things we do have, the heated seats are a must have, and I like the privacy glass, 18" wheels (non sport package), and retractable cargo net. I believe the 2007 model offers heated rear seats (as part of the cold weather package) and I would get that option.

    We purchased from the dealer closest to our house. We liked the salesman and their location is a big convenience factor. IIRC, we paid a little less than halfway between the invoice price listed by Edmunds and MSRP.

    Good luck,
    Bruce
  • bruceomegabruceomega Member Posts: 250
    I finally sat in an RDX at the DC Auto Show this past Saturday. I had to wait in line to sit in the one that was powered up as the show was very crowded, and couldn’t stay in the cabin long as others were waiting.

    The RDX was very nice, but I could not spend any time in the cockpit trying out things. Since I’ve never had a navigation system equipped car, or driven an Acura, I could not appreciate the advanced technology in the cockpit from a quick test seating. Maybe if I drove one for awhile, I would become accustomed to what it has and appreciate it more vis a vis the X3 interior.

    I liked the size of the RDX, but compared to our X3 it felt just a little:
    - Smaller
    - Less open
    - Less storage area in the back
    - Lower seating height

    If I didn’t already own an X3, and was in the market for a new vehicle of this type, I would definitely give the RDX a test drive.

    If I were to consider replacing our 2006 X3 however, then I would be more inclined to trade it for a 2007 X3 with the 6 speed auto.

    Bruce
  • x3driverx3driver Member Posts: 18
    We drove both, more than once, and bought the X3, for a couple of reasons.

    There was too much wheelslip in the rain in the RDX - I had to ask the salesperson if there was traction button turned off.
    I've had a turbo, and prefer an in-line 6 over the long haul, although feeling that turbo spool up is always a thrill.
    The RDX interior is too much like a spaceship - too distracting, we just want to focus on the road.

    My wife liked the Bimmer ride! She likes to feel the road!

    The RDX for sure offers more "technology" for the price, and probably better reliability, but it seemed a bit "immature" - it was like driving a video game piece, maybe it was the interior styling.

    A bit of vanity - the RDX just looked, to us, a bit too much like a toy.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    Agreed. Rather than going for luxurious, I think Acura opted to go high-tech with the interior. On paper that works for the target demographic (youngish urban males). However, I think it turns off the other buyers who just want a nicely put together, semi-sporty vehicle with some utility.
  • micckiemicckie Member Posts: 9
    I can't say I fit the demographic stereotype living in a more rural area, a woman turning forty. But, while dealing with BMW (working out a lease.. not a purchase), I couldn't help but think what a ridiculous move I was making when I could afford to purchase the RDX. Clearly, In my mind, driving one right after the other, It was more vehicle for the money. I also felt it was MORE lux (but that's me) then the BMW inside, and the seats were more comfy. I liked the styling outside of the X3 better. I think in all, I almost leased it because of the stigma attached... and it has a pan sunroof! But it wasn't worth the price. I didn't get that "Wow" when I got in it.
    I've had the car now 2 months, and I'm still learning something new every day. I'm not "young" per say, but I still have that wild side, where I enjoy a sporty fun ride, with state of the art techno-candy. Maybe turning 60, I'll think about settling down into a refined quiet comfort, but until then, I'm spoolin ;)
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    "I'm not "young" per say"

    Forty is young. You're only as old as you drive! (ie. don't buy a Buick, or a Caddie)
  • x3driverx3driver Member Posts: 18
    You can't go wrong with either one, it's art, not science, deciding between the two. The price might not be as far apart as you think, what with the BMW 4 year / 50K maintenance, etc, but then again, I bet you don't get to know your Service Manager as well as I will :-(
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    "..it's art, not science, deciding between the two..."

    NOT...!!

    The X3 has a very definite RWD engine torque bias and also is available with a stick shift.

    If you have any expectation at all of often encountering wintertime adverse roadbed conditions the X3 will be the obvious choice of those with experience and knowledge of driving in those conditions.
  • patentcad1patentcad1 Member Posts: 69
    >>If you have any expectation at all of often encountering wintertime adverse roadbed conditions the X3 will be the obvious choice of those with experience and knowledge of driving in those conditions<<

    It's hard to overstate how utterly silly this statement is. I've had a base RDX (no tech package) since October. I drove the car 25 miles over largely unplowed roads after a 12"+ snowstorm last week. No problems. Overall the best handling car I've owned. The car is phenomenal wet roads, snowy roads, dry roads. A bit stiff riding over some surfaces, but the handling is remarkable. Loving the car after 6500 miles.

    By the way, I got a tech package RDX as a loaner car and I greatly prefer my base car. The tech package was annoying. GPS screen is too small, too hard to read in bright daylight and is not a touch screen. The Nav in my 2004 TL is MUCH bigger, MUCH brighter, and MUCH easier to use. I'll stick with my little Garmin dashtop unit on those rare occasions when I need it. Works great. Fits in the center console of the RDX with my entire livingroom set.

    It is remarkable to me (and a real comment on how dopey many car buyers are) that the focus on the RDX is the tech package. IT's THE CAR STUPID. And the bluetooth, Nav, etc. are static compared to the core issues here. I have all those features on my TL. I don't use the bluetooth, voice commands, etc. Only the Nav. And I don't miss that at all with the Garmin at my disposal whenever I need it. Which is about 6x annually.
  • x3driverx3driver Member Posts: 18
    Well micckie, (and other looking at both an X3 and RDX) if those two last posts don't prove my point (deciding between the two is an art, not a science), then nothing does!

    I'm gonna go enjoy the drive......
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    Oh, now I see, you're saying the decision process is an art form, I'll agree with that.

    I am a great admirer of the SH-AWD system and the break-through technology and outside-the-box thinking it represents, and I have said so many places. But when it comes to recommending, nay, REQUIRING, a patently UNSAFE use of tire chains I'll always vote for the competition.
  • patentcad1patentcad1 Member Posts: 69
    The X3 is a nicer car. And pricier. If you're leasing, the money BMW throws @ lease programs combined with the car's high residual might well make you lean towards the X3. If you're BUYING the car, the X3 is very pricey. Nicer? Yeah, OK. $8K nicer? Not for me. The Acura will probably be cheaper to own for a driver like me with higher miles (15K+ annually) who plans to keep the car 10+ years.
  • micckiemicckie Member Posts: 9
    Bimmer isn't giving the buyer anything but a base model car. Any options are pricey. When the warrantee runs out, you'd better run away. If you're leasing it, and you don't mind borrowing the car at a high price, then yea, it's a good choice. There's a whole lot more folks leasing Bimmers then buying them. Any sales associate will tell you that (especially those who have the $ to purchase them).
    Personally, to bring the X3 up to a comparable buy (what you get for your $) then that would be a ridiculous price to pat for the logo. As far as winter driving goes, where are the bimmer drivers getting this notion of better handling with back wheel drive? I see Bimmers in the snow spinning their back tires, and going nowhere. That's one of the main things that steer me away. Even Bimer drivers will admit that's what they hate. They lease the Bimmer for the handling, service/maintenance plan and stigma, Not for the resale value that the salesmen keep throwing back at ya (It is leased far more then purchased).
  • markcincinnatimarkcincinnati Member Posts: 5,343
    I priced, a lease, on a $46K Acura and a $48K BMW.

    MDX vs X3:

    MDX $865/mo
    X3 $613/mo

    Same term - 36 months, 45K miles.

    The BMW residual is much higher than the Acura's.

    The more attractive the residual, the more attractive the lease.

    If you are simply financing, even at low interest rates, there is no immediate benefit to the higher residual.

    I loved the MDX sport. There is no way it should be over $200 more per month than the Bimmer.

    I didn't cross shop the RDX I shopped MSRP and compared dollars instead. Perhaps the RDX would be less expensive per month -- but for over $9,000 less it should be.

    So an all optioned X3 drives like a dream, has older technology and performs like a champ, the Acura, not so much.

    But, the Acura costs more per month, so er. . . well you figure it out. Beats me why the Acura is $200+ more per month. It is nice, but not that nice.
  • mlb11mlb11 Member Posts: 31
    While residual is part of the story in leasing it doesn't tell all....the money factor is equally important. I haven't looked at the MF for the MDX, but it stands to reason it is significantly higher than the X3. BMW is very pro-lease, while Acura typically isn't, especially for a new model change (MDX). Acura currently has some of its lowest MFs that I have ever seen on the RDX, probably to reduce inventory at the dealers. I'm leasing one for slightly more ($20 a month) than I could've leased a CR-V EX-L because of the low Acura MF. The base RDX is still about $4k more than the CR-V at invoice and has a slightly lower resudual, but the MF is so competitive it keeps the monthly payments close.

    I don't want to get into a discussion of comparisons between the BMW X3 and either the RDX or MDX. I've owned hondas since 1986 and whenever I've strayed (once even owning a "german" car) I've regretted it. Where is the X3 made, BTW? The last time I looked at BMW (3-series) many were made in South Africa?? The interior looked like it.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    Acura has an aversion to leases. They claim to be a company that builds cars people want to buy, not cars people will rent. Frankly, I think its silly, but that's what one of the upper management types said at an event.
  • x3driverx3driver Member Posts: 18
    They are made in Austria.
  • novicenovice Member Posts: 64
    For RDX owners who have logged some miles, can you speak to the ride and road noise? Not only Consumer Reports cites these as two negatives of the RDX, but I've read reviews in magazines that raise similar issues. One said passengers literally bounced off the rear seats at points. I know it's supposed to be a sportier ride. But are any of you unhappy with it after driving it for some time? Or, is the ride saisfactory? What about road noise in the cabin?

    I really like the car and am thinking about a 2008. But I want a comfortable ride--not a back breaker.

    Thanks.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    Well, I didn't like the ride...after a 20 minute test drive. But maybe it's something that you can get used to over time....?
  • mlb11mlb11 Member Posts: 31
    Wow, this is a tough question to answer because it is really a matter of taste. I was concerned about the ride as well after reading the reviews and posts, but now that I have close to 2k miles on it, I like it alot. The ride is firm and because of the short wheelbase, it can get somewhat bouncy in the backseat. I have driven it fast over some very rural (not even striped) backroads in Illinois and you definitely feel the road. However, I also feel the most confident driving this car - it is extremely stable and handles better than anything I've owned before.

    A test drive should give you a clue as to how it handles - if you're concerned drive something else and compare. I also drove a CR-V and it is more compliant, but not nearly as stable (especially at higher speeds and in corners).

    I also haven't found road noise to be an issue at all - not sure where CR got that info. It is very quiet inside and when cruising the engine is silent. In lower gears you will hear the turbo spooling up, but it is never instrusive. Besides, the stereo is so good (even in the base model) that you really don't hear anything anyways :)
  • jblaze13jblaze13 Member Posts: 152
    You should compare two vehicles in the same class.
    MDX vs X5
    RDX vs X3

    The comparison you made with the MDX vs X3 just isn't reasonable. It would be like comparing an Acura TSX to a Mercedes E-Class.
  • jblaze13jblaze13 Member Posts: 152
    I test drove the RDX and didn't have an issue with the ride. It was a city drive so every stop and start called up a very loud turbocharger. Its annoying unless you want really loud music playing at all times. I'm still considering it though.
  • micckiemicckie Member Posts: 9
    yea, the turbo you can hear, but who cares? If I had kids, I might think twice about suspension. But for me and passanger, (which I can't say the X3 does much for either) it's OK. For the most part, we use this car is a one person show. It is primo! I've had it 3 months, and learning new tech stuff all the time. The car rocks in fun, and steering. Got kids and car seats, get the murano, or the pathfinder.
  • micckiemicckie Member Posts: 9
    what I ment to say, is the the back seat isn't much better then the Bimmer. but if you are looking for fold down seats, then you haveto give somewhere.
  • bruceomegabruceomega Member Posts: 250
    micckie,

    Are you saying the back seat in an RDX is better than in the X3? Or that they are about the same?

    I find the back seat in our X3 somewhat roomy when considering the overall size of the vehicle.

    I've had one quick experience sitting in an RDX, both front and back seats, at a recent auto show and it was nice. My subjective impression is the RDX is a wee bit smaller inside than our X3.

    Bruce
  • budhbudh Member Posts: 109
    So on the base RDX, what is in place of the Navigation system on the dash? Anything other than the Navigation system missing on the base compared to the Technology version?

    Bud H
  • markcincinnatimarkcincinnati Member Posts: 5,343
    The vehicles were in the same price class.
  • johnny98johnny98 Member Posts: 88
    There's an interesting comparison of the RDX and X3 in BusinessWeek magazine:
    http://www.businessweek.com/autos/content/may2007/bw20070522_043879.htm
  • bruceomegabruceomega Member Posts: 250
    One aspect of the article is the author is questioning why one would want an SUV, or SAV in BMW-speak, rather than a sedan or coupe. Its a good question, and the answer is dependent on individual priorities and preferences.

    We have both an X3 and a 330Xi, both '06 models, and the sedan has a folding rear seat. Based on our experience-

    He does acknowledge the greater carrying room in the X3. We can definitely carry larger, bulkier items in the X3 than we can in the sedan.

    But he missed two other attributes of a small, performance oriented SUV which we like:

    1)- The X3 has more room in the rear seat, especially leg room, and easier ingress and egress to the rear seat than our sedan.

    2)- My wife likes the higher seating position in the X3's driver's seat.

    I would also comment-
    - Although we don't do off-roading, we do venture onto rough, gravel roads exploring West Virginia mountain spots, for example, and the higher ground clearance of the X3 is an advantage.
    - Both our vehicles go well in the snow with the X-Drive, but the X3 is more versatile with it's higher ground clearance; e.g., unplowed roads.

    Thanks
    Bruce
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    Yeah, I think this character is a little nutty. I mean, take a look at this remark.

    "All-wheel drive is standard, but the X3 only has modest off-road capabilities."

    Like off-roading is the only reason you'd need AWD? For that matter, anyone who does any real off-roading knows that AWD is inferior to a true 4x4 system (for that single purpose).

    Then he suggests a coupe instead. Pretty much the only reason to buy a coupe instead of a sedan is styling and image. Coupes tend to look better.

    Well, half the reason why people purchase SUVs are because they like the rough-n-tumble outdoorsie image they project. For that matter, half the reason why people buy Bimmers is because of the brand's image. Image is a big part of the appeal. While a coupe and an SUV both project plenty of image, they provide different flavors.

    Ask this guy to pick between three brand's of chocolate ice cream and he'd tell you it doesn't matter because strawberry is better.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    Is it going to have x-drive? IMO, the models that it would affect most are the Audi A3, VW GTI 4-door. It appears to be the car designed for people who have outgrown the Mini, both physically and financially.
  • british_roverbritish_rover Member Posts: 8,502
    Except that it is ugly.
This discussion has been closed.