Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
Now to tweak the categories and attract some new posters maybe. :shades:
I have to agree that the Pilot seems big for a crossover - but I have similar reservations about the Highlander and MDX as well. I lean more towards a crossover being more of a high clearance wagon with available AWD and maybe a little 3rd row squeezed in.
We about beat the CR-V v Escape/Tribute comparison to death, so they can manage on their own.
I'm curious steve_, are you creating new threads?
1) Please don't tell people how to raise their kids. It only causes anger for no good reason. Everyone has heard the experts proclaim that kids should not watch TV, play video games, be spanked, eat fast food, run with scissors, etc...blah, blah blah. Nobody is a perfect parent and we all do things that we are not supposed to do.
2) I have owned one of those portable DVD systems and it was a pain in the butt. There were harnesses everywhere and wires for feet to get tangled in. No fun at all. The extra couple hundred $ is worth it to eliminate the hassle.
Are you referring to the front row passenger seat? I have a TX Limited and it came standard with power front passenger seat (unless I don't understand what you mean by power passenger seat). The only options I got was auxillary heat for 3rd row, bench 2nd row, and the entertainment system (yes, I got the DVD player and I love it- it's a huge improvement over the DVD player that was in my Freestyle).
Why can we applied same rule for CUV?
Also, Crossover, as vehicle can crossover with the van and SUV.
200-300 miles isn't what I'd consider a long trip. I just returned home from a trip to Oklahoma (I'm in Alabama). We put 1900 miles on my great-aunt's Honda Odyssey. That, is a long trip. We never needed to watch a movie; we just drove, slept, listened to CDs, etc.
That trip is just about 13 hours one-way, from Birmingham to Memphis to Little Rock to Fort Smith to Oklahoma City. Whew!
2.) Escape/Tribute (Popular, but not too carlike)
3.) RAV4
I have lots of driving experience in all three. I have not driven the new RAV, but I have driven the new Escape/Tribute and CR-V. I think the newer Escape / Tributes have a nicer, car like ride then they did before, however, I like the previous generation much better, especially the V6 models. Many don't know this, but the Escape / Tributes have a really good repair record, minus the first year (2001). We all know Toyotas and Hondas track record for these vehicles.
I dodn't write that statement you qutoed from my post. I quoted it from someone else. I actually don't know, and for Ford's sake, I hope you are right, because that's a dumb mistake not to make that standard.
Because you have never experienced one, but your right- this is a topic for another thread.
I will disagree. It has independent suspension and is made of unibody construction. It looks more like a truck because if its boxy shape.
If anything, the Ridgeline would be car-based pick-up. It's really not a true truck at all.
Built-in Navigation:
AGAINST:
A. The auto navigation system software and hardware seems to always be a couple years behind the portable market, in terms of features, ease of use, number of waypoints and addresses stored, etc....
B. An excellent portable system can be purchased under $1000 (I have three portable Garmins for car and biking use), whereas the automobile systems cost nearly $2000. (The Navigation on my Taurus-X is costing me $1700)
C. A portable unit can be linked via USB into your home computer to more conveniently edit waypoints and routes.
FOR:
A. Although GPS evolution is rapid, the units installed in cars are still very functional for the intended uses,. All GPS go out of date and require updates. Fortunately, all systems have software upgrades, including built-in systems, especially important considering their lifetime. So the built-in features will tend to track the portable evolution in capability with a little lag.
B. The navigation system built into a car has the largest screen for navigation, making it easier to navigate, find addresses, phone numbers and other items.
C. The large navigation screen is nicely used by the car manufacturers for all other functions, such as radio, satellite, numerous settings for balance, bass, fade, identifying songs, and so on. The touch screen soft keys can provide a much more usable interface with less hard keys needed on the car panel.
D. When used with Ford/Microsoft Sync, the Nav screen is nicely integrated. You can access your phone book and it provides a large screen visual confirmation when used with voice control. You can read song lists off your iPod or MP3 player using this screen.
E. Overall, the car navigation system is a much nicer system than portable GPS for it's intended purpose in terms of size, electronic integration, voice control and menu integration with Sync. It fits nicer into the car without a lot of wires and suction cups. For me, it was worth the ~$800 more.
Family Entertainment System (FES) - DVD player
AGAINST
A. Kids should be doing other things, talking with family or each other, looking out, reading books, etc.. (Counter argument, they never do that anyway, with or without DVD available)
B. You can get a portable unit for the car at much lower cost. (My FES cost me $860 and you may be able to get a portable DVD player similar features such as wireless headphones and headrest screens for less, maybe half price. But the portable screens will be smaller.)
FOR
A. A DVD player is nice to pass time with movies on long boring trips across the desert or down long freeways we've often done on family trips in CA.
B. The player can be used to watch home videos taken on vacation, via the external inputs.
C. The kids in back can play their own separate music CD (not just DVD) on the FES, going to separate wireless headphones.
D. For me the biggest plus is the Audio integration. Sound can be cut off to speakers in back when the kids play a CD or DVD. It can go to one of two wireless headsets. Or each wireless headset can listen to the DVD or the other radio, satellite, or MP3 or USB music file channel up front, independently of the driver. That's right, people in the car can be listening to three different things at once, important with my kids having an age span from 5 to 17 years old. Also, the rear passengers can control (if allowed) the front system for radio and satellite and MP3 player (with SYNC). With MP3 taking over from CDs, the FES and SYNC work well together for future car value.
E. With the Sync system, the FES allows much more control and flexibilty in the audio and DVD systems. Everyone can control the other (front Nav screen can also control the rear DVD and audio, and the rear remote control can also control the front systems).
The point is that the Navigation is not just a GPS, its a big control screen with a lot more system controls integrated.
Similarly, the FES is not just a DVD player, it really is an Family Entertainment System with lots of various listening and playing options and controls, which 95% of the time will be used very practically for audio, not movies.
We could try that ... but Pat may just be better at organizing stuff. :shades: With all the overlap, I suspect we'd have three discussions that would mirror each other.
My vote for #1:
Saturn Outlook
Why- No other vehicle combines this much space and comfort. Ride is smooth, and for an almost 5000lbs vehicle, is much quicker and handles smaller than expected. (I actually like the Acadia better, but the outlook is 2grand cheaper, making it better priced than some of it's smaller competitors). Homerun for GM.
2nd Place:
Mazda CX-9
Why- does a pretty good jpob of combining sport with utility for a good family vehicle. A step up for Mazda. (I debated choosing this over the Taurus X, but whille it gives more utility, the CX-9 gives a larger dose of fun).
Maybe an editor could total up the votes, and we could see who the forum favors.
FWIW - Strongly agree
This is my top five 7 pass. CUV
1. Outlook (Acadia entry level look better from the rear, has 4 exhaust pipes, but couple grand difference can make better choice for entry level customer)
2. Mazda CX-9- no doubt about.
3. Hightlander ( I choose over TX for only one reason: Today, on parking lot someone parked TX right beside my Acadia. I'm looked a close again and found myself on thought this car not much different , than any other wagon. So ,it seats low on road and makes more like a sedan/wagon.)
4. TX
5. Pilot. (Good car, but boxier design)
That is exactly the definition of a crossover. But the Pilot pretends to be a traditional SUV with its boxy design and rough uncar-like design. This was prabably intentional as at the time of Pilot's debut, CUVs weren't as widely popular. It's very trucklike.
I'm holding out until I see pictures of the 2009 Honda Pilot. I think it might combine elements of the Acadia and the CX-9 (i.e. bigger size than the outgoing Pilot, and some added sportitude (I don't think that's a word) borrowed from the MDX!
I believe it was 3 times that I pointed out to you that the Ford system has every single control on the roof unit whereas the Honda does not. I didn't notice any inputs for a video game system or something else of the like on the Honda system either. The Ford system does have one.
Not true- you can a the beeping system. That's whats 400 bucks.
Yes it is true because the "beeping" reverse sensing system is NOT a backup camera. BTW, the TX Limited has the "beeping" system standard too.
What? That's dissapointing. Power passenger seats should be standard in all topline models of these cuvs.
As someone else pointed out, I was wrong about that. Turns out the power passenger seat (4-way with manual lumbar adjustment) IS standard on the TX EB and Limited trims. It's an option on the base SEL.
The perfect vehicle for me have driver seat have a lot space (i'm only 6'0", 180 lbs), I meant seat as your at home in comfy seat. I think Highlander has small seat or around area tight. Acadia is perfect seat for me, i feel a lot space there.
And I pointed out several times that it was nicer not to have all of the controls on the unit because it cluters the unit.I believe there are inputs somewhere on the Honda system on the floor where you can plug up game systems. But where does the Ford have them? On the roof? That's convienient.
As someone else pointed out, I was wrong about that. Turns out the power passenger seat (4-way with manual lumbar adjustment) IS standard on the TX EB and Limited trims. It's an option on the base SEL.
Yes- I acknowledged his post too, but it makes me wonder- what else are you worng about? I did blindly follow your statement that the Pilot doesn't have dual power seats, but I know it probably does. Going to look at the site right now.
I disagree. The Rav-4 and outlander, clearly small CUVs seat seven, whereas the very midsize Equinox and Murano seat just 5. It should be measured by size (length). 185 in and under=compact CUV, 185-195=midsize, and 195+ is full size.
If rating remaining 7 pass crossovers:
1.TX: The most affordable, highest safety ratings, most car like drive, probably the best 3 row leg room.
2.CX-9
3. Acadia
4. Highlander
5. Suzuki XL-7
6. Outlook
7. Hyundai Veracruz
I know different information Acadia scored highest safety rating. Plus, Ford can call TX as CUV, SUV or wherever, but at end it's wagon. This year new model coming from ford, it will be real CUV.
After actually doing osme resaerch for myself to disprove you wrong and abviously biased against Honda statements, I did find some things. Well this is interesting. You were right about the Pilot's not having a power passenger seat. That's about it. The Pilot EX-L with DVD comes with fog lights, which you said in a previous post was not so. Also, you said the TX limited came standard with backup camera. It does not, but comes with backup sensors, like the Pilot. So you are either misinformed, or have decided to lie and leave some features out.
You asked me to tell you one thing that the Ford unit had that the Honda unit did not have. Whether you like the feature or not has been noted but just try and deal with the fact that I was answering your query.
I wouldn't call having all the controls on the unit a feature. Even so, beside that you haven't given me one function the TX's system can carry out in which the Pilot's can't. You have to deal with the fact that the answer you gave me was your personal oppinion- nothing more.
It depends on how you look at it. If they are on the floor console then kids can trip over them when trying to cross the rear floor to get out the door on the other side they were sitting on. With them on the roof like the Ford unit has, top left on the side and not in the driver's view, that doesn't happen. IMO, Ford wins again.
Don't even try to say having the inputs on the roof is a convinience. this way, you can trip over them or pull them out. With them on the floor, they aren't hanging from the ceiling, but are flat on the floor. So, if it is true that Honda has inputs on the floor, they definitely win for convienience and ergonomics, and Ford has some catching up to do.
Well the GL450 isn't a CUV, but a true body on frame SUV. But no- if it's a 7passenger CUV thats midsized or larger (Outlander and RAV-4 not included ) then it counts- even Audi Q7 and MB R-class. And the Enclave isn't much more expensive than anything else in this comparison.
I would also disagree as I feel the Acadia is so much more comfortable and spacious inside despite being only a 1/2 inch longer, but that's not really the point of this. We are just expressing which CUV we think is best, so I don't think it's necessary to post a response disagreeing, as it's only oppinion.
1. Audi Q7: sure, it starts at $40k, but I thought it had the best ride and interior quality of the CUVs I tested.
2. CX-9: rides like a sports sedan, felt more confident driving it than the Acadia.
3. Acadia: great interior space, love the captains chairs, did not love the gear-hunting and low end punch of the engine (I understand much of this has been addressed in the software recalls)
I'd probably pick the Q7 if I wanted to spend $40k on a car, but I don't. Since I like a more sporty feel, I tend to lean toward the CX-9 as opposed to the Acadia.
With 3 kids and the dog, I'd probably consider the Acadia with the Captains chairs, for the ease of getting into the 3rd row (although the Highlander also has the Captains chairs, just less interior room). Otherwise it's a minivan.....
Tidester! He said the M word!
http://www.iihs.org/
Ford claims on their web site that " TX is safest 7 pass crossover" is based on offical tests, picks and ratings from NHTSA,IIHS ,etc.
GMC says, "highest possible safety ratings" although on rollover test it gets 4 stars - same like TX.
So which company is lying?
But he qualified it with the word "otherwise!" :P
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
Who's lying? Who knows. Could be Ford. Could be GM. Could be both. Could be Ford.
The Insurance Institute testing is much more advanced and sophisticated. It looks at many different angles of crashes, vs. just running into a wall head-on. According to the Insurance Institute, about 10 vehicles achieved their highest rating - mainly including the Taurus X, the Taurus, some Volvos and some Audis.
The Taurus X is built upon a Volvo platform and has a full set of air bags, traction control, and stability control as standard features.
http://www.safercar.gov/Index2.cfm?myClass=SUV&myYear=2008&myMake=GMC&myModel=Ac- - - adia&GoButton=View+specific+vehicle
http://www.safercar.gov/
The reason the IIHS doesn't have crash data available yet for the Acadia/Outlook/Enclave is they are too new. The reality is, a car of this size/weight is likely to fair well in their offset head on test, but only time will tell.
-mike
Is there a bug with the my tracked items for this thread? This continuously shows up on my tracked items (along with one or two other threads) even though there are no new messages here. It also takes me back to over 100 posts ago every time I click the link to check for what it says are "2" new posts.
It might be, but not for sure. Many vehicles in the past did quite well on NHTSA test and poorly on the iihs scores. (This has improved as consumers pay more attention to both test results, prompting manufacturers to improve their performance for both parameters.) IIHS does an offset crash which is more real world than the US gov't frontal impact. Cars rarely crash into flat walls or meet other vehicles perfectly head on, rather, they tend to hit at an angle. IIHS also assesses headrests.