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 7/25 for details.
Options

Crossover SUV Comparison

18990929495142

Comments

  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Haha... glad to know I'm not crazy. Well, not about this anyway. :P
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    Did you end up getting a Taurus X?
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    These things pay off on very long trips, especially at night when there is nothing much the kids can see. We usually don't even use it on short trips, but on a 7 hour drive to see the grandparents it sure helps break up the trip.

    No more are we there yets.

    I don't need one one every car in the fleet, but on the family/trip car, I want one.

    A portable laptop worked for a while, in a pinch, but I tired of the power inverter, charger, laptop boot up time, etc.

    If you don't want to use it, it simply folds away.

    Oh, and vad - most systems have inputs for games, so you play on a bigger screen.
  • tencjeddtencjedd Member Posts: 44
    The TX may be a 2008 model, but its really just a renamed Freestyle, which has been on the market for sometime. And since its been on the market for sometime, with lots more of them already in the real world, the IIHS has a good reason to test it sooner.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    If you haven't used one yet, just know that a GPS is a lot more than just a map.

    It's a co-pilot. A navigator. Someone that reads the maps to you, on the fly, never gets lost, knows where all the nearest gas stations are, and where the nearest burger joint is.

    I have a portable, but the built-ins have big screens, many accept voice commands and all give voice guidance, so you need not take your eyes off the road. They also offer a nice safety feature - backup cams! A big plus when you drive a crossover that's too tall for you to see a baby stroller right behind you as you back up.

    Portables go from car to car, but can be stolen, and you deal with cords. They cost less but have smaller screens. It's nice to have choices.

    VZ Navigator is also neat, IMO, though at $10/month that adds up. Best Buy had a Tom Tom One for $119 on Black Friday, that would have been a better deal. Updated maps run about $70 every 18 months, so in the long run a dedicated unit may actually be a cheaper option.

    To each his/her own. That's why there are many options, thankfully.

    It's a whole lot more than just a map, though. The latest Garmin has traffic info, gas prices, even movie show times. All context sensitive.

    Getting back on topic, for a big crossover, I'd want a built-in GPS for the backup cam alone.
  • vad1819vad1819 Member Posts: 309
    "Getting back on topic, for a big crossover, I'd want a built-in GPS for the backup cam alone"
    Is it too pricy ($2500)for back camera? For 1000 buck you can get Pioneer system with GPS, NAV and Camera and it will be installed in your dash (on-star will work too and plays DVD.)
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    It is a lot more than a renamed vehicle. 500 changes including new powertrain, which in itself is a HUGE change (30% more power AND better economy).
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    I have several GPS systems in my cars...

    Carputer in my Armada that I put in myself with an 8" screen, it's great but took some installing and I rarely use a lot of the computer stuff in it.

    Garmin 670c for my Legacy/other cars. I've gotten to really like this unit, for under $500 I have traffic, voice, etc. I could even do MP3s if I wanted to as well. Bluetooth too.

    In my next Armada I will likely get the built in DVD and Navi w/backup camera as the OEM integration is great. For a regular car I will stick with my garmin.

    -mike
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    It is a lot more than a renamed vehicle. 500 changes including new powertrain, which in itself is a HUGE change (30% more power AND better economy).

    I think he was talking about the IIHS safety test, which would be the same for both, regardless of the power and trans options I think.

    -mike
  • tencjeddtencjedd Member Posts: 44
    500 or 5000 changes, the fact is (quoting YOUR source right in the 2nd paragraph)...

    "...and the Ford Freestyle has been renamed Taurus X".

    And the changes are classified in the article as....

    "...some 500 changes to the new Taurus, changes that were already scheduled for the mid-cycle freshening..."

    So the real reason the IIHS has already tested it is because its an UPDATED version of an existing vehicle.

    Their testing isn't done at random. It's done with their members (insurance companies) needs in mind. The number of Freestyle's/TX's in the real world outnumber Acadias/Outlooks/Enclaves, so the real world usefulness of destroying one is a better payback for the IIHS. One would expect them to beat up an Acadia/Outlook/Enclave on their next full size SUV go-round.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Honestly, I didn't take time to notice if safety was changed or not, but for people who skim the forum, I wanted to re-emphasize that the Taurus X is indeed a much-improved vehicle over the Freestyle. A casual reader may not know that.

    I realize the context of the post I replied to didn't imply that, but I wanted to clarify, and provide extra info. If it helps nobody, oh well. :) I'm just a visitor on this forum anyway.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    It is more than just a rebadge, was my point. I realize that it is much the same vehicle, but its guts also much improved.

    Take a drive in the Freestyle and a drive in the Taurus X back to back and there will be a noticeable difference in several areas, not just the name badge. In all honesty, my post wasn't really about safety, but to restate that the Taurus X was more than just a 2007 Freestyle with a new name.

    I wasn't trying to step on anyone's toes. :blush: :sick:
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    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.

    That's why I said 7 ADULTS I don't care about the exterior dimensions as much as the interior's ability to hold 7 adults plus some cargo.
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    Actually the Freestyle has better MPG than the new TaurusX..
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Excuse me, I was thinking of the Taurus Sedan having better mileage than the Five Hundred. D'uh Grad!!! :P

    Trying to keep up with all the posts; I'm bound to miss once in awhile! ;)
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    Re: Taurus X vs Freestyle

    I think you're taking in Ford's marketing BS a bit too big here. While the engineis new and is (finally) big enuf to push the thing around in AWD and the grille is now of Gillette design (I think they should have called it the Taurus Trac II) it is most definitely NOT a new car or even a redesigned car or even a 'freshened' car. It's the same car with a new engine, a new grille and a stupid new name. It does have the same old dismal sales figures though.
  • tencjeddtencjedd Member Posts: 44
    Ssshhhh! You're going to upset some Freestyle, excuse me, Taurus X owners. People don't care about the truth. Perception is everything!
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    You must have extensive driving experience with the vehicle to have formed such strong opinions about it.

    Styling is purely subjective, so I won't bother telling you how I feel about the styling.

    I'd say it is more than a "refresh." I have a "refreshed" (mid-model change) Accord which included nothing more than a change in taillamp design and added chrome in the grille, bigger wheels, and....that's it. The new Taurus has many more internal changes and a new powerplant, new method for mounting the engine, plus modestly revised styling.
  • volkovvolkov Member Posts: 1,306
    Nope, they changed a few other things too. Changed the engine mounts, put more of that internal deadening material in the frame, tweaked the suspension. Added power rear hatch, power fold rear seats, VSC, and a new AWD system. Certainly not a new vehicle, but would definately qualify as a mid-cycle redesign. Sorry if that news bothers your narrow view. I test drove both the FS and TX, and the smoothness and NVH was clearly improved.
    I honestly don't know why sales are so poor. We prefer its look, to the dozens of variations on the same bulgy sheet metal look and don't need an AWD station wagon to try to pretend it's something else. It was our front-runner but fell behind as other manufacturers offered much bigger incentives to address the Can/US pricing discrepencies.
  • vad1819vad1819 Member Posts: 309
    "I honestly don't know why sales are so poor. We prefer its look, to the dozens of variations on the same bulgy sheet metal look and don't need an AWD station wagon to try to pretend it's something else."

    Because it's a wagon. For almost same price you can get full size CUV, VAN or SUV.
    Wrong marketing again. I admited good car but who is looking to buy overpriced wagon and more important they have offering Explorer (3 row) for almost same price. If I was on market for Ford, I will be buy Explorer. It's better brand from ford.
  • nxs138nxs138 Member Posts: 481
    The Highlander comes with a backup camera without having to get the NAV. The CX-9 has a backup camera in the rear-view mirror, thus don't need to get the NAV.

    IMO, a safety feature should not be bundled into an expensive option. But with that said, an integrated NAV is very nice as compared to an add-on. It's not $1500 nice, but nice nonetheless.
  • allison5allison5 Member Posts: 130
    Thanks for the advice.I see that people have different opnions on why the Acadia is not on IIHS. I guess though it has good ratings from other sites. I looked at 08 highlander, I like it but too small. I can't afford the hybrid Tahoe. I like the new model regular tahoe and it would have good room but those gas prices OUCH!!! Today news was 100 for prices of oil, look out gas prices are moving up!!! Looked at the minivans I would be interested in and seats are not comfy ( I have a bad disk in back). SO I am running out of options but need to make a decision. I heard about the Acadia with transmission problems, car stopping out of the blue on this forum of repairs or problems.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    The number of Freestyle's/TX's in the real world outnumber Acadias/Outlooks/Enclaves

    Probably barely, and that is for both the TX and the FS combined. BUt I get the rest of your argument.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    That's why I said 7 ADULTS I don't care about the exterior dimensions as much as the interior's ability to hold 7 adults plus some cargo.

    And Audi Q7 is just as big as an Acadia, but there is no way you are going to hold seven adults in it, let alone cargo. You could fit more in a Hyundai VeraCruz. SO it has to be about exterior size. That's how real SUVs do it. That's how cars do it. It's tradition.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    it is most definitely NOT a new car or even a redesigned car or even a 'freshened' car.

    A freshoining is simply mid life interior improvements and maybe some minor exterior improvements. This is definitely a midlife freshening. No question no doubt. Ford is now known for huge mid life freshenings. Take the current Explorer.
  • barnstormer64barnstormer64 Member Posts: 1,106
    People don't care about the truth. Perception is everything!

    Precisely why people aren't buying the Freestyle in droves . . . they don't care about the TRUTH, just image.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    If I was on market for Ford, I will be buy Explorer. It's better brand from ford.

    Yep, nothing like less power, less room, higher cost, and less fuel economy to be a better vehicle. :confuse:
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Bingo.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    Because it's a wagon. For almost same price you can get full size CUV, VAN or SUV. Wrong marketing again. I admited good car but who is looking to buy overpriced wagon and more important they have offering Explorer (3 row) for almost same price. If I was on market for Ford, I will be buy Explorer. It's better brand from ford.

    Uh- you probably just opened up another can of worms. Some FS/TX owner probably has steam coming out his ears as he reads this. Marketing the FS as a CUV was extremely intelligent. There are few wagon entrants in the market called station wagon. It's the new bad word for the Auto industry. And CUV/sports tourer is the new in.There are definitely several FSowners who have been fooled into thinking it's a real CUV, and that helps it's slow sales.

    You'd rather have the Explorer? What? That is one terrible SUV. The Taurus X is so much more spacious, smooth, powerful and better handling. If anything, The TX probably steals a portion of what's left of the fallen Explorer's sales. The TX is just a better offering from Ford. A CUV buyer who occasional considers and SUV wouldn't go near the Explorer.

    You nay think the TX is a dismal player in this CUV market, but really it's a smart entry. It's not the best at anything, but becuase it's just a station wagon, itsperfect for people who want another car, but need the space for extra passengers. If it looked like the Ford Edge, Ford probably coudn't keep them in stock.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    I still say you should go for the Acadia. If you look at the NHSTA ratings it got top scores. Nothing else is as spacious. The gas mileage is very good for something of its size. I doubt you'll have any problems with the car just stopping- probably no more than just the gear hunting it does sometimes on inclines. Have you driven it or just looked?
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    Yep, nothing like less power, less room, higher cost, and less fuel economy to be a better vehicle.

    Actually more power, but to a much heavier, less nimble (yet over a foot shorter) vehicle.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Well, unless they've upped the ancient 4.0L from 210hp, I'd say less power, since the V6 is the standard engine.
  • vad1819vad1819 Member Posts: 309
    "I heard about the Acadia with transmission problems, car stopping out of the blue on this forum of repairs or problems."
    Read my post #4653 on page 233 about my personal experience with Acadia trans. I've never have problem "car stopping". It can be lot different problems or not following user manuals. Also, i'm participating at another forum for acadia (i can's put a link here), just search on googles "acadia forum", I've never seen such problem before there.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    I'm curious; is the Acadia/Outlook/Enclave transmission in any other GM vehicles?
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Because it's a wagon.

    Image Is Everything (Alternate Route)

    R-Class anyone?

    image
  • nxs138nxs138 Member Posts: 481
    The 2007 Acadias are more problem-prone than the 2008 models, if you read the forums, but there have been improvements with the 2008 models, so you are probably safe, and owner surveys on truedelta.com have shown less trips to the shop for the 2008 models so far. The transmission software programming is what irks a lot of people (it irked me), but it was improved for the 2008 models.

    The next roomiest CUV is the CX-9, which is almost the same size as the Acadia. A little less headroom in the 3rd row, but my head was fine (I'm 5' 11"). If you don't plan on getting captains chairs for the second row, might be worth checking out the CX-9.

    Other than that, there's not much to choose from in terms of crossovers in that same size. Maybe the Taurus-X? The 2009 Pilot is coming out early this summer! It should be bigger than the outgoing model, you should see some pictures coming out at the Detroit show in January.
  • vad1819vad1819 Member Posts: 309
    For the most people name of Explorer more familiar. Everyone knows it was/is one of best mid-size SUV. It had bad record because of tires blew up. But overall it's good SUV 4x4. I had for 4 years and I had only one problem, shut off fuel valve had broken wire. The gas mileage was not bad, 215 HP(yes, it's not fa astest SUV), but it did job well for me. Today, ford had tried sell wagon as CUV and called Freestyle. A wrong name for family car (name good for young guys going to ski). Then change name to Taurus X(what heck is X, Is it Xtreme) again wrong name.
    I can agree if Ford put it on Edge platform it will be hot vehicle. In summer we will see FLEX, another Ford CUV. The costumer will confuse what is it really CUV? TX or Flex?
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989

    And Audi Q7 is just as big as an Acadia, but there is no way you are going to hold seven adults in it, let alone cargo. You could fit more in a Hyundai VeraCruz. SO it has to be about exterior size. That's how real SUVs do it. That's how cars do it. It's tradition.


    I'm not too concerned with tradition, but comparing vehicles with similar capabilities, like holding 7 adults and some cargo.
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    I admited good car but who is looking to buy overpriced wagon and more important they have offering Explorer (3 row) for almost same price. If I was on market for Ford, I will be buy Explorer. It's better brand from ford.

    Unless you need to tow a lot, the Taurus X gives you more legroom, more cargo space behind the 3rd row, better MPG, and car-like driving dynamics over the truck-like dynamics of the Explorer.
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    Actually more power, but to a much heavier, less nimble (yet over a foot shorter) vehicle.

    Actually, the Explorer is 193" vs 199" of the TaurusX. And being up higher, it has a higher loading floor in the back and higher climb in height up front...not too convenient to me.
  • tidestertidester Member Posts: 10,059
    People don't care about the truth. Perception is everything!

    Occasionally, truth and perception coincide. :P

    tidester, host
    SUVs and Smart Shopper
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    The TaurusX will give you the same headroom and greater legroom than the Acadia. The Acadia is only roomier if you need to hold 8 people, since the TaurusX can't do that. But for 6-7 passengers, the TaurusX will comfortable hold the people and have a good cargo area behind the 3rd row...call it a wagon if you want, but I'm more interested in capability.

    But I think that the old Freestyle, with it's more efficient engine and CVT, is a better vehicle than the new Taurus X. Ford knows how to make good vehicles, but can't market them and they know how to screw them up!
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    I'm curious; is the Acadia/Outlook/Enclave transmission in any other GM vehicles?

    No.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    The next roomiest CUV is the CX-9, which is almost the same size as the Acadia.

    Actually, I'd say the next closest is the Taurus X. The interior is much more spacious, and comfortable. The third row would be best in class if not for the Lambdas. Then the CX-9.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    That could be a way to look at it, but that's not how it's usually done. Actually, exterior measurements aren't either. It should be by interior volume.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    Numbers don't always tell the truth. The third row in the Acadia is definitely more comfortable than that of the TX/FS, and Headroom is about the same, too. The TX is about the same height and width of the Acadia, so why not get maximum volume (which is a lot more) for your money. Cargo space is almost 50% more.

    It was definitely good of Ford to add power, and only 1 or 2 mpgs was lost, which I wouldn't have a problem giving up for the signifigcant and greatly needed increase in pickup. I'd say the TX is a better vehicle than the FS. Well actually that's not true because they are the same. Ford corrected some of it's errors. It just didn't quite cut it on the styling part.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    Actually, the Explorer is 193" vs 199" of the TaurusX. And being up higher, it has a higher loading floor in the back and higher climb in height up front...not too convenient to me.

    Actually the TX is 201inches, and I don't really care about a couple of inches difference in loading height. Ground clearance is nice to have.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    I can agree if Ford put it on Edge platform it will be hot vehicle. In summer we will see FLEX, another Ford CUV. The costumer will confuse what is it really CUV? TX or Flex?

    NNo- just if the TX had the stylng AND proportions (becuase it already has the chrome) of the Edge. And I believe the TX will be phased out in 2010.

    The Explorer name is more familiar, but so is the stigma- the tire fiasco, the SUV gas mileage, the bad handling.
  • u045777u045777 Member Posts: 33
    Will the 2009 Honda Pilot be the new CUV standard that all other are judged?
    I hope so.
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    The Acadia's 3rd row is wider because the Acadia is 4" wider than the TaurusX. I own a Freestyle and it was parked beside an Outlook and looked a lot bulkier. And the height of the TaurusX is mostly at the rear, which is why it looks like a station wagon more than an SUV, like the Acadia. And adding unnecessary power is just a waste. After 60,000 miles on my Freestyle, I have yet to find it lacking in power, but I do like getting 30mpg on the highway if I keep the speed at 65mph.

    But if you need seating for 8 or need a lot of cargo space, then the Acadia is a better choice, but on the other hand, if you really need that much interior space I'd get an 8 passenger Sienna.
Sign In or Register to comment.