Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
It was tough leaving the Volvo on the floor but the extra 700+ lbs and slightly lower HP of the XC90(not to mention the difficulty of finding a white 5 seater) pushed us to the RX. A FWD XC 90 with V8 and no third row would have been the ultimate--alas, no such animal! Still have a C70 convertible to maintain the Volvo karma in the household!
On the decision regarding the RX330 vs. XC90 V8. Not sure why you wouldn't have taken an AWD, standard 7-seat XC90 V8 given that it is substantially more powerful than the RX330 and more than makes up for the added weight? Friends of ours (no kids) bought an RX400h and they are already complaining that it is too small to take another couple and weekend luggage to their lake house.
RE: the RX vs XC, here in Atlanta we might use AWD a couple of days a year and couldn't see paying for the extra weight and mechanicals even with the V8 fun. We almost qualify for the tax writeoff on the 6K# gvw that the V8 sneaks into but I don't want to tempt the IRS gods(not that about 80% of those buying the big SUVs and taking the tax cred SHOULDN'T--but that's another story). Also, the V8 requires third row and the very nifty articulating mid-row system and disappearing third row eliminates a fair bit of storage. Most of our cargo is of the bicycle, Home Depot and Scottish Terrier varieties--not so much of the four pass plus cargo. Additionally, even with the deals I've heard of on V8s, we would have been out another 6-8 grand...hard to get comfy in this $40k plus auto range. We had a Tribute for 3+ years and found the capacity just about right for us(albeit at $10k LESS). Cheers!
The wife loves it, as it is easy to reach in to strap the kids into their seats, but to me it is just like her 2002 BMW330ic drop-top,... every time I drive either one of them, I can't help but feel like I am driving (no offense)a "chick car". It just doesn't feel like my 2000 Landcruiser. and so it goes.....
Jay
However, maybe a compromise would be an SUV with a wide second row to comfortably hold your three children, leaving the cargo area for your retriever? If you can put all three kids in the second row, do you really need a third row?
If that arrangement would work, most mid-sized SUV's would work unless your children can't comfortably fit into the second row. Of the vehicles in this thread, the MDX may have the widest second row (along with a very large cargo area).
I don't want a minivan... I don't need *that* much space.
i live in so cal..so AWD is not a necessity. I have two small kids, 1 yr and 5 yrs. so thrid row seats would come in handy with family get togethers - caravaning places..but it wouldn't be a feature we'd really need/use regularly..so it's not a priority.
i originally was looking at the XC90..i own two other volvos and like them. i rode in a friends RX330..and lked it..so i was looking at the new model.. the RX350...
the RX350 has 270 hp...weight less than an XC90...so it seems like power/weight it wouldb e on par with the Volvo V8. the Volvo 3.2 is much less powerful..220hp i think...which would make it a slug compared to the lexus.
power is only one small part of the equation.
living with the cars on a daily basis would be key. gettin into and out of them, storage capacity, etc.
is there any real differencein safety? i know volvo is known for being safe, but is the RX350 really any less safe than an XC??? both are raised up, heavy..etc...
for any of you who cross shopped the XC90 (either the 3.2 or V8) and the Lexus RX line...let me know what it was that swayed you one way or the other.
i'm looking to lease. volvo usually does 2 year leases..sweet spot for them. Lexus it is better to do 3 yrs.
i could probaby get a nicely equipped 3.2 Volvo for about the same as an RX350...the volvo might be a tad cheaper...if i want a V8 volvo that will cost me a bit more than the RX350... the RX is sort of in the middle price wise... a bit more than the 3.2 but a bit less than the V8.
if i got the volvo..i'd want the V8...but i don't need AWD...
my big question is aside from specs...what are the ups/downs to each of these vehicles...
any of you
in some buying decisions.
for me, that was a huge safety difference. volvo let me try to roll over one of their xc90s during driver training. i tried it, up to about 50 mph & couldn't come close to inducing rollover - the vehicle is idiot-proof in that regard.
I love the Volvo-size, looks, inside, etc. The gas pedal is strangely over to the right side and your leg practically rests up against the console. No good.
We checked out the Audi Q7 - Too big, can't see over the 3rd row headrests (and they don't adjust down), and not enough leg room for the hubby.
We both like the Acura MDX and Cadillac SRX, but I'm leaning more toward the Cadillac. I wish the Cadillac came standard with blue tooth like the MDX, but the automatic liftgate the SRX has is a big plus. Also, the real wood and luxury interior beat out the faux stuff in the MDX. The Cadillac also has adjustable foot pedals, which the MDX does not. For similarly priced vehicles, the Cadillac leases better - maybe $100/month less!
Check it out. Its really nice!
Regarding the MDX, has anyone noticed that the adjustable steering wheel does not come down enough? I like to pull the wheel directly in front of me, but I found the MDX does not do this. It stays in a somewhat angled-up position,
We also drove the Lexus GX470, but that had a strange low console that cut my husbands right mid calf when he drove it.
The Lexus is really nice, but I also have 2 kids and would find the 3rd row helpful when carting around neighborhood friends.
I am leaning toward the Cadillac SRX. It has the 3rd row, is comfortable and luxurious inside and the rear liftgate is remote. How great is that when you are loading packages!! Also, the third row goes up and down electrically. I know it kind of looks like a hearse, but for the price it kind of has everything you need.
Picture gallery here: http://www.autoblog.com/photos/autoblog-garage-2007-cadillac-srx/
Samples:
Even more at the link--if you can believe it.
How much research have you been able to do?
If you are looking for vehicles with a third row, here are some of your best choices--based on reviews in the press:
Volvo XC90
GMC Acadia
Mazda CX-9
Saturn Outlook
Acura MDX
There are more.
The Volvo third row is not likely to be comfortable for very long for anyone, but you could probably manage.
It is very safe.
You might also want to wait for the Toyota Highlander and Honda Pilot--all due to be refreshed this year.
If you are in a rush and want the best right now, there is no question that the Saturn and the GMC are the very best. They are all the rage in the automotive press right now (and incidentally, hey have the biggest third row).
Two more to consider:
BMW X5 (small)
Mercedes-Benz R-Class(cavernous)
It is very crucial that you find loaded examples of each and drive them.
I have been an owner of a SRX for three years now, and have had many pre-teen kids in the 3rd row. No problem there...I've also put two adults ( 5'5" & 5'7") back there on a one hour drive. They didn't mind at all.
MDX (tech/ent)
Pros:
1. Well integrated audio and video and navigation
2. Excellent voice recognition
3. Great handling
4. Very techy with lots of gadgets and toys
5. 3rd row
6. Lots of "small things" included like xenon lights, backup camera, bluetooth, aux input on the tech/ent package.
Cons:
1. May be too techy for some folks. If you think a blackberry or treo is too complicated, don't look at this car. Must read manual to maximize all the tools.
2. 3rd row is smaller than Volvo.
3. Roof rack, trailer hitch, and side boards are all optional (if you care for them)
4. Ugly grille.
Volvo XC90
Pros:
1. Safe, high crash ratings.
2. Large roomy 3rd row
3. Nice factory headrest DVD setup
4. Nice conservative appearance (my wife likes it)
Cons:
1. The 6cyl is very weak.
2. Poor reliability history ( and thus higher maintenance)
3. Navigation is really really bad and not worth its weight in paper.
4. No backup camera, just an optional radar buzzing thing.
5. Ends up 4-5k more than MDX comparably equipped.
Lexus RX350
Pros:
1. Nice finish
2. Smooth drive
3. Nav is pretty good and easy to use.
4. Lexus customer service
Cons:
1. No 3rd row if you need it.
2. Very boat like to drive. Handling worse than Acura of Volvo. Could be a good thing if you like driving a boat, though.
3. Its really a glorified highlander. All the interior setup is identical, shift gear box and all.
4. Hard to find the factory DVD and aftermarket doesn't look so hot.
5. Costs a little more than MDX even without the DVD.
Hope that helps someone.
Benz ML 350 vs Acura MDX Technology
1. Benz drives with a more solid & safe feel
2. Benz has a much better exterior front nose.
3. Surprisingly Benz holds better resale value when I checked from year to year going back to 2000. Plus I bought my premium 2007 Benz for much less than the MDX Technology
4. Better voice activated Navigation & traffic report in MDX
5. Much better looking gauges in MDX.
6. Bigger & roomier interior in MDX
I would have bought the MDX if I could tolerate the funky looking front nose from the side and from the front. Driving the Infinity FX35 actually gave me a german car feel- much better than the MDX, but the FX appearance and blind spots are even worse than the MDX.
By the way, the BMW and the Lexus are not alike and appeal to different target audiences. You need to figure out which one you fall into.
Has anyone shopped the MB M-Class in relation to the MDX? What did you find notably different between the two? In your opinion, which would you prefer?
I am looking at both vehicles right now, and wanted to see if other shoppers/buyers compared these two vehicles in their research.
Thanks!
I have two kids so interior room is HUGE factor to me so the Lexus appears too small, is that what the rest of you think?
I love the ride and feel and gadgets on the MDX, but I think the BMW looks better outside.
The Mercedes is actually the LEAST expensive of them all I have found, can you believe it. I will be LEASING and they are running a Lease special for $525 a month so it's $125 less a month than the MDX so it's hard to decide.
Help please!
I faced a similar decision recently and went with the 2008 X5 (w 3rd row seats) after owning the RX300 for 8 years.
The previous generation RX (Japanese made) was incredibly reliable - not a single problem in 88,000 miles and had adequate space for family with 3 kids and dog. Unless you are doing any offroad driving, the performance differences are not significant between X5 3.0, RX 350 and MDX. MDX has horsepower advantage and has better 0-60 but for most daily driving I guess you would not notice. Looked at XC90 also but have heard reports of reliability issues and found the V6 underpowered.
RX and X5 felt more luxurious than MDX and as a former owner of an earlier Acura car, I spent most of my time with that wishing that I had bought something else
Can you tell your experience how it has been till now.
I have the same problem choosing well off course i am in no hurry for a purchase.
I like the x5 but since hearing reliability issues i dont know what to choose anymore
I ldo like the rx but well the design is old and guys don't really drive it much
mdx well not for me volvo dont consider.
I am hoping lexus bring a much better rx or a new suv to compete with x5 cayenne and ml
http://www.volvocars.com/us/models/xc90/Pages/Accessories.aspx
or
http://vparts.dealerfit.com/store/volvo-xc90-cross-bars-prod126_1083.php
fit BMW 2006 X5?
Thanks.
The Caddy could be purchased and serviced locally where as the closest Acura dealer is more than an hour away. They also claim that the new 2010's are selling faster than they can get them in so no discount off MSRP.
We have an 01 MDX with 145,000 miles that the tranny is giving us problems, so have to do something in the next week or two.
Would love to hear your thoughts if you've compared the two.
We also have an 02 Acura TL with about 140K miles, and the tranny is already slipping. So much for Acura reliability...We are also looking into dumping it for a new car.
I would recommend you test drive the SRX with / without the 20" wheels. Some folks like the softer ride that you get with the 18" wheels - the 20" wheels definitely give a firmer ride and there is no sense in paying extra for that if you are not going to be happy with the change in firmness.
We ended up going with the 2.8 Turbo AWD Premium - which for that model is pretty close in price to what you would pay for an MDX with all 3 packages. If you are someone who is sensitive to power at takeoff - you should drive both the turbo and non-turbo versions to get a feel for whether the difference is worth it to you. One warning though - the Turbo not only adds several thousand to the cost of the vehicle - it also requires premium gas - so that is another cost issue to consider when going with that model.
1. 450h = Lexus reliability (we hate spending time at the shop, causing one or both of us to miss work and such a hassle to rearrange schedules), really liked the new exterior design, interior layout was very nice, rich leather, ample space, velvety ride, ultra quiet, expecially the hybrid version along with 30 mpg gas mileage, remote touch navigation is better than the others I tried, and just an overall upscale feel inside and out. It would have been nice to have a 3rd row option to use in a pinch and ports shouldn't be so hard to get to in the arm rest, but otherwise this car fit the bill in every way. IMO, it's perfect for a family who needs an all-purpose luxury car to commute to work, run daily errands, take the kids to school, take the family on a 1,000-mile road trip for the weekend, and then show up to a black-tie dinner.
2. Acura MDX/RDX - great reliability. However, while the handling was a touch better than the RX, the ride is not nearly as refined, there's more noticeable road noise, and the transmission is not as smooth. I didn't like the "bagel slicer" front grill and the controls were a bit too busy looking. This was tied as our 3rd place car.
3. Audi Q series - really nice handling, but that's about where it ended. Reliability was a major issue for us, and although Audi's record in that department has improved somewhat over the past few years, it's not reached Lexus reliability. Interior was not quite to the level of the Lexus. This was tied for our 2nd place car.
4. BMW X series = on par with Audi in terms of handling, but road noise was pretty loud and interior was not even close to the other brands. Ride was on the harsh side. 3rd row option was nice though. Reliability is better than Audi and MB, but still not a Lexus or Acura. We liked the exterior design, but overall, it was never really in the running.
5. Cadillac Escalade/SRX - we test drove the Escalade once, and once was enough to know it wasn't what we wanted. Way too big, bulky, and pretty gaudy all around. The SRX was better, but we weren't at all impressed with the quality of the interior, the fit and finish, or the ride comfort. The exterior was a bit edgy as compared to the others, and we liked it.
6. Infiniti Fx/Qx - As with the escalade, the Qx was just too bulky for us, but it drove a lot smaller than the Caddy. As for the Fx, the design didn't really do anything for us, although we liked the interior and the ride quality. This was tied for our 3rd place with the Acura.
7. Land Rover - different, but that was about it. Reliability? 'nuff said.
8. Mercedes GL and GLK -- We really liked both of these. Alot. The GL's exterior is really striking, has an aggressive stance, although the interior could be nicer. Navigation needs to be improved big time. The M B Tex a.k.a. pleather, also was a turn off at this price point. But, unlike the other larger SUVs, this one drove really small for its size. This was our 2nd place car, and we probably would have bought it but for reliability history for the GL (not good, to say the least), and the poor gas mileage. If both of these improve in the next five years, we're getting this car. As for the GLK, if we went with MB, we would have gotten the GL over the GLK.
9. Porsche Cayenne -- test drove it once, was not impressed with the ride quality, then came back again in a month and confirmed it was not for us. Bouncy ride (better not put any hot coffee in those cup holders), jerky accelleration, just overall not a comfortable ride. I couldn't imaging taking it on a road trip of any significant duration.
10. Volvo XC series - a few years ago these would be high on my list. Since then, every other car on my list has equaled Volvo in the one category that Volvo used to be the leader in - safety. Who feels unsafe in any of the cars above? Once you get past the safety advantage, there wasn't much the XCs offered that wasn't surpassed by the other cars. Plus, the reliability has dropped off over the last few years.
11. Other cars never in the running -- Hummer, Lincoln, Hyundai.
This is our first adventure into the luxury vehicle market and have narrowed our choices down to the BMW x5 and the Lexus RX350. In truth, we like the X5 better, but do have concerns about overall maintenance charges after the initial warranties. We tend to keep our cars for 10+ years, so interested in any insight regarding past experiences comparing these 2 on what we can expect from charges. Because of past biases, I must admit we are leaning towards the RX350 because we feel that it will be cheaper down the road from a maintenance perspective. Welcome your views and appreciate the input.