Volvo XC90 vs MB M Class vs Acura MDX vs Lexus RX 350 vs BMW X5 vs Cadillac SRX

phastphil1 · January 2006

Of the vehicles you mentioned, I would go with the MDX. I am a little surprised about the reliability comment on the Acura. Another source (Consumer Reports) has the owner's index for reliability as excellent. Safety, The MDX and the Volvo have the best crash test scores. The MDX's 3rd seat roomier than the Volvo. As you noted , the Lexus and the Infiniti are truck based, and the Infiniti has not had great reliability ratings plus the dealers are limited. The Lexus and the Volvo will also run more than the MDX when the equipment is the same.

10scoachrick · January 2006

Will pick up our new RX330 today--white, premium, 6 CD, 18" wheels,towing prep pkg, rain-sensing wipers, cargo mat, wheel locks for $36,700 plus taxes at Nalley Lexus in Atlanta(Smyrna)--beautiful dealership! I've posted on another thread but I'll ask again--Is dealer install of XM the way to go??? $695 includes a tuner gizmo installed in the sunglass holder or low on console--unit is controlled by remote--haven't seen antenna placement. DW would prefer not to plug in the Roadie from the other vehicle but seven hundred bucks is seven hundred bucks! Any thoughts?

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!

habitat1 · January 2006

I had a XM "Commander" receiver installed in our 911. Total cost was under $300 parts and labor by an independent installer that my Porsche Dealer recommended. The tuner was installed in an opening in the lower portion of the center console and can be controlled by remote from the rear seat or directly by me. The antenna was run from the rear through the dash and up the A piller. Completely invisible and a real professional job by the installer. The commander is an FM based XM (goes through 88.7 on my dial) so the sound is not quite as good as the factory installed XM on our TL or MDX.

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.

10scoachrick · January 2006

hab, thanks for the 'Commander' info. I'm back to the dealer Monday with final paperwork,etc. and hope to get a look at one of their XM installs. Meanwhile, I'll check with local aftermarket folks as well.

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!

bullethead · February 2006

Bought it for $41K in late late Dec 05 - was stickered around $50k and some change, with the tacky chromed rims.
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.....

bullethead · February 2006

Been scouting around looking for one - with two kids in car seats and two dogs, I am trying to get a good quality cover to go on top of the leather seats - thanks in advance for any suggestions

sestesod · February 2006

What packages do you have on it, i.e. touring w/ alloy wheels, rear dvd player, nav., etc. Thanks.

whowhome · March 2006

Just curious, where you brought your V8 from? 41K seems to be a great price. Edmunds TMV is ~ 43K.

music287 · March 2006

I don't mean to throw a monkey wrench into the proceedings but, is anyone else considering the new Lincoln MKX due this fall? It's a five-seater with heated/cooled front seats, heated rear seats, hid xenon headlights, huge moonroof and real wood. Looks like a Lexus competitor to me.

Jay

rcf8000 · March 2006

The MKX does look like an attractive alternative to an RX350, but only at a significantly lower price. The RX350 has more power and a lot less weight, among other advantages.

futurevolvo · March 2006

I'm thinking of buying a new 2006 XC90 but am wondering if anyone knows what the changes will be for 2007. Do you think it's better to get the 2006 now or wait for the 2007?

arvin1 · May 2006

I would go with the mercedes, but i heard it has some problems,but in 2007 bmw x5 will come with 3 rows of seats..

magp · July 2006

My husband and I (yes, I'm a woman) are in the market for an SUV. We have 3 pre-teen (bigger than me) children and a labrador retriever. After driving a minivan for years I cannot compromise on size. My husband on the other hand wants luxury because he drives a GMC pickup all day (which is very luxurious with all the options, if you ask me). I suppose it should be the other way around.... however....We have checked out the Volvo XC90 and the Cadillac SRX. He is stuck on the SRX and I don't want either because those 2 third row seats in the back are useless unless you have infants or toddlers...even then can you imagine the struggle to get back there to buckle them up. No way am I buying either of these vehicles. Any advise on a compromise would be greatly appreciated. I bet the new 2007 BMW 3rd row will be exactly the same. BTW.....he doesn't want another "truck" such as a Yukon,Tahoe, Escalade which I would be happy with.

wmquan · July 2006

Realistically, a minivan is going to provide sme of the best roominess than an SUV.

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).

avery1 · July 2006

Since you already have a GM product check out the new Buick Enclave and its other GM relations that are due out soon. They are supposed to have lots of room and use it effeciently. There is at least one discussion here at Edmunds following them. There is also the Ford Edge due out soon but I think that is going to be smaller. If you really have some money the Audi Q7 is out and it is also quite large I hear.

eclou · July 2006

If you want luxury and space, but not a strict minivan, you might consider the Mercedes R-class. Not real easy on the eyes, but the space and finish are excellent. You can also get excellent deals on them, as they are heavily discounted up to $10k.

magp · July 2006

Thanks to all for your advise. I will check these ones out next week.

23109vc · December 2006

I've been in the market for an SUV / family vehicle.

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

elias · January 2007

as far as i know, the volvo is the only SUV on the list which has rollover-stability-control. this might be a factor
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.

susanw6 · January 2007

I have checked out almost all the mid size luxury SUVs with 3rd row recently. My hubby is very tall and finds most cars with consoles to be uncomfortable so we had to do a lot of looking for one with more leg room. Here's my 2 cents worth on the best contenders...

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!

susanw6 · January 2007

Just a couple of more things...

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.

susanw6 · January 2007

I checked out both the Volvo XC and Lexus RX. My husband found the leg room in the Volvo uncomfortable when he drove it. The gas pedal is too far to the right and his knee was smashed up against the console.
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.

readerreader · January 2007

Review here: http://www.autoblog.com/2007/01/29/in-the-autoblog-garage-2007-cadillac-srx/

Picture gallery here: http://www.autoblog.com/photos/autoblog-garage-2007-cadillac-srx/

Samples:

Even more at the link--if you can believe it.

readerreader · January 2007

Your biggest problem is that the RX does not have a third row--like you are looking for "occasionally".

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)

guyf · January 2007

Volvo says their 3rd row is recommended for people under 5ft-3". My wife is that size and she is very comfortable back there for 2-3 hours drives. We do not use the 3rd row very often, maybe twice a year. You are right, the Volvo third row is very safe, as safe as any other seat in the XC90.

jgibs890 · February 2007

I am debating between the Cadillac SRX and the Volvo XC90, does anyone have any suggestions?

readerreader · February 2007

Drive them both and see which one you like better.
It is very crucial that you find loaded examples of each and drive them.

adamt12 · February 2007

hi, new to these forums, does anyone actually have the srx with the 3rd row, i feel it wont fit 2 adults but how about 2 pre-teen kids.

minime5 · March 2007

Adam,
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.

mattcannavo · May 2007

I'm a sophomore, and am trying to decide between the Mercedes ML320 or the Acura MDX for my first car(Years 2001-2004). I prefer the Mercedes, just for the name, but the Acura is good too. They both seem pretty reliable but what do I know. Thank You.

wmquan · May 2007

Of those vehicles and model years, your best bet for reliability would be a 2003-2004 MDX. 2001-2002 MDX's have a transmission design that has been problematic. ML320's don't have a good reliability record by most accounts.

suvhunt · May 2007

I just got the MDX after comparing to XC90 and RX350. The MDX is best value for the money by far, here's some pros and cons:

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.

kaistring · July 2007

From my SUV hunt, I eliminated BMW X5 (too many friends got lemons or service problems)& Porsche (best looking but poor dealer attitude with too limited warranty for a fuzzy car):

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.

nursebabygirl · October 2007

i am looking into buying an suv... i don't know whether the bmw x5 or the lexus rx350 is better. can someone please help me out as to which is the better vehicle... thanks

JBaumgart · October 2007

It all depends on how you define "better" - what are your most important criteria?

nursebabygirl · October 2007

i basically want to know the ups and downs of each... i like the bmw, but i also like the lexus

JBaumgart · October 2007

My suggestion would be to first do some research (you can start here) on each of the vehicles that you are attracted to. Read some reviews, do side-by-side comparisons to narrow it down to 2 or 3. Then go out and test drive those on a variety of roads, and get a feel for the dealers and what kind of pricing is available in your area. Do not "fall in love" and buy until you have driven all of the models that you are interested in.

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.

chaseboy · February 2008

Hi everyone:

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!

bidder5000 · March 2008

Hi. I am trying to make a final decision and having a hard time.

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!

praz · March 2008

I will also have the same dilemma when I plan to buy this year end, waiting for 2010 RX.

storo · March 2008

Hi

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

bmlexus · March 2008

I think ur decision was good. is it the 4.8?
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

6degrees · December 2008

Anybody knows if the Volvo Silver Cross Bars:

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.

jwoodie · May 2009

As a new car, the SRX takes a tremendous depreciation hit; however, a used '07-'09 SRX (especially CPO) is probably the best automotive bargain in America.

bren_va · January 2010

Has anyone else compared these two vehicles? We drove the Cadillac last week and really liked the ride and the looks of it. You can get most of the perks of the MDX's advance/ent in the premium for about $5000 less. From what I can tell the only thing we would be giving up would be the third row seat. If we purchased the MDX, the most we could afford would be the tech/ent. For a $1000 more for the Caddy we would get ventilated seats, front/rear park assist, passive lock/push button start, onstar, the ability to fill up with regular gas and two entertainment screens vs one.

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.

cal_92 · January 2010

I'd go for the 2010 SRX. Not only is it a better looking vehicle, but it's also a better bang for the buck suv. Better gas mileage, better gadgets, etc. The only negative would be if you need the 3rd row seat, which the MDX would have. However, the 3rd row on the MDX is really only suited for kids, and you would give up most, if not all, of the trunk space. The SRX would only seat 5, but has generous room in the trunk. Did I mention how much better looking the SRX is?

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.

srjacobs · February 2010

Yes - I would agree - we have a 2007 MDX with Tech/Ent package and when my wife's XC-90 needed to be replaced recently - we ended up choosing the 2010 SRX over the XC-60, MDX, and RX-350. There were aspects of all of them that we liked. The Volvo is a nice car - and a pretty good value in that you should be able to get decent deals on them - but she was looking for something a bit different. We decided we didn't want two MDX's and didn' t need to have 2 cars with a 3rd row since we already have the MDX.

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.

wwest · February 2010

Turbo would also mean a detuned/derated base engine resulting in poor hwy FE.

carfan777 · September 2010

After months and months and months of shopping for a new SUV, I finally bought the RX450h. I looked at every SUV on the market. And I do mean every single one. Some we drove three, four and five times over. To the point where I had to go to different dealerships for the same car because I was embarrassed with how many test drives I took. That doesn't include the countless magazine articles, blogs, owners I spoke with, etc. I could spend pages talking about all the ones I considered (and I have the stacks of papers to prove it!), but in a nutshell here's the reasons I went with the RX and didn't go with the competition:

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.

jac17 · February 2012

All:

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.

Volvo XC90 vs MB M Class vs Acura MDX vs Lexus RX 350 vs BMW X5 vs Cadillac SRX

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles