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

tonychrys · August 2001

..yer making me thirsty.

Homer says: "Mmmm.... beer."

cheeks · August 2001

This discussion has been very informative. However, I have not seen many comments about the X5. Can anyone provide me with some insight?

rxcure · August 2001

If driving excitement is top on your priority list, X5 wins hands-down in this category. To get that you give up some cargo room, you pay more, and the evidence I've seen says the X5 is suffering from new model reliability problems. I'm sure BMW will work out the kinks in production as did MB with the ML, but it's probably a riskier purchase if reliability is important to you. But if you love a tight-handling fast vehicle this is the best, probably followed by MDX/ML (depending on your taste for Japanese vs. European handling), with RX bringing up the rear in driving excitement. (For the record, the reason I bought my RX despite having just dinged its cargo and handling in recent posts relative to the other vehicles, is that it is a super-reliable vehicle, with nice luxury and safety and enough cargo room. Those were my preferences. MDX wasn't available when I purchased and I'd give it a hard look if I were buying now, though the MDX's width and lesser luxury and probably average reliability for first model-year would likely have RX win again for my preference set.)

diploid · August 2001

Besides the fake wood accents, I really don't see anything else that would strike the MDX as having less luxury than an RX300.

drew_ · August 2001

There are a few other things too, such as vinyl for the 3rd row seats, and other portions of the first two rows of seats. I think the most significant complaint from owners about this is probably the hard plastic dash and instrument panels that you'll find. The RX has soft touch vinyl surfaces, as does the M-class (from MY2000 onwards). Heck, even the lowly Honda Civic has a soft touch dash. This will hopefully be improved upon in the near future.

Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards

wmquan · August 2001

Yep the MDX does have a less luxurious interior than the RX. The hard plastic dash, molded with fake texturing, is the most obvious un-luxurious piece, as is the fake wood. The third-row seat being vinyl doesn't bother me, though, especially when it's mostly intended for kids and many people won't use them regularly; I'd rather take the cost savings.

The MDX's interior is beat by even the 2000+ ML's, in terms of quality of materials (real wood, nicer leather). Though the ML's seats are hardly all leather with the hard, molded plastic shroud around most of the backs of the front seats -- rather chintzy, should at least have padded vinyl there.

drew_ · August 2001

The hard plastic actually in all MB vehicles (and has been even 20 years back) and is supposed to prevent anything from penetrating from the back of the front seats in the event of an accident. It's also supposed to be more durable against stratches. If you're a long time MB owner, you'll be right at home. However, if you come from a Toyota or Honda, you will definitely notice it.

It defiinitely is cost savings too though...MB could've covered the plastic with vinyl it like does with the other MB cars, where it's not leather either, except maybe in the flagship S600 and CL600, or S55 and CL55. Instead, they chose to make all of the other things leather, such as the door side impact covers, the head restraints, and the map pockets.

wmquan · August 2001

Either way, it still isn't very attractive IMHO. I'd imagine they could prevent seat penetration in a more elegant way, and should have just covered it in vinyl as you mentioned they do in other vehicles.

ibmindless · August 2001

I could use some help deciding which SUV to buy. I'm currently considering the MDX, RX300, ML320, QX4, Highlander, and maybe even the Sequoia. I currently drive a CL Type S, and my wife has a minivan (we're keeping the CL). She prefers the RX300, but I'm leaning towards the unavailable, sticker+++ priced MDX.

I've read every available road test & user comments, and we've test driven all of the above. I really liked the Sequoia, but my wife thinks it's too big for her. We can't seem to get a deal on the Highlander, while the QX4 can be had for a decent price ($3K - 4K off $36K+ MSRP).

Is anyone aware of any great bargains on 2001 models? I'm on the west coast if that makes a big difference. Thanks for any feedback...

ib

bobput · September 2001

You didn't say what your specific needs are, esp. passenger capacity and loading flexibility, but I am extremely happy with my MDX Touring.--my decision was between that & Odyssey EX, to replace my Windstar.
One RX300 & Highlander disadvantage is load capacity is meager <900 lbs., versus about 1300 for MDX--my family of 4 alone totals about 750!! Obviously, it would be Very easy to overload the Toyotas. Max. cargo area of MDX with seats folded is immense, when that is top priority.
Biggest surprise was that handling and agility for such a large vehicle! It goes where you point it, and acceleration is effortless, once you learn to be reasonably aggressive with the throttle-- a wonderful, Acura V-6 sound as it revs toward 6200 rpm. Can you say "fun to drive?!" BUT do not do this if your trying to get 18-20 mpg. Mine does get 23+ on the interstate at 70-75, which I think is great. More like 15 around town, though.
Minivans are surely the most space-efficient, but MDX comes close when you consider its space for 2,3,4, or 5 (large adults) plus 1 or 2 seats for children or small adults, with ANY unused seating folding down for cargo!

johnnnyc · September 2001

I just opted for one over an Acura MDX, mostly because of the safety factor (MB makes one safe damn car).

The comparisons were very close - but ultimately, the pricing, included maintenance, safety features, luxury and the service of the Mercedes beat out the Acura.

If you're looking for a 2k1 - ML320's are serious discounted right now ($2k off invoice, factory to dealer incentive). You can score one fairly cheap, although there were some nifty improvements to 2002 that made me switch to a 2002 instead.

I'd say try them all out first though. The MB had the more rugged, truck like feel. The Acura had the more car-like feel. Acura's acceleration was better, but nothing beat the MB's stability control, excellent sportshift transmission, and real full-time 4WD.

diploid · September 2001

Go for the Mercedes ML55 AMG.

paul166 · October 2001

I entered the SUV market in May and test drove the Acura, Mercedes and Lexus. I preferred the MDX for reasons I'll outline below but waited until now to finally purchase--I wanted to see the MDX safety numbers and hoped the price would come down. I have now put a down payment on a 2002 MDX. I gave each of the vehicles very aggressive test drives and preferred the MDX hands down. The Mercedes steering was hard and unresponsive--I had to ask the salesman whether the steering was utterly unassisted. I felt like I was driving a tractor or golf cart. Although the MDX has been widely criticized for its lack of interior polish and faux wood finish--the only sign of true luxury I was sure ofwhile test driving the MB was the emblem on the grille. The Lexus clearly had the nicest interior of the three. However, as a tall person I felt cramped, the ride was minivan-like, and the exterior look--tall station wagon. The MDX handled extremely well during medium grade off-road test drive (I took a Highlander on the same route and my wife who came along with me for the ride hit her head on the roof during the Highlander test drive). The bottom line is that my wife lobbied hard for the MDX and we decided to go for it--we liked the ride, look, and safety specs of the MDX but only the safety specs of the MB and Lexus. This is admittedly the biased view of a man who has just spent more than 16k for a new vehicle for the first time--not necessarily because of a lack of money but because of a general lack of interest in cars (or SUVs) or driving. I have to say, I am sincerely looking forward to driving our new MDX--when/if it finally gets here.

johnnnyc · October 2001

the others. This was my first luxury purchase as well - but at no point did I feel that either the M-class or RX-300 weren't heads above the MDX. The MDX was essentially a Honda Accord with leather seats.

donlino · October 2001

If you didn't like the handling and ride of the M class and RX300, did you try the X5 3.0?

paul166 · October 2001

were great! The handling was superior but the ride was a little less smooth than the MDX. In terms of overall performance and exterior appearance, I'd clearly give the nod to the X5 over the MDX. However, I was less sure about X5 reliability and its interior finish was more spartan sport than luxury. The bottom line was the bottom line--I couldn't get myself to pay the extra $$ for an X5 similarly equipped as the premium MDX.

bobput · October 2001

I bt my MDX in March and am very happy that it is the choice gives the very best combination of performance, utility, safety, luxury and value! Most complete 7 lux. SUV comparison test was in the Dec. 2000 Car& Driver: MDX #1, X5 3.0 #2, RX300 #3, ML320 -tie for 4th ("trucklike").
Exterior styling is too subjective for me to address, but the MDX simply does everything VERY well, and can actually be called "fun to drive" to an extent remarkable for its size and weight. Luxury is NOT a list of expensive options, but more the ability of a car to do what is asked of it with responsiveness, comfort and simplicity--at least to me . BTW, I also own a BMW 7, a couple of older Porsches, & a M-B 280 SL --so hopefully I understand the concepts of luxury and performance without too many prejudices.
Hope your wait isn't too long!!

wwest · October 2001

If the MDX wasn't predominatly a FWD vehicle, or if it had TRAC (to make up, partially, for the FWD bias), VSC and HID, I would definitely put it on top of the SUV list.

I noticed not just a few posts comparing the RX300 to a MiniVan. Good point, that's really all it is, the Chrysler T&C AWD Limited is priced about the same although not nearly as luxurious. Both are basically FWD with a viscous clutch coupling to carry some minor portion of engine torque to the rear. The major difference is the RX300 only routes about 5% normally whereas the T&C has a much more tighter and "robust" viscous clutch coupling, so much moreso than the RX that it must be by-passed with an over-running clutch during braking.

I have little doubt that the X5, except for pricing and the BMW nameplate, belongs at the top of this list, head and shoulders above the rest.

I could overlook the price much easier than the nameplate.

diploid · October 2001

Byt you gotta hand it to Honda- the MDX's panel gaps are amazingly tight for a vehicle this size.

kojak2 · October 2001

Having driven a X5, MDX, RX300 etc, and having owned assorted domestic SUV's, I recently drove a ML320 and a ML500. I bought the ML500! Ride, safety and now performance! I've had it for a few weeks now and it is the best truck I have owned!

ezdrive · October 2001

I have tried them all. I am convinced the 2002 Mercedes is the best suv for me. I am undecided on the 320 or the 500. I like the power in the 500. Is it worth the loss of 2 miles to the gallon? Kojak2, tell me what you like about the ML500!

kojak2 · October 2001

There is no comparison in the driving experience between the ML 320 and the ML 500. The 5.0 litre v8 is a big improvement and the acceleration is effortless and the truck just feels absolutely rock-solid. Secondly, the fit and finish in the 2002 ML 500 is as good as in any MB sedan, it is a nice interior! I really like the saddle interior with the black exterior combination. Thirdly, being 6'2", there is just ample head and legroom in the first two rows of seats. I chose the third row option. The good news is that they can be latched out of the way(its kind of cool) when you dont need them, the bad news is that the only person that probably can use them is someone like me who has young kids or as an emergency type jump seat for adults. Fourth, the standard list of options includes GPS/Navigation which has become pretty easy to use. Lastly, it had the best rating for safety. Steel frame, eight airbags, sos teleaid and so on.
I did'nt like the other trucks as much because:
RX 300 too small, LX 470 nice but gaudy and underpowered, MDX was nice but is it really worth $40k+? and in my opinion, a little bit plain jane. X5's ride and performance were awesome but just did'nt have the room I needed, the Escalade was clearly not in the same league as the others in fit and finish.

wwest · October 2001

If you are buying an SUV for "survival" in wintertime adverse roadbed conditions then those are more easily and adequately managed with the ML320's lower HP, torque, engine. It is much easier to "soft-shoe" through an area of low traction with this engine. POWERING through these types of roadbed conditions just simply does not work.

Finesse does!

You have clearly picked the best of this "lot", the ML series, as far as handling in adverse conditions.

berger2626 · November 2001

We just closed a deal on a Silver 2001 MDX with Touring...MSRP $37,450, selling price $35,200...Too good of a deal to pass up;the MDX is selling for MSRP in Atlanta, where I live, so I have to fly to Florida and drive 500 miles back to town. My wife and I looked at the Mercedes(poorly designed 3rd row seat, ugly) and the RX300 (too small), and we just feel that the MDX fits all of our needs. Cargo capacity, stylish, handles terrifically; yeah, the interior could be more luxurious, but it still is a tough SUV to beat. I feel grateful to have received a $2300 discount from sticker.

hpia4v2 · November 2001

Well, actually I picked X5 4.4i, will arrive in December.

I liked MDX alot but the drive is rather plain vanilla for my taste, but IMHO the best value for any luxury SUV out there, not to mention realibility. The ML is not bad, except for 3rd row seat options, by the way what are those 2 flappers covering foot well? ugly solution for not very comfy 3rd row seat. Here is the example of "trying to be evrything to everybody" and going nowhere. MBZ just forgo the 3rd row seat or go to bigger chasis next time around.

The best SUV will be drive like X5, reliable like a Lexus and value like MDX. I can dream can I? But again everybody will drive that thing on the road and it's not funny.

Oops got to go, need to install smoke detector in the garage, he...he...he...

spfotey · November 2001

am wondering -- what made u decide on the x5???

i like all 3 of the vehicles -- mdx for value/reliability, ML for sturdiness and recent improvements, and x5 for driving. But am concerned about x5 reliability. i am about to ditch my 98 ML -- way too many things going wrong in that thing...

hpia4v2 · November 2001

Well, I am superficial as well as picky about how the car handles. Take a test drive in an X5, get on an on-ramp to a freeway that's say 25mph then hit it around 60mph. One cautions, bring a duck tape a long before you do so, I am worry your jaw is going to be open for the rest of the afternoon with awe on the handling of this SUV/SAV. Please folks don't do this in any suv if you end up on the wall don't come looking for me to sue. I gave you plenty of warning!

I've been in the sideline lookign to buy a lux suv for 1 year, been looking everywhere(never couldn't commit to X5 cause of reliability issues) but my guts can;t seems to accept anything more reliable alternative out there, SO.....
I am waiting for my first BMW next month. Wish me luck.

stever · November 2001

Surely there are on-ramps where the legal limit is 55; we wouldn't want anyone to think a Town Hall member is advocating an illegal activity like speeding would we?

Steve
Host
SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards

dpb54 · November 2001

To those of you considering buying an X5, as an owner of one I would caution you. There are many problems with our car. It has 30,000 miles, and is 18 months old. It is in the shop an average of once per month. It rides and handles great, better than the other SUV's mentioned on this board. But BMW has quality control issues they need to resolve, so wait a year or two and maybe they'll have worked it out.

sduv · November 2001

My 10 month old MDX (15K mostly commute miles, dealer serviced) had Transmission problems last weekend. The accelerator revs and gears shift but the vehicle does not move. In about 10 miles it went from lurching while accelerating and "shuddering" while revesing to a dead transmission. Shocking. Is now at Dealer and they say it is a manufacturing defect that they will correct with anew transmission.

Wondering if someone else has seen quality problems..

paul166 · November 2001

sduv: Have you had any other "quality problems" with your MDX or is it just your bum transmission?

sduv · November 2001

So far only this transmission issue. It has been an excellent vehicle otherwise..

heatmiser1 · November 2001

I have looked/driven at all the vehicles listed in the title of this discussion. I liked the BMW X5 the best all around but can't bring myself to pay a high price for unreliability and high maintenance costs on a depreciating asset. This would also rule out the MB M-Class SUV's. The only logical choices for me were the Acura MDX or Lexus RX300. The MDX is a great SUV and is the one that both my wife and I would have liked to purchase. The main reason why we won't pull the trigger is that we can't bring ourselves to pay an Acura dealer full MSRP for a vehicle even if the end cost is in line (somewhat - the Lexus, BMW and MB provide more luxury and quality inside than Acura) with other vehicles of this class. I have owned Acura's in the past and the dealer experiences I have had (at more than one Acura dealer in my area) have been terrible. Fortunately Acura makes reliable cars so I haven't had to deal with them very often. One thing is certain, paying full MSRP at an Acura dealer will only get me lousy customer service. Is a one-way shuttle from the Acura dealer to any location within 10 miles (provided if it is prearranged) when I have any problems under warranty really a strong selling point??? A Lexus RX300 is going now for $500 over invoice which is equivalent to the MSRP (selling price) for a MDX equally featured (minus marginal/questionable 3rd row seats). Going with Lexus get's me a free loaner car whenever in need of service plus top notch customer service all the way around. In addition, the initial residuals of the MDX will diminish quickly once Acura get's production up properly (and they will). The RX300 has proven to have the highest residuals, reliability and customer satisfaction of any SUV on the market (Consumer Reports). As much as I wanted the MDX to work, they will lose me to Lexus...

senneca01 · December 2001

If you guys have not seen it yet, check out the new Volvo XC90 SUV. It wonder how it will stack up to the X5, ML-Series, RX300, QX4, and MDX. It is supposed to have more room than the X5 and ML, plus seat up to 7 people, forward facing.

Volvo XC90 Pictures

frank3333 · December 2001

frank3333 · December 2001

I own an x5 and have been disappointed in the quality. I thought bmw would be more careful. But lots and lots of parts have had to be replaced. Bmw seems more concerned wtih getting the product out there, and getting their money, and letting us poor fools have to deal with the constant repairs. Latches, fans, belts, steering col., fuel senders, stalling , etc. etc.
Avoid this one , for now.

sunshine25 · December 2001

I have done extensive research on these 4 vehicles, and nothing compares to the high performance capabilities of the M-Class.

M-Class has the best turning radius, the best off-roading capabilities, the best ground clearance, the best passive and active safety features, tremendous cabin and cargo space, unparalleled driving comfort, a superb suspension system, and great creature comforts.

In addition, recently dateline tried to roll the M-Class and found that absolutely weren't able to!

If you have any questions about the M-Class, BMW X5, Acura MDX, or the RX300, feel free to write me and I will be able to provide you specific information.

Brooke

tso2001 · December 2001

From our families' point of view it all depends on one's personal taste. My sister, my mom, my cousin and myself all live within 5 miles of each other but our tastes in cars are worlds apart. My mom thinks Lexus is the greatest car and just picked up a 2002 RX300 over the weekend. My sister is a MB fan and loves her E320. My cousin is a BMW nut, has a M5, and 5 serie station wagon, and refuses to get an X5 due to the lack of cargo space, went to Germany a few times to attend BMW driving classes, now that's passion. And me, I'm ordering a MDX for the wife and looking for a few year-old NSX to keep the Miata company. Not much decisions here.

mgoldstein3 · December 2001

I'm in New Jersey, and I'm interested in buying a new RX 300 and was intrigued by "heartmiser1"'s comment that they could be had for just $500 over invoice. Is this really the case?

Firebird_EOU · December 2001

Well I see Carsdirect.com selling it for $500 over invoice for 08824 zip code! $37,158 w/nav & destination charge. MDX is $3,500 over MSRP at Carsdirect. Local dealer wanted $3k over MSRP. If you can get one MSRP that's a steal!

jfxmjr · January 2002

advise any info on best price in philadelphia area and will dealer take anything off list or add add'l options etc? advise. thanks, jfxmjr1@aol.com

lambo_oreo · January 2002

Brooke,

What about the quality problems on the previous MLs? I like the new looks on the 02 ML but just worried if it could compare and hold their value against an X5 or an Acura. I still bought the ML but I guess I just wanted to hear from someone else that the 02 is totally different.

flytogolf · January 2002

Just started the examination process for the following vehicles: MDX, RX300, X5, ML320/430 and even the Toy Highlander. I've talked to co-workers who own some of these, read magazines/ ratings till my eyes blurred and now am as confused as ever. Heer are my introductory findings:
The RX300 has all the creature comforts but doesn't have much punch - found it somewhat vanilla to drive (The NAV was nice, but the salesman kept barking out orders on how to use it to the point of totally annoying both of us). The ML shape (boxiness) was too much for me to overcome. Reliability "seems" to be an issue as well.
X5 was a joy to drive, seems to have a little more status appeal (if that's a consideration) but seemed to be a 325 in an SUV body. Also, realibilty seems to be a weak spot with this as well.
MDX - I have no idea. No dealers around here (SF East Bay Area - Walnut Creek) do not have a vehicle to drive. We have attempted to drive one, but all the dealers keep telling us this SUV is so "hot" each owner has to pre-order one with a $1k - $2.5k deposit and then wait 20 - 40 days for delivery. That deflated me enough to nearly rule this one out!
Highlander looks like a great bargain, but have not test driven it yet - it was an afterthought after all the other contenders had some weakness about them. Still, not sure about its inclusion in this company.
I already own a Land Cruiser, so I don't need another heavy, lumbering SUV (don't get me wrong, I love my LC, but its big and bulky).

So, I'm looking for something with functionality, power, SAFETY and above all else, RELIABILITY.
Additional comments from current owners of these vehicles would be appreciated.

fedlawman · January 2002

Looks like you eliminated all of your choices. If you feel the RX300 lacks "punch" and is "Vanilla" to drive, then certainly the Highlander won't please you either...they're the same car.

Since you already have a big SUV and you appear to be looking for something smaller and sportier, perhaps you should look at the AWD wagons. The Audi Quattro and Volvo V70, to name just two, offer similar all weather capabilities and cargo room of the MDX, RX, X5 crowd, but are sportier and more fun to drive.

allhorizon · January 2002

I agree with fedlawman.

take a look at the A4, A6, Passat 4Motion, Subaru Outback/Forester, Volvo ...

If you already own a Landcruiser - one of the above may be the way to go for you? Many station wagons are safer (side and head curtain aribags, strucural integrety, crash zones, low center of gravity - not prone to roll-overs), cheaper, more fun to drive, and use less gasoline than SUVs.

- D.

rickrover · January 2002

I considered these vehicles a few months ago and ended up with the X5 3.0 - it's driving dynamics won me over - it's my 4th BMW. A very close second was the MDX, if cargo room or seating capacity would have been more of a priority we would have an MDX instead.

I read about the X5 teething problems when they first came out and have experienced similar issues in newly released vehicles before. We decided to take a chance on a late 2001 X5 with the hope that a lot of the first year kinks had been worked out. So far that has been the case, the X has performed flawlessly in 6k miles, no problems to report what-so-ever.

flytogolf · January 2002

Good to know the X5 has made it through a significant breakthrough period without any problems. I have been concerned about reliability with the X. I'd appreciate continued postings of your experiences, if you have the time and inclination.
I am leaning toward the X and the only thing holding me back is the reliability.
The only other option (for me) is the MDX. I still haven't had a chance to drive the MDX, so I'll have to wait until the "lucky" day arrives when a dealer has one available.
However, I think I'm looking for an excuse to decide on the X, and the Acura dealers are giving me a convenient one.
Anyway, as you just purchased an X, I did have a couple of questions:
1) Did you drive the 4.4? (Our dealer did not have one for testing). Does the performance difference justify the addition $8 - $10K. I only drove the 3.0 and that was a joy.
2) Did you opt for the rear side airbags?
3) Did you have some negotiating room on the sticker or is this another Acura-type experience?
4) Your opinion of the X's Nav system vs. the MDX.

Many thanks!

rickrover · January 2002

I was able to drive an MDX, it was nice, but not up to the X5 in interior design and material quality plus the driving dynamics of the X are truly amazing, same for exterior styling, the X wins hands down. The X's crash test ratings are increadable, it's built like a tank.
Answers to your questions:

I did test drive a 4.4, I guess it had more power, you wouldn't really notice the difference in day to day driving - the 3.0 is just as responsive and actually a better engine IMO (double VANOS etc) not to mention the much better gas mileage. I'm averaging just under 20 mpg in everyday driving according to the on-board computer, the vast majority is stop and go city driving.

I do not have the rear side airbag option, Mine has the luxury package, rear climate control package, Xenon's, automatic transmission, CD, on-board computer and a few other things I can't remember. Total MSRP was around $46K, I was able to get a little over $3k off after a little arm wrestling. Join the BMW club - I got an extra $1k rebate from the club.

I didn't see an MDX or X5 with the Navigation system.

flytogolf · January 2002

Many thanks for the answers - I really appreciate it. Sorry for my tardy thanks - I've been out of town most of last week. Anyway, I'm close to "pulling the trigger" on the X5. Still, I have not driven the M-class and I promised to drive all four (RX-300, MDX, X5 and M) before making my final choice. Drove the MDX (finally)over the weekend and it seemed very nice, and is now the official #1 challenger. Still, it didn't drive like the X5, but, within the class, what does?
Anyway, I found your options selection dead-on with my considerations:
Premium pkg. 3,900
Rear Climate 600
Steptronic AT 1,275
Xenon HL 500

However, I am considering one other goody (either NAV or Sport package), possibly neither, but NOT both.
I didn't think the Sport Pkg was a very good value
(IMHO). I'm only interested in the wheels and the suspension. The wheels? - I can buy these later separately. So, really my question is whether the suspension is worth the price. I don't think so, but wanted to hear your thoughts as you probably reviewed this package as well....

rickrover · January 2002

You are exactly where I was when I set my sights on the X5. I thought I wanted the Sport Package initially, when it came to sign on the dotted line I decided against it for the following reasons.

Even though I'm leasing my X5, I have a history of purchasing my formerly leased BMW's. I'll be really suprised if I don't end up purchasing the X at the end of the lease - I really like it. With that I didn't want the rear self leveling rear suspension on the sport package. I had an M5 with a self leveling rear suspension that was increadably expensive to fix when it wore out - granted it wore out at 150k miles and I didn't end up fixing it, it was a major factor in ditching it. I didn't want that added complexity on my X5.
I do want the Y spoke 19" wheels that come on the 4.4i sport package X5, I've found them on Ebay with tires for $1,300 to $1,500 - a steal. Apparently a lot of people that get the X 4.4 with sport package get after market wheels. I'm in the process of purchasing some Y spokes now. I also plan on getting the 4.6is bolt on body pieces (painted front and rear valences and rear wheel well moldings) these should be relatively cheap additions to my X. I may go so far as to replace the springs with H&R sport springs which will lower it an inch - I doubt I will do the springs, although I usually install after market springs and suspension pieces on my other cars.

I did look at the ML but didn't like it at all, it doesn't handle well (it's ugly), I don't like the interior (it's ugly), you have to get a V8 for similar X5 3.0 performance (it's ugly), and it's oogly.

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