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
Also outdoes the X5 too. Very impressive. Too bad the FX45 lacks some of the practicalities of the GX470 and MDX. Though it's somewhat better than the X5 in that department.
Or rear torque biased in AWD form.
Shame its appearance is so....
An RX330 with the FX AWD system, that's what I want.
The ML at MSRP has to be one of the most uncompetively priced SUVs currently available, BUT there ARE incentives and the Edmunds TMV for a "typically equipped" ML350 suggest a savings og $1600+ off MSRP is common. Not so the MDX, that Edmunds STILL shows is fetching a paltry $92 off MSRP even after nearly 4 long years of availability...
Keep shopping!
The original poster who stated that the MDX was built on the same frame as the Odyssey was being factual. They use Honda's global Accord platform which is somewhat ingeous in it's own right as the wheels hook to the inner subframe where most designs connect the wheels to the mainframe. It's this technology that keeps the cost down as the platform is the most expensive part of a new car. Had they developed a new platform it's likely the MDX would be priced much higher.
I will explain myself and perhaps on my own experience you can find some answers.
I bought my ML first as a utilitarian vehicle and not as an SUV look, height or the like, to use as a tow vehicle for my jet skies and boat (25 ft heavy offshore fishing boat). I used to pull with my GMC pickup but it did not have AWD and low range which was problematic on steep landings and sand. I did not want a big vehicle to be a pain when backing up on tight parking spots so a midsize was fine, after some research I settled on the ML because having met the size requirement I found it to be the strongest of the class, built on a heavy ladder frame the drive and suspension components match the frame, the vehicle was built for offroad use also, testament to the effect is that the ML has won the Dakar race three times in the unmodified class, in other words as is from the showroom, no modifications allowed plus many other grueling rallies. The mercedes engineers did a terrific job in smoothing the harder suspension by reducing the unsprung weight and going independent on all 4’s which was a novelty in 95-96 when unveiled, coupled to a rack and pinion steering which gives the vehicle a precise steering, the front has a very low caster angle which makes self centering a little slow but places less strain on the components when in off the road situations as it should be.
Since I am not a gadget oriented type of person I find all the appointments more than enough, I don’t have to hand roll the windows or crank the seats and the Bose is fine for me and a map is all I ever got use too, but that’s just me, rugged substance under the skin was more important for me coupled to a first class ride.
My ML430 is 5 years old now, never had any problems with it, I just came from a 500 mile trip pulling two jetskies (3500lbs) at 75mph average and being doing that for 5 summers, a few weeks ago I pulled an tractor and trailer (8000lbs) for several miles in the woods and hills on dirt roads, nothing to it using the low range. If I listened to all the experts and reports who never owned one I would have deprived myself of a fine vehicle, I got to the point that I look with contempt the competition.
If you want a soft ride, car based SUV to use only as a car or you have concerns because of “HORROR” stories then for peace of mind is better to get an MDX or any of the other SUV’s in that class.
The money may not be in the nice little appointments on the dash but to me a hefty build like this is real value, I took this picture myself at the plant in Alabama a few years ago.
http://www.funtigo.com/mltransmission
Wow! I wouldn't have expected you to say something like that about the GX470 at all!! You amaze me.
Truely, in my opinion, the best car designs are the ones that is own and driven by a 50/50 mix of male and females, a design that appeals to the general population.
I find this topic very interesting, the RX is the most female dominate driven car I can remember. Even more so than the beetle and the mini cooper.
I see alot of RX300's and now have been seeing alot of RX330's running around. I see mostly women driving them, but see plenty of men driving them also. I would say the split is probably about 70% female drivers to 30% male in my neck of the woods.
I have not seen much RX330 on the road here in the northeast for some reason. I think I have seen 2 so far. One was driven by a man and the other a woman.
Do you think it is the cuteness factor that attracts females to the RX or the 3- series?
wwest: The Porsche 911 cost $70000 to $180000. I would say that most of the people who are willing to pay that much for a car are men. Therefore Porsche like many other high end auto companies, design their cars for men. I think that females are more practical when it comes to cars and just us men are stupid enough to pay $100000 for a car.
Like I said looks is down near the bottom of my list when evaluating a car. First is finding the right size and features, then safety, then reliability and projected longevity, looks is down there but you would still never catch me buying an Aztek. And at the time the only car with the size, features, safety and expected reliability was the ML. (I'm sure glad I chose the RX. The first MLs had too many problems.)
Given these criteria I am TOTALLY satisfied with the RX and I've even grown to like the looks a little bit.
By the way my wife has only driven the car a couple of times in the 5 years we have had the car. She drives an AWD Aerostar. I suspect that doesn't fit the pattern either but she is an artist and needs the room.
Now this car is rock solid, and a good driver, but Mr. Honda would roll over in his grave if an Accord was blowing oil out the crank seal at 70,000 miles. The car has not been abused, looks brand new (garage kept), and was service by a Mercedes dealer for the first 36,000 miles.
What does this have to do with the ML 350?
I was considering an ML to replace our Lincoln Navigator due to it's age and excessive fuel consumption, but with 60,000 miles the Navigator has needed NOTHING but fuel,oil, and tires.
I hate to judge a mark by one experience, but an Acura MDX is looking better than a ML350 right now. We have 3 children, so don't even suggest the RX 330, BMW X5, or any other 5 passenger SUV. I really want to stay with Daimler as the Acura has NO soul, and the Mercedes service/treatment is great (but you do pay for it when out of warranty). Any long time MB owners want to comment?
Thanks
I agree with avery1's comment about not even considering whether more men or women drive a particular vehicle. Of the four MDXs in my family only one, mine, is driven regularly by a man. I drive the MDX because my wife finds our PT GT a lot more fun (so do I), easier to get in and out (so do I), more versatile (so do I in some situations), and has a hidden luggage space (instead of all the shopping items being visible when parked).
I don't care that nearly every driver of other MDXs I see during the week are women. My MDX gets the job done for me.
My wife really wanted a BMW X5 but after test driving the car with both engines we just didn't really like it. The decision then was down to the ML500 and the MDX, we chose the MDX and it has been a great vehicle. The typical Honda/Acura quality is present and it is relatively fun to drive as it has a great engine and it handles well. The bonus is the third row seat as it is handy as well as the fact that the MDX is wider inside than most other vehicles in this class.
Good luck with your decision, If you choose an MDX I'm sure that you'll like it.
Well, the cutest factor is definately one of the reasons women flock to cars like the 3-series, RX300 as well as other cars like the Integra, Celica, Golf's, Jetta's.
But back to the RX300, the reason it is soo popular among women is because it was the first entry luxury cross-over designed with women in mind. The unibody construction and Camry platform gave it a low step in height(it doesn't need running boards at all), it's easy to see out of, with it's big windshield and sloping hood, it has a interior designed for women(big center consoles & a place for a purse between the front seats), and from the start it had bulletproof lexus quality/reliability. The RX300's only real other competitor at the time, the ML320 kinda flopped on all of the above counts and definately screwed up on the quality.
NO Soul in the MDX? What gives a Mercedes a soul....the 3-pointed star?
but don't you ever read a post loike his and wonder if the poster is actually that person, of if he/she works in marketing at Acura?
I know that would violate the rules for posting on this site, but....
Perhaps the new ML320 can compete with the RX in the female buyer market. It would have to be more reliable that its predecessor and oh yea, and it would have to have a big center consoles and a place for a purse.
Not everyone who has kind words to say about Honda (or Volvo) is a dealer or marketing maven :-)
Steve, Host
Keep up the good work as the board host, this is an interesting place to visit mainly due to the quality of the board members/posters.
I was just casting doubt on the whole message board posting phenomenon.
Believe it or not there are a lot of auto executives and even dealers that drive other mfrs vehicles. They do this to compare their vehicles; better features, worse features, understand why so many people bought the other guys vehicles.
I like the direction Cadillac has taken and they've been doing pretty good at execution the last few years... and they've started making some products those of us not yet retired are interested in. Neither the RX300 or BMW X5 hit my needs or soft spot(as well as a number of others) and I ended up in Denali.
Hope the SRX is better than current offerings.
I'm sure GM would be very pleased to hear that. The new performance oriented Cadillacs are not being marketed to retirees.
The others here have their own deficiencies.... quality problems afflicting the M-Class and BMW (with it's Focus-like recall totals), the BMW's lack of utility, the RX and MDX's use of cheap appliance vehicles as their basis.
I still think the high end Cadillacs are aim at middle age people and retirees, but the low end Cadillacs are a big question mark. They are definitely not aim at the retirees, younger people cannot afford them because Cadillac didnt lower the price enough. The middle age group finds the low end Cadillac cheaply made. Not in the true tradition of a Cadillac. I guess that is why Cadillac had problem selling the low end model since the 70s. The horsepower may have gone up, but unfortunately, not much else has change.
The true tradition of Cadillac is going bye-bye. The new tradition is high performance and bold styling.... XLR and SRX are getting rave reviews and they're not luxoboat iso-chambers for geriatrics.
As for selling the low end.... seems to no longer be a problem. CTS is the 2nd best selling sports sedan in the near lux class, it's passed the Mercedes C-Class and trails only the 3-Series, on pace to sell 60K units this year.
I didn't fit in back (lack of head room), too many hard surfaces where one expects soft, off center seating in front, small trunk, and more. Tried an STS and it felt like an old car Also found the front seats hurt my back. Like the DTS, but it is too big to fit in my garage. The dolled up SUV had an unusable third row and it was hard to get in and out, though it did accelerate quite well.
I have noticed the CTS is selling well enough that some dealers are now selling them with inflated priced aftermarket parts already installed.
The '04 CTS with the larger engine and some interior refinements should sell well.
As a comparison, Toyota Camry sold 450000 units in 2002 and the Honda Accord sold 400000 units. Looks like the CTS have a long way to go.
Personally I feel it somewhere near a non-quatro Audi or the older MB C class, but still different. It is not quite as nicely finished, and lacks that last little bit of Autobahn solidness, but things are moving in the right direction...
If the SRX reviews match the production version things could get very interesting.
GM has projected 30K sales for the SRX, probably because the initial offering is all high end V-8 AWD units. But once the lower priced V-6 models come out, I expect that forecast to get blown away.
If you want brute force (but not great speed - the SRX will blow its doors off) full size or need to tow, then pick the Escalade.
Cadillac always project high numbers for their new cars for the sake of the share holders. The CTS did not live up to its promise, the same will happen with the SRX, personally, I think they set their goals too high. I would prefer a Escalade over the SRX. The Escalade is well build and uses high quality components. The SRX promise speed, but the body design is tall and narrow without roll over controls, not a very good combination for speed.
The ES is a Camry with a nice interior, in no way resembling a sports sedan. Comparison would be with a base DeVille, except with a weak V-6 instead of the powerful Northstar. Basically trading some better interior bits (Lexus) for a far superior powertrain (Caddy). I'll take the power.
GM projected 30K sales for the CTS.... it has blown that away by double, so all expectations have been met and then some. 30K sales forecast for the SRX is a conservative number that will likely be exceeded.
Also, you are speculating the the CL will be more reliable. Not provable, as the CTS is too new to have any statistical evidence, but Cadillac has been right up there in Powers' long term reliability surveys for quite some time. The difference between Cadillac and the Japanese makes has been a few hundredths of a defect... an inconsequential amount.
The CTS owners group here at Edmund's have had very few issues and are very pleased with them.