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
For the ML safety and comparisons here is a lot of information.
http://www.whnet.com/4x4/crashes.html
The only other SUV I will consider is the Touareg with the V10 diesel because I do go to the beach a lot and I usually tow something, either 2 three seater jetskies or a 24ft offshore boat which is over 5000lbs or like next weekend we will go to Road Atlanta for the Petit Le Mans race in which case I will pull a big heavy camping trailer, for my needs I want a serious towing vehicle that handles and rides good for the long haul with a few thousand lbs. behind.
Infiniti FX35/45 vs VW Touareg vs Porsche Cayenne vs BMW X5 vs Cadillac SRX
you folks may be interested in this one
Steve, Host
I agree that comparisons should be between similar vehicles. Then again, if the same driver woud "consider" each of the vehicles,then they should be compared. I think there are folks out there who would consider all of the vehicles in this message board (as well as the Pacifica, the XC90, and others).
Outback -VS- an ML or X5.
To be a real crossover, it needs to ride higher Like the Lexus RX 330
Its sooo low. I was like, Yikes!
Me thinks the Cayenne is more set up for the upscale "soccer dad" who runs up to the ski area on the weekend. (like my Denali)
The third row is just a cushion on the floor with a backrest that is electrically raised. The floor for your feet is virtually the same as one's rear when seated.
Luggage area behind the seats seems smaller than MDX. The load floor is not flat with all of the seats folded.
Expensive too. Can't get navigation without all wheel drive. Not impressed enough to take a test drive. The RX330 seemed a lot nicer inside and feels like it has as much room for five and more room for luggage.
Its strength is in its all-around competance, which brought it a win in a very tough Car and Driver comparo.
The SRX doesn't meet my cargo and people carrying needs. It doesn't matter how well it drives. In addition, the price is well above an MDX.
I'm sure Caddy will sell a lot of them. I like the outside look and the finish inside looks fine too, though I like the more open feel of the MDX better. If I was longer in the leg the wide frame rail to step over wouldn't be a problem either, but it is for me, while it isn't in the MDX or most others.
Besides, Caddy already has the Slade (bigger) and ESV (biggest) for those who need to carry more people and stuff.
In my case I can choose from just about any SUV or car-based SUV as my 17 1/2 foot boat weighs less than 2,000 lbs. My FX45 (and my Audi allroad before it) handles it just fine.
Right now I tow mostly a two three seater Jetskies along with other gear in the trailer, about 3500lbs or a 24 offshore fishing boat, high bow on tandem axles, over 5000lbs.
I have used my GMC pickup to tow the boat but the ML is stronger on the highway and better on the other end, by that I mean it has a low range and AWD, that makes it a lot easier on difficult boat landing that are too steep or have a sudden drop or a combination or sandy areas, locked on first gear in LOW at 5000RPM the truck will not reach 10MPH, is a very strong and controlled pull, I don’t have to burn clutches, spin tires, rock it, have help and delay the ramp like some others while they try to pull their heavy boats out.
And definitely I don’t want a big SUV like a Suburban or a dully pickup, in other words the strongest on the smallest package with a very precise handling, in that respect my ML has served me well, in five years I had no problems whatsoever, it will be very hard for me to justify getting rid of my ML.
However I agree with you about the Touareg, but the V10 Diesel only, and that is the only other SUV I would consider, but going to a gasser Touareg I don’t see how I will be upgrading much from my particular vehicle.
Regards
Also, we purchased the SRX at "Dealer Invoice" and it was exactly the same as the Edmunds site. I cannot give out dealers name, as he is a friend and would not do this for someone else. {at least that's what he said.
The white diamond is a 900.00 "extra as is the 1800.00 AWD, which we also got for the dealer invoice. I forget what the amounts were.
I pulled up next to a Pacifica yesterday and asked the folks to roll down their windows. Talked to them about the car. They hate it. Drives like a boat and you can't see anything.
I didn't ask what they had driven before. It may be a great car if you are used to driving a minvan, but not a great car if you are used to a coupe.
At these prices, I'd make darn sure I liked it.
"it has lots of nice featrues, though" they said
but the wife was even leaning over the husband/driver to yell to me how much they hated it
pretty funny
I should have offered to buy it for 20K
From checking safety web-sites, MDX seems to have a pretty good ratings (4-star) on rollover and other crash tests. Also, for 04 model it has side curtain airbags for all 3 rows.
However, its quality/reliability are questionable (from reading problem forum and JD Powers rating).
What is your research/experience comparing to other SUVs, esp. Toyota's SUVs (e.g. Highlander)?
Thanks for sharing
Initial build quality has been very, very good, as well as uniform through all the years. There have been those who complain that Acura is not as "luxury oriented" as Lexus , but that is not a "build quality" issue so much as a 'customer treatment' issue.
I am not aware of any data that suggest otherwise.
Through the years I have found little correlation between initial build quality and long term reliability or durability.
My PT Cruiser's initial build quality was far superior to the initial build quality of my MDX. If I start counting at day one, my Cruiser had two problems and the MDX 15. Both are equally reliable and neither shows any durability problems.
overtime
What I was told by the sales manager at the local Caddy dealer was that Cadillac initially messed up the model mix, giving dealers loaded V8's - a tough sell against the ever-popular Escalade - whether the dealers wanted them or not. The V6 ones move out fast. I aasume they're rectifying this.... this dealer told me the vast majority of his stock will be V6's.
Nice thing is, though... since the V8's tend to languish on the lots, if you do a 24hr test drive, that's probably what they'll give you. It is a fantastic vehicle to drive.
With in the circle of my family and in-laws, we have MDX, Lancruiser, Land Rover, Lexus LX450, ML320, ML430, ML500. The third row seats and bang for the buck is Lancruiser off road and on road. The 1998 ML320 had some rattle noise multiple times, even after had been fixed by MB dealers few occasions. The new ML500 for 16 months, no rattle but braking problems. After 2 yrs owning Land Rover Discovery of having temperature problem, My sister trade it with the 2003 MDX. Closer to 2 yrs now she has not spent any extra money on the MDX.
Nevertheless, all vehicle are great depend upon the test of the buyer. For reliability with less maintain go with Acura or Lexus. Willing to pay for just the name plate go with MB. You need to compare apple to apple, this case SUV with 3rd row seat. Welcome to any input. thank
Checked out the X5 which was in the 50's and very small inside for what was IMO a large vehicle. Did like the option of a manual tranny, she's the primary driver and prefers Automatics.
The ML was is nice, but from what I've been told, an oil change requires removal of the transfer case and partial pull of the motor??? They have something like 20k mile oil change intervals so maybe it balances out the cost. The interior was kinda cheap, for the money, I think our CK coupe had a nicer, classier feel.
The Volvo XC was the runner up, I liked it ALOT, and have been eying it since Auto show season, but power was adequate, and the maintainance scared us off.
The FX is awesome, but really hard to see what's behind you, and while I absolutely love the whole cheetah look, she thought it was hideous.
She liked the RX, and it was very smooth, comfy, quiet, and pretty quick, but narrow and claustrophobic IMO. Would have stepped up to the GX, but once again mid 50's pricetag.
Didn't compare Cayenne, Toureg, or Aviator. In the end, we love our "X" getting alot of use from it, and the Acura service dept. is excellent.
I only had like 3 minutes in each car so that's all I could say for them now.
BTW - It seems like there is precious little difference in the mileage of SUV's until you get to the "light" crossovers.
How can you compare a Suburban to a MDX, X5, ML, or RX in terms of towing? First take a look at the size of your suburban's engine vs. those in the MDX, X5, ML, or RX. Second, take a look at the size variance between the Suburban and the others. Third, take a look at how they are constructed. The Suburban comes from Pick-Up genetics while the others come from Sedan genetics except for the Benz ML.
You have to realize the above crossover SUVs were not designed by their manufacturer's to tow heavy objects, they were designed to be used the way the majority of SUVs are used, which is basically to make HOme Depot trips, pick up kids from soccer practice, to hold lots of shopping bags and to make it through snow.
If over 5,000lbs. towing capacity is a necessity you have to look at SUVs with bigger displacement engines(Big V8s) and body on frame architecture. There is ultimately no way a 6-cylinder engine is going to pull more than a few thousand pounds.
Or the Lincoln Aviator. Lincoln performed very well (top 5) in the long-term Power survey.... I've driven the Av a couple of times and came away quite impressed.
It was interesting to look at the towing numbers for the X5 and the ML. I agree the X5 doesn't have truck genetics, but BMW shows a 6000 lb capacity. Not sure on the GVWR. The ML with it's body on frame is 5000 lbs and the Sub (from memory) is 6800 lbs. The RX has no chance, but it's pretty small - however the GX and LX are body on frame - RWD, and V-8's -- not sure on their tow numbers.
I was hoping for a pleasant driving experience, a long lived vehicle, towing capability and a decent amount of space -- doesn't need to be cavernous -- just decent. The MDX is the right size, just can't tow for beans with the FWD, unibody, etc. etc. It's more a highly capable minivan with AWD -- IMHO. The GX and LX seemed a bit overpriced and a somewhat unremarkable driving experience.
I was scared off the ML with all their low grade parts and teething pains, and the X5 seemed quite small inside.
I was tempted by a Denali, but I don't want to trade car payments into parts payments as we get close to 100K. Besides - the truck genetics pretty much guarantees an unimpressive driving experience...
If you have a big towing need you might want to consider a 4 door diesel powered pickup or the VW Touareg (sp) diesel.
And that is the problem with comparisons like this; the MDX had 3 rows and seats 7, the RX330 and X5 are 2-row 5 seaters. Each vehicle has its own advantages and weaknesses. Any car purchase decision eventually comes down to a compromise between ones needs/wants/desires and their budget.