Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

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

11617192122

Comments

  • mdxlovermdxlover Member Posts: 18
    In 2006 ML350 can I add third row seat as an option? If so could any one tell us the price for that option?

    -Thanks in advance
  • newmownernewmowner Member Posts: 86
    No third row option is available in the MB 2006 ML. I just got the new ML 350, and love it. :)
  • wmquanwmquan Member Posts: 1,817
    A third row seat is not available. For now, MB seems to want to steer you to the upcoming G-class replacement, or the R-class.
  • thock33thock33 Member Posts: 6
    I can't see how MB will be able to improve their reliability and high maintenance cost for many years, if ever. I bought a new 1998 ML-320 and kept it for six years, and 64,000 miles. The vehicle was a constant problem, and the closest dealer was 30 miles away. It left me stranded twice, and I just couldn't trust it on a trip. Even worse was the lack of desire by MB to make these vehicles right. $700 for a new fuel filter because they decided to change the design of the filter and would not sell the original equipment filter, so extensive modifications were required to fit the new filter, at the customers expense. The "straw that broke the camels back" was a $4000 bill to repair a wiring harness problem. I'm sure the new models are better, but I will never trust Mercedes to do the right thing, and I will never again buy a Mercedes product because of the many weaknesses and failures they turned their back on. Read the book "Taken for a ride".
    It was a happy day when I traded it in on a new Toyota Highlander a year ago. The Highlander has been PERFECT.
  • fun6889fun6889 Member Posts: 27
    Anyone have the answer for this question?
  • msu79gt82msu79gt82 Member Posts: 541
    Anyone have the answer for this question?

    Which question? Are you wanting us to tell you which car to buy :surprise: Surely you are researching and test driving each :confuse: What do you need? What do you want/desire? I chose the MDX because we needed seating for 7.

    All car purchases are a compromise between the buyers needs, wants, and budget.
  • m4d_cowm4d_cow Member Posts: 1,491
    were gonna need more infos from you though, what are you looking for is one of them...

    roughly id say:
    MDX : 7 seats, value for the money
    RX330 : comfort, interior materials and quality, quietness
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    We didn't shop the RX330, but did take a 2005 MDX over the GX470 after extensively considering both..

    Lexus fans seem to think it has a quality advantage over Acura. I must respectfully disagree. Several (5+) of our friends and neighbors bought GX470s over the past 2 years due to the tax write off available for 6,000+ lb SUVs. We could have capitalized on this kick back, as well. However, when pressed to be honest, most if not all of the GX owners expressed some serious dissatisfactions. Several have had a multiple mechanical problems. One negotiated a buy-back from Lexus.

    I believe the reputation of the RX330 is better than the GX470 with respect to reliability and mechanical issues. But if I were in the market for a smaller SUV, the RX330 would still be below the XC90 V8, X5 3.0, Cayenne, FX35 and a few others on my shopping list. I'm just not a fan of Lexus driving dynamics (or, rather, lack thereof), but that's another story.
  • msu79gt82msu79gt82 Member Posts: 541
    But if I were in the market for a smaller SUV, the RX330 would still be below the XC90 V8, X5 3.0, Cayenne, FX35 and a few others on my shopping list. I'm just not a fan of Lexus driving dynamics (or, rather, lack thereof), but that's another story.

    Funny you say that, I've already stated that we own an MDX as our 7-seat family car. Last fall we were in the market for a 5-seat additional car and narrowed the choices down to the RX330 and the FX35. The FX won. :shades:
  • fun6889fun6889 Member Posts: 27
    thanks for quick response and sorry for not making this clear. Well I tested drove both of them. RX330 seems little better on everything when we test drove, but MDX seems to have a better record. I went to RX330 chat room, almost everyone is bad mouthing about the RX330. And that's something I want to have you guys tell me. For the price, it's only about 2000-3000 different. MDX is bitter (seats 7) but how likly we going to use it? Not very so..
    Inside, MDX looks cheaper then RX, RX has more toys, and suppose services will be better with Lexus. And I sure like the look of RX better then MDX.
    But I am afraid that all those issues from RX will be a big issue down the road. And I have to make up my mind soon. If i am going with MDX, I will need to buy it this weekend. Of cuz if I am going with RX, then I have time to play with. Thanks in advance for all your help.
  • m4d_cowm4d_cow Member Posts: 1,491
    ive also heard of some issues with the rx, particularly electronics related, i cant confirm any of them since i never own one. MDX, as many of acura products are well known for its transmission problems , nothing fatal (but annoying for sure), just pointing out that every car has its own problems.
    other than those problems above id say both MDX and RX are the most reliable crossovers available so far.

    "Lexus fans seem to think it has a quality advantage over Acura. I must respectfully disagree."

    i think they both have the same quality, but comparing an MDX with lexus GX? GX (aka Toyota Prado) is well known as the less reliable toyota product...now replaced by the new toyota Sahara if im not mistaken...
  • mikenjmikenj Member Posts: 25
    Has anyone cross shoped RX330 to FX35, what are your + and - ?
  • msu79gt82msu79gt82 Member Posts: 541
    Inside, MDX looks cheaper then RX, RX has more toys, and suppose services will be better with Lexus. And I sure like the look of RX better then MDX.

    Thats exactly the kind of subjective opinions that make recommendations to others difficult. I do not like the interior of the RX at all; the center console and the shifter is awful fugly (to me). As far as toys goes the MDX has all I want and need (many of the RX toys the MDX does not offer will jack the price difference well above $3000). I have received nothing but exemplary service from my Acura dealership.

    We need 7 seats and to me the MDX has been the best vehicle we have ever owned and the first time we have ever traded a car in for another one.
  • msu79gt82msu79gt82 Member Posts: 541
    Has anyone cross shoped RX330 to FX35, what are your + and - ?

    I did last summer and bought an FX35 last September. I recommend that you browse the Lexus RX330 and the Infiniti FX Forums. Bottom line I deplore the RX interior (center column and shifter are butt ugly) and the FX35 loaded with Tech offererd everything I wanted (including Smart Key not available on the RX) for a lot less money.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    Even though the FX and RX have similar exterior dimensions, the FX sure seems a lot bulkier. I sat in an FX and as I was looking over that massive hood, I imagined parking the thing would be a fairly daunting task. I think the RX is more user-friendly in that regard. My one criticism of the FX is that given the amount of interior space, could they not have made it less bulky? :confuse:
  • fun6889fun6889 Member Posts: 27
    thanks for the reponse and m4d_cow thanks for your input too....
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    I commented previously that we chose the MDX over the GX470 for a variety of reasons.

    Yesterday, I took a look at the interior of a neighbors RX330 for the first time. I have to agree with msu79gt82, the entire center console, shifter and dash layout was ugly, in my completely subjective opinion. The MDX may not be as clean and sporty as a Cayenne, but the ergonomics and layout of the RX330 is closer to a GM mini-van layout, albeit with nicer materials.

    On the RX330 vs. FX35, I have to believe the driving experience is night and day. I have yet to drive a single Lexus that wasn't near the bottom of their peer group in handling, steering feel and overall driving dynamics. They have clearly prioritized "quiet" and "insulated" over "crisp" and "fun to drive". On the other hand, the FX35 is in the same handling league as the Cayenne and X5. Meaning that it handles better than Lexus' wannabe sports car, the SC430. If I only needed 5 seats and limited cargo capacity, actual driving dynamics would be a more important factor in my purchase decision than which one looks like it would be easier to parallel park.
  • m4d_cowm4d_cow Member Posts: 1,491
    rx and fx are on 2 completely different sides, rx being the comfier choice with more gadgets, higher material quality, and soft ride, fx is on the sporty side w/ great handling and performance, but lacks almost everything else.

    i like rx styling and interior better, but as one of the younger ones here id choose the fx35 (not 45, cant stand the ride on the 20" wheels)
  • msu79gt82msu79gt82 Member Posts: 541
    rx and fx are on 2 completely different sides, rx being the comfier choice with more gadgets, higher material quality, and soft ride, fx is on the sporty side w/ great handling and performance, but lacks almost everything else.

    What does the FX lack? Mine has everything: Navi w/ RearView Camera, Laser Guided Cruise Control, Preview Brake Assist, TPMS, Intelligent Key (keys never leave my pocket), etc, etc, ...

    On of the reasons I got the FX was because of all the technology gadgets not available on the RX330 :confuse: And a lot cheaper than the RX :shades:
  • m4d_cowm4d_cow Member Posts: 1,491
    ah sorry, i forgot about the tech package, my bad, but i thought lexus offers the same package...or is it toyota harrier....hmm i guess i need to update my lexus-infiniti knowledge :D

    btw, keyless unlocking is pointless imo
  • msu79gt82msu79gt82 Member Posts: 541
    btw, keyless unlocking is pointless imo

    Its not a must have, however its a nice feature to have and is useful when you have your hands full. Full hands is a fairly common occurance; briefcase, jacket, coffee mug, etc - I would think women would appreciate not having to get keys out of their purse, especially in a dark parking lot.
  • safeperfsnowsusafeperfsnowsu Member Posts: 16
    #940 of 940 X5 3.0 by safeperfsnowsu Jul 11, 2005 (11:21 pm)
    Is the MDX for me?

    I live in Boston and have a 2 hr total commute each day across town. Lots of twits and turns and zipping in to traffic at rotaries and when a spot opens up on big traffic roads. Lots of people cutting you off on the rotaries too and cutting in front of you in high traffic. So performance means safety, Great braking and immediate and strong response when accelerator is mashed. I tried a passat top of the line with 4 motion and the thing increased my commute time by 15 minutes (on a 30 min segment) in order to drive it safely. It has terrible pick up, worse than most volvos.

    Anyway, I drive the x5 (2003 3 liter auto) for the commutes but also have a 2003 Ody that I use for throwing the bikes in the back and the dog. What I would like to do is to find one car that satisfies all my needs so that I don't have to have two for no reason. I looked at all wagons and basically none had the pick up that the X5 has and the BMW wagon has very poor visibility so that is out and frankly if a huge SUV was bearing down on me I would rather be in another SUV than in a wagon. I should also mention that my 5 year old is in the car most of the time.

    While the X5 satisfies all my driving needs (though could stand to have a little more power in the mid range acceleration from 40-60MPH) it cost an arm and a leg to gas up taking only premium and it is a work out to drive, also you can't fit anything in the back and the poor old dog can barely jump that high. Also as it is my "nice" car i am always worried about it getting dinged and putting muddy boots etc in there are hiking.

    I should also mention that I am 6'4 and about 280lbs so not a small person and have had a bad back in the past so seat comfort is essential for all the bum time I put in. The Ody seats are a joke and so uncomfortable and I am worried the MDX will be similar. The BMW seats are very firm and quite comfortable but not as good as some Volvo seats I have sat in.

    AWD or excellent snow ability is crucial as I have to be able to do the commute even in the worst weather (i always put on performance snow tires late fall and run the Potenza R950s the rest of the year).

    So really my priorities are:
    Performance so that I can safely do a shorter commute and ghet out of that big SUV's way but also stop in tim when that little zippy sports car cuts me off
    Safety features in case I get rammed by a big SUV (including rear airbags which i don't think I currently have)
    Very comfortable seats that will hold up over time (want to keep the car for min 6 years, probably longer as I usually drive them in to the ground)
    Enough cargo room that I can fit a small kids bike in there and a dog, maybe even a small night table or something like that.
    Reduce my running costs.
    Hopefully something that I can get in to under $50K new or late model used if no major model change.

    As I mentioned I tried all the wagons and even the E series 4 matic just didn't cut it (all wagons failed the 1st cut which is performance). I thought about going with sedan (was thinking the VW Phateon because of AWD and massive power from the V* and very comfortable setas) and keeping the minvan for the other stuff but still don't like the idea of being "down there" when that big suv comes knocking on my drivers side window.

    Should I even try the Merc SUV? The Lexus just doesn't seem as safe as the BMW or the Acura should acrash occur. Back to the original question, will the MDX cut it or should I stick with the SUV mini combo? Any other suggestions?

    By the way drove a 300M a while back *rental and thought it was horrible, both in terms of pickup, breaking, sea comfort, and especially 360 visibility (the X5 is just barely acceptable on that score with help from extra mirrors on rear view and sides) so not sure if that Pacifica is worth suggesting.

    Very light off road (logging track something easy like that) only really need good snow performance with snow tires and twoning capacity would be a nice extra but not necessary(have to haul large Hobbie Cat twice a year).

    Thank you for any suggestions.
  • nileshnilesh Member Posts: 5
    try the new 06 ml 350 or the 500. they are very comfortable and has lot better cargo area than x5.i have one and am very satisfied with my purchase
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    "Lots of twits and turns and..."

    C'mon, you're being too harsh on Bostonians. Every town has got its share of boneheads. :P ;)
  • safeperfsnowsusafeperfsnowsu Member Posts: 16
    :-) yes I saw that. I moved here recently and love the place and find the people here to be very civilized and considerate drivers for a city this size.
  • safeperfsnowsusafeperfsnowsu Member Posts: 16
    Going to test drive the Merc and the MDX today. Hopefully one will work.
  • safeperfsnowsusafeperfsnowsu Member Posts: 16
    Test drove the MDX and pick up was very dissapointing as well quality of interior and seat comfort. Not a big step up from my minivan (in fact after having driven one don't know why anyone would pony up that kid of cash when the minivan is so similar but then again I don't care about people seeing me driving a minivan as some do). Struck out a again. Will say this though as a positive Nav system was amazing!

    Then on to the Merc dealership. WOW do they have some nice cars. Anyway after lusting over a little convertible number I see the new 2006 M series and frankly it looks like an explorer but as I could care less about the looks I go sit in one. Now this is quality, even nicer than my X5 and seat comfort was very good. Also much roomier than anticipated (I am a big guy so that was appreciated, in X5 my head is 2-3 inches from column, in Merc at least 5+ and leg, hip room and adjustability of controls much better than 2003 X5 too for a much more ergonomically satisfying driving position) and good head room too even with sunroof package (didn't like the dials for the radio control but again who cares, minor stuff). Still a little on the small side for cargo space but just enough to live with especially with the bike rack accessory that attaches to the trailer hitch. Rear airbags a huge plus and all sorts of safety features, very impressive. So now I am hoping that the test drive will not disappoint so I asked to test drive the 500 but they didn't have any so i tried the 350. Again WOW. It is quicker off the mark than my X5 and does much better than the X5 between 30-60 as well. Far less jerky, a much smoother ride and yet without sacrificing any performance and apparently getting better gas mileage too. It isn't a very exciting car in terms of driving as you don't feel as much as you do with the X5 but for 2 hours commute a day that is OK by me. Also I plan to get the suspension option so you can change from comfort to sport for when excitement is required, should also come in handy for the big snow that they get up here. I took it out for about half an hour and put it through its paces (the poor asistant salesman the head guy sent off with me was a little nervous at times) but everything exceeded my expectations and braking was excellent (apparently where the BMW breaks 20 times a second the Merc brakes 40 times a second) and this was all in the 350 mind you, not sure what the 500 will be like but if it is as big a step up in performance as they say it is then it will be worth the extra $6k, going to try it on Friday when a new one comes in.

    One question I have for those who are lucky enough to have one (kind of a no brainer once you drive it) or are in the know, does the suspension option allow you to lower the car from its standard height as well as raise it or is it all levels of raising it from is standard height? I would need to lower it one inches for it to fit under my old style garage door or take off the roof rails if that can be done (don't need them). Also does it retain its tightness (ie non frame flexing) in the long run, the BMW feel very solid , the Merc a little less so but I think it is because they use lighter materials? Lastly does this business of using virgin steal vs. recycled really make any difference and does BMW really use recycled steel?

    Anyway it will either be the 350 or 500, excellent car.
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    Far be it from me to want to change your mind, but I find some of your comments interesting. We purchased a 2005 MDX in January. Our runner up choice was a XC90 V8. But we ruled out the M350/500 almost from the beginning based upon the horrific reliability and build quality issues Mercedes has had with the M class. Both objective sources like Consumer Reports and JD Powers, as well as numerous friends and associates, steered us clear of the M-class.

    As far as performance, I found the the MDX's 3.5 liter 265 hp engine to be very adequate - quicker than the X5 3.0, on par with the ML350, and behind the XC90 V8. Handling was also adequate, although I admit the braking could be better.

    I will not dispute that the M350 is an improvement over the previous ML320. But nothing suggests to me that this vehicle will reverse the substantial decline in Mercedes quality over the past few years. A recent business week article listed the worst 10 luxury cars in terms of reliability and Mercedes captured 4 of the 10 spots.

    It would seem to me that, given your priorities of performance and seat comfort, the XC90 V8 should have been on your shopping list. It is not the highest rated vehicle with respect to reliability, but is well above the M-class.
  • ctsangctsang Member Posts: 237
    If you buy MB, good luck to you. MB is not known for its reliabitiy. Ask previous owners before you buy.
  • safeperfsnowsusafeperfsnowsu Member Posts: 16
    Thanks for the suggestion, will give it a test drive. Only reason I have hesitated to do so is that the wagons are so slow off the mark (what I really mean by performance is low end torque to get in to traffic). The MDX is better than the X5 from 30-60 you are right, but 0-30 the X5 smokes the MDX(because the MDX, and Ody's Vtech engine really gets going with the higher revs) 0-30 and the 350 smokes them both.

    If I didn't have such long urban X town commutes to do and all in heavy slow small street traffic (no highway) then the MDX would be fine, actually the Passat wagon would probably do fine but for my commute I need to safely (quickly) be able to pull in to traffic from a stand still and that means low end torque and the MDX just doesn't have it.

    I can only hope that with the new and completely redisgned 2006 M series they have addressed some of the reliability issues (I understand that the M series are the only Merc's to be built in the US, Alabama or somewhere? X5's built in SC very good build quality). If they haven't and the Volvo (they do have the best seats) doesn't work out then I will stick the M series out until BMW comes out with their new larger X5 in late 2006 hoping that i won't have to deal with too many issues in the interim.
  • wmquanwmquan Member Posts: 1,817
    The MDX is better than the X5 from 30-60 you are right, but 0-30 the X5 smokes the MDX(because the MDX, and Ody's Vtech engine really gets going with the higher revs) 0-30 and the 350 smokes them both.

    Are you sure it's just not a perception? Even a conservative publication like Consumer Reports timed the 2003 MDX's 0-30 as 3.0 seconds, and the 2005 X3 3.0 at the same 3.0 seconds. The MDX was faster 0-60 and 45-65, as expected.

    The new M-class is much improved but it's the first year, and first year models can be very dicey for any brand, especially Mercedes. If you do get it, make sure you get the Airmatic suspension as quite a few reviewers and test drivers have found the difference to be night and day.

    The XC90 V8 won't handle as sharply as the M-class or X5 but it should give you plenty of low-end torque.
  • safeperfsnowsusafeperfsnowsu Member Posts: 16
    Yes I saw that as I was doing research this evening and was surprised because in the MDX it really does not jump from a stand still like the X5 does and I could not safely enter traffic in the MDX that I could with confidence in the X5 or the M350 (here is another twist, the edmunds first drive review says the 2006 Merc is lacking low end torque so I am not sure what I am talking about when I am talking about performance from stand still now as he M350 jumped off the line even faster than the X5 does). Yes the airmatic is one of the options I would get.

    The XC90 V* looks like it will fit the bill very nicely and while it doesn't have all the gadgets that the Merc does it seems just as safe and the seats very comfortable (I have found that Volvo's seats are the most comfortable), and visibility seems better too. I just hope it is quick off the line or I will have to pass on it and pay at least $10K more for the Merc. Look forward to test driving it tomorrow. Thanks again for the suggestion.

    I agree with the 1st year worries with the new model but it may be my only option.
  • safeperfsnowsusafeperfsnowsu Member Posts: 16
    Tried the Volvo V8 and it was a nice car (certainly a nicer looker than the Merc which I still contend looks a little too similar to an explorer) but pick up was still not as good as the M350 or the X5 but slightly better than the MDX.

    Braking not as good as the Merc and surprisingly the seat ws not as comfortable either and I did not feel that the seat gave me enough depth either and also visibility was not great as the top of the windshield was at my eye level even with the seat all the way down (great visibility if my eyes were 6 inches lower). The interior was very nicely laid out but didn't feel as luxurious as the Merc.

    The worst part though was that it bounced around all over the place at the slightest yaw, when breaking and cornering (the Merc standard has quite small bounce but with the airmatic system virtually eliminated, X5 is very good in this regard) and felt like almost as bad as the older Landrover Discovery's were. I bet it is a very good off road car though but my needs are on road.

    So I will be getting the Merc (unless there are other suggestions that people have that I should try) and will keep my fingers crossed that relaibility holds up. If it doesn't the new roomier X5 comes out fall of 06 and I will trade in the Merc and get one of those. I am taking the M500 out tomorrow and will post my impressions vs. the 350.

    Thanks for the suggestions.
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    Sounds like you have convinced yourself that the Mercedes is your vehicle of choice.

    Obviously, a lot of the attributes you are looking at are subjective, since I found the ML350 to be below both the X5 and XC90 V8 in terms of handling. We test drove both the X5 3.0 6-speed and Cayenne V6 6-speed because of our preference for manual transmissions. (The MDX is the first automatic that either my wife or I have owned in 28 and 30 years of drivien respectively). Unfortunately, as much as we liked the X5, it was just too small. And I found that the X5 3.0 needed a manual transmission to keep up with the MDX, so go figure your different impression of "off the line" speed. I admit I am used to and comfortable with the V-tech engine characteristics, having owned a Honda S2000 and Acura TL 6-speed.

    The only other vehicles that I would suggest, with some reservation, are (1) GX470 w/ sport (KDSS) package. The 2005 is improved over the previous model, with a 270 hp (vs. 235) V8 and the sport package helps take some of the body roll out of the suspension. I doubt you would find it better than the ML in driving dynamics, but Lexus is far superior in reliability, build quality and resale value.

    The other suggestion is off topic. Since you seem to want to use an SUV as a sporty commuter car, have you considered a new BMW 550i 6-speed sedan through European Delivery?? This is about the safest sedan you can buy and it will nearly match the old M5 in performance. The price you could get through discounted ED might not be that much more than the ML350. Obviously, you won't have the cargo capacity of a larger SUV, but the 550i damn near matches the X5 in "utility" and even the renowned Cayenne TT won't come close to it in "sport".

    Sorry to get off topic, guess my recent shopping for a Boxster S has clouded my thinking.

    P.S. I feel compelled to mention that, having bought two vehicles in the last year from a Mercedes/Acura dealer, the sales manager privately discouraged us from considering the ML 350 over the MDX purely because of reliability issues. Similarly, the Porsche sales manager who is a friend privately discouraged us from considering the Cayenne for similar reasons. I am now about to award him for his honesty by buying either a Boxster S or 911 Cabriolet. If you decide to roll the dice with the ML350, I stongly suggest you get an extended warranty and make sure they will take care of you in the event of problems (i.e. drive a loaner to you, etc.). Simply covering the cost of repairs under warranty doesn't make up for the extreme pain in the butt caused by a vehicle that has repeated problems. We know at least two friends whose ML is the last Mercedes they will ever buy. Ever.
  • ctsangctsang Member Posts: 237
    I, my wife, and my father-in-law used to own MBs, we will never buy MB again. Same with my physician friends. Again good luck to you.
  • safeperfsnowsusafeperfsnowsu Member Posts: 16
    I have been reading about the M series and apparently even people with the 2006 are already complaining about reliability issues and the car has only been out 3 months! It is giving me pause as one of the things I read was tranny related.

    I would much much prefer to drive a sedan than an SUV and the 550i is a great suggestion (my father traded his 7 series for one of these) and one of the three that would consider( the other two being the VW Phaeton and the Merc E AMG) but don't want to have two cars (or at least not two if one of them isn't a sports car, DB7 is on my shopping list once my child is a bit older) and need one that I can take the dog and the bikes around in and that will reliably have no problem with a Boston snow storm.

    You have a lot of experience with cars and it surprises me that you feel that the MDX could pull in to traffic as quickly as the X5 auto (remember I am not talking about a highway on ramp but from a stop sign on a side street in to a rotary or from a side street in to 2 lane fast road with practically bumper to bumper with the odd break here and there, also I don't know if this makes a difference but I have the 2003 X5 haven't tried the new ones) . I haven't had the range of vehicles you have but I have been driving for 20 years mostly in European cities (London, Rome, Barcelona) and I just couldn't pull in to traffic with the MDX where I could with the X5 or the 350.

    Didn't look at the cayenne because I surmised that it would be even stiffer than the X5 and not great for a commute, also had read the seats were not that comfortable and the MPG was not good.

    Anyway I do appreciate your suggestions, and your warnings about the M series have sunk in (I was so taken by the 350 because it was the 1st car after test driving so many that impressed me with both its pick up and its comfort and safety and frankly just didn't want to have to do anymore "shopping"). I have decided to hold off for a few more months to give the new M's some time to get some more reviews from owners. Also, I have some extensive hiking and backpacking planned for the summer and frankly don't want to do it in my new car as it will get messy. The more I think about it it might just be worth keeping the minvan for that kid/bikes/hiking type stuff until I am ready to get the DB7 (the 1998 is my favorite year, a truly beautiful car).

    I have a suggestion for you too: go for the 911 unless your wife will be driving it a lot, and congratulations, very nice car.
  • safeperfsnowsusafeperfsnowsu Member Posts: 16
    Thanks CT warnings have sunk in. My wife is an ER Doc which is why the ability to deal with the snow is so important.
  • wmquanwmquan Member Posts: 1,817
    Obviously, a lot of the attributes you are looking at are subjective, since I found the ML350 to be below both the X5 and XC90 V8 in terms of handling.

    Just out of curiousity, is that the old ML350, or the new 2006 one? Just curious in how you ranked it if it's the new one.
  • wmquanwmquan Member Posts: 1,817
    One plus for the ML (and the X5) is that it should handle Boston snow storms slightly better than the MDX and XC90. I think the latter two will be adequate, but the ML and X5 will inspire some more confidence. Since you seem to be looking for maximum levels, I thought it worth mentioning.

    An odder possibility that you may or may not have already mentioned is the Infiniti FX45. It should have a decent amount of power and good handling, at the expense of some ride comfort and of course passenger and cargo room. Reliability should be impeccable, safety won't be as strong as an MB or Volvo, though.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    Assuming you can get past the styling (of the FX).
  • wmquanwmquan Member Posts: 1,817
    Besides looking at the FX, perhaps the RX400h merits a look? I haven't driven one, but supposedly it launches very strongly from a standing stop. This due to the hybrid powertrain's electric motors which provide immediate, full torque
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    "...it surprises me that you feel that the MDX could pull in to traffic as quickly as the X5 auto".

    You may be right after all. I was driving our MDX yesterday and paid particular attention as to how it performed from a dead stop and the acceleration does lag a bit below 2,000 rpm. After about 15-20 mph, it takes off nicely. But I'll take your word that for your driving requirements, the BMW may feel more confident from a dead stop.

    I have a suggestion for you too: go for the 911 unless your wife will be driving it a lot,

    Didn't quite understand how my wife's driving figures into it?
  • safeperfsnowsusafeperfsnowsu Member Posts: 16
    It is just my opinion but the 911 has a much more manly look about it. Then again if you like the look of the Boxster who cares, after all I drive a minivan too!

    Also, compare the Boxster S and the 911 Turbo S Cab, no comparison!

    Either one you get congratulations, very nice cars.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    safeperfsnowsu, don't get into any discussion involving habitat's wife's driving skills/style. Don't even hint that her skills may be less than his. Don't even joke about it. That, apparently, is a taboo subject!
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    Pay no attention to bodble2, joke away all you want!!

    Not to stray too far off topic, but the 2005 Boxster S and 911 (997 model) share the same chassis and a lot of other components, so I don't see that big of a "manly" appearance difference between the two. And I'll blame my daughters for buying it in Speed Yellow, if anyone challenges my male ego. Regarding the 911 Turbo S Cab, it's still the old 996 body and interior. I'll take the new 997 Cabriolet S and nearly match the performance, with a much nicer interior, while saving about $45k.

    Back on topic and the SUV front, perhaps you should try the Cayenne TT? One dealer I visited has a 2005 demo w/ 3000 miles for $79k. I am not sure it would be any more reliable than the Mercedes M class, but you certainly won't be lacking for "dead stop oomph".
  • safeperfsnowsusafeperfsnowsu Member Posts: 16
    I have a 5 year old daughter who wants us to paint the minvan pink (NEVER going to happen) so I empathize completely!

    Cayenne seats are not that comfortable and the ride is too stiff for a daily commute, also cargo space is sorely lacking + the terrible MPG.

    The more I think about it I may not be able to achieve what I want with one auto:combination of minvan type cargo space, good performance commuter, and winter reliability. The merc was great but frankly even its cargo space leaves a bit to be desired and I would have to go with the external bike rack that mounts to the trailer hitch for the bikes rather than just being able to throw them in the back like I do with the minivan. Also the Merc with all the options I would like doesn't offer much value and that's without even considering the potential reliability problems and the high cost a Merc would extract for regular upkeep.

    So now I am thinking that perhaps I will be better off getting a late model used MDX to replace the minvan (for hiking/biking etc) and also to do commuter duty in the winter months when there is snow on the ground (when initial pick up is not really the issue that it is when roads are snow free most of the year) and just get a safe high performance sedan or wagon with decent gas mileage as the daily commuter, no need for AWD as I will have the MDX for those few weeks or month a year when it is needed. Question is, are there any sedans or wagons out there that are as safe as the MDX, X5, or M series Merc particularly when sustaining a side impact by an SUV?
  • m4d_cowm4d_cow Member Posts: 1,491
    i doubt it, though id suggest either an audi or a volvo. never drove a volvo, but audi is a nice and decently safe car. i used to drive an a4, it took a direct hit from a tacoma like a tank, though i doubt you can call a tacoma a truck...

    btw seems like we both think that cay's ride is harsher than the x5, some people dont agree though...

    im now considering an x5 or a range rover, still trying to make up my mind :)
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    It sounds like you have had a premonition of getting T-boned by an SUV?? Hopefully this isn't post tramatic stress from a prior incident.

    I think a BMW 5-series is going to be about as safe as any sedan out there. And it should be of some comfort that a 2005 model would be significantly safer than anything 5-10 years old, both in its ability to sustain and impact and its ability to avoid one (thanks to stability control, anti lock brakes, etc.).

    P.S. If I continue to read about your concerns regarding the safety of a full size sedan vs. an SUV, I'm never going to pull the trigger on a Boxster or 911!!
  • m4d_cowm4d_cow Member Posts: 1,491
    safety is more about the driver than the cars imo. but i can understand his concerns. 2 of the cars ive owned before got hit by a truck. first one was my audi a4, got hit by a tacoma, luckily the kids parents offered to pay for all repairs. i wasnt very lucky with my 330i though, it was totaled by a chevy s10, and the driver was both dui and uninsured...
  • safeperfsnowsusafeperfsnowsu Member Posts: 16
    No premonition or past experience thank goodness but it is the rotaries here in Boston, I ma used to them from driving in Europe but not used to seeing some behemoth coming at me like my driver door has a bullseye on it several times a week. If you don't have rotaries where you are you don't have that much to worry about.

    The 5 series and MDX would make a nice combo but I don't like the visibility of the 5 series (I am 6'4") and also not sure if the ride is any smoother than the X5. Merc is out because it couldn't manage a 5 start crash test rating across the board, doesn't offer much value, and ofcourse reliability and maintenance. I am going to look at the GS430 as it seems to offer pretty good value and safety, also apparently has decent power.

    Habitat you are right of course and frankly the commute is too long so we will be moving closer in the next year so that I won't have to apply F1 skills to get in to traffic every day :-)
Sign In or Register to comment.