Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Acura MDX (pre-2007)
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I have the navi update. There was a problem with the initial batch delivered and a patch was sent that supposedly fixed problems I had not noticed.
The point of interest database is much larger and the street database is more up to date, but still appears to be information that was not current at the time of release. It appears the information is from mid to end of 2002.
I'm also in SoCal and there is enough added POIs and additional roads to make it worth the cost of the update for us.
There appears to be a change in logic on how routes are selected compared to the OE DVD. Most of the time it is better. The system is slower, much slower at times, but once under way it keeps up just like the OE DVD. The larger database takes longer to access, so some patience is needed when looking for POIs or entering streets.
There are some negatives with the update. First, the bong that sounds just before the voice says what to do is louder. Too loud to us when the navi is used around town. For some reason the update shows every school on the screen (on the lower miles settings, like 1/8 and such) as red flag like icons. Bad enough they can't be removed, but some are not in the correct locations either. I find the route (blue line) doesn't necessarily fall on the roads. Not a big deal, just not accurate. It has happened three times that the voice directions did not match what the screen directions showed, but not since the repair patch was installed.
Once you install the update you cannot go back to the original DVD. Supposedly there is a way for the dealer to do, but my dealer does not have a way.
At first we were very unhappy with the update, but now find the expanded database worth the expense and degraded performance.
I checked with my Honda dealership that services my S2000 and they indicated that they could perform routine service, but that Honda dealers are NOT authorized to perform warranty work on an Acura. I'm in the DC area where there are an abundance of both dealers; maybe Honda makes an exception where there are not Acura dealers nearby.
I agree with fndlyfmrflyr though, I don't think "Acura" necessarily means higher quality service than "Honda". In fact, in the DC area, I had several bad experiences with 2-3 Acura dealerships on my former Integra, whereas my S2000 experience has been exceptional.
While I don't have a 2004 MDX, I would still go for the MDX with the curtain air bags over a 1 star increase in frontal protection in the Pilot. Chances are you'll still be okay, but who's to say I'll be okay after a Navigator hits me in my 2003 as my head bashes into the Navigator/side glass?
It might not hurt to wait till 2005, because rumor has it, the Pilot is planned to get a sunroof and side curtain air bags. If not then, by 2006, all Hondas are supposed to have things like side air bags, curtain air bags, vehicle skid control, etc. standard across the board on all models in the Honda/Acura lineup.
In the IIHS offset frontal crash test, the MDX actually is very slightly ahead of the Pilot in Structure/Safety Cage, so go figure.
I wouldn't buy another vehicle without head protection airbags. Very few vehicles in this price range lack them now. Neither the Pilot or MDX have been subjected to a more rigorous side impact test (than what the NHTSA provides, and what IIHS ia attempting).
While the MDX does have VSA, it's curious that Consumer Reports gives the Pilot the edge in emergtency handling.
Not related to safety, but another potential reason to buy the MDX over the Pilot is that the latter still has the potentially suspect transmission that the 2001-2002's MDX's have. The MDX received a redesigned transmission in 2003, though only time will tell if it eliminates the issues of the older one (and the one that is still in the Pilot).
Thanks
I think if you tow frequently and with heavy loads, a conventional ladder-frame SUV may suit your purposes better than an MDX. The MDX tows okay but I don't think of it as a heavy-duty tow vehicle.
How easy to attach or remove mask? How effective mask? Can I use mask just for long trip?
inemer, I have the full nose mask, but it's a real pain to install. I leave it off for normal driving, putting it on for long trips only. it's still worth it though if for nothing else to keep the rock chips down.
A good place for pricing is honda/acura world.
Front bumper seems to catch a lot of bugs, but windshield doesn't. ALL of my bumper chips and headlight chips have happened during local driving, not on trips.
The cargo liner has another advantage over the cargo tray: The third row can be used without removing the liner from the car. I don't attach the parts of the liner that protect the second row seat back or the sides. I like that I can pull it over the rear bumper and protect the paint on the bumper when loading too.
Does anyone know?
I would like to know if somebody have ever tried or somebody have this system in there MDX?
Thanks
I just picked up my 2004 base MDX. I'd like to install a RES, either flip down screen or headrest screens. I'd appreciate any recommendations. Thanks in advance.
I did a short non scientific study to see if my theory that lower octane means lower mpg and less performance on a car that has a recommendation to use premium.
Was almost out of fuel several weeks ago and the station had only regular gasoline. I filled with regular (18 gallons). I've kept a fuel/mpg log since day one and had used premium since day one too.
The car's performance felt the same around town (stop and go as well as up to about 60 mph or so). I thought it was a little less responsive to part throttle input at freeway speeds and it seemed to downshift more frequently on freeway hills than before, but high speed passing felt about the same.
After a couple of tanks on regular it was clear that the car was getting about 8 per cent less mpg than it had been getting on premium. I also tried a tank with nearly all freeway driving and discovered the mpg dropped even more on just straight high speed freeway driving.
In short, the drop in mpg using regular was greater than the percentage savings in cost for buying regular. Using the lower cost regular actually cost more per mile than using the higher cost premium.
I also checked acceleration using a stop watch. Acceleration from 0-60 took a little more than 3/10 longer using regular than when using premium. It felt the same though.
Once I returned to using premium mpg returned to normal and so did acceleration and freeway performance.
The car has had the transmission recall modification and there was no mpg or performance difference after the modification.
I suspect that using mid grade (89 octane) would have a similar result with performance a little less than when using premium, but only detected with a stop watch, and a mpg drop that at least covers the difference in cost savings per gallon.
I drove the same way as always and the mix of driving was about the same. The one freeway only tank was the same route I took immediately before and after switching back to premium. The car had the same two people on board and the temperature and humidity were nearly the same (2 degrees different according to the trip computer temp readout). Speed was the same and cruise control used all the way. There was very little wind and what there was came from the side.
I made sure the tank was completely filled at the start and again at the end of the testing (I do this all the time anyway). The start and end fillings took place at the same station and at the same pump.
When I made the switch to regular the tank had only about 1 gallon of premium left in the tank. There was a little more than a gallon of regular in the tank when I switched back to premium. The second premium fill after switching back resulted in a little better mpg than the first tank of premium. No way to tell if the amount of regular that was left in the tank at the switch back to premium is the reason for the difference.
Some guy from another forum did a Dyno test on a 03 MDX with premium and regular gas. The result was 260 HP with premium and 240 with regular gas. I am not sure what is the HP difference on the 01 and 02, but, you are right, one cannot feel a 20 HP difference in acceleration by the seat of the pants on a 4500 pound car.
Also, how sure are we as consumers that when you get 87, 91 or 93 octane we are actually getting it? I would imagine that with 87 octane you are getting anywhere from say 85 to 89 octane? And with premium? Whose to say that there isn't one big tank below the station with different prices on the top. I guess the gas companies have to test the blends as they are being made, and if the process is good, then it should be homogenous, but I always wonder about that.
Wish Acura would have a diesel - hybrid MDX available as an alternative to the current gas only car. Probably have a gas - hybrid version in the concept stage.
I agree with fndlyfmrflyr that a Diesel-Hybrid MDX (with a CVT and with something like xDrive) would be a great alternative to what we have now. Are you listening, Acura?
Transpower
Is there another solution as I am traveling and dealing over the phone with spouse who is annoyed with no music and says that singing to herself is no fun at all and she is getting ready to take frustration out on me when I return if radio is not fixed upon my return. Not sure she is ready to try disconnecting the battery herself.
She got appointment at dealer on July 1st but I am not sure she will last till then.
I asked about the muffler hanger noise thing...I don't think it effects the '02, however he said he "never heard of it"...and "no one has complained about it". Interesting...not sure if I am getting 1/2 accurate information or none.
They also put completely new pads on the rear along with the shims. Will be interesting when it is time to get the fronts replaced if they tell me the rears need it too.
Transpower
The general rumor mill seems to indicate that there are only small changes pending.
-----------
Rolling out hybrids
Some hybrid fuel-electric-powered vehicles that automakers are launching:
2004: Chevrolet Silverado FAS, Dodge Ram Contractor's Special, Ford Escape, GMC Sierra FAS, Honda Accord, Lexus RX 400h, Toyota Highlander.
2005: Acura MDX, Acura RL, Honda Odyssey, Honda Pilot.
2006: Ford Futura, Nissan Altima, Saturn VUE BAS, Toyota Camry, Toyota Sienna.
2007: Chevrolet Malibu BAS, Chevrolet Tahoe AHS II, Dodge Caravan, GMC Yukon AHS II, Lexus LS.
2008: BMW 3 Series, Chevrolet Silverado AHS II, GMC Sierra AHS II, Toyota Tundra, Volkswagen Passat.
Source: J.D. Power and Associates
-----------
My guess is that the year 2005 means, in this instance, the 2006 model year. This trend toward hybrid vehicles is exciting and revolutionary. Maybe we'll finally become less dependent on foreign oil!
Transpower
I also think it is interesting that the first, and only, BMW listed is the 2008 3-series. A buddy of mine has a 330i and manages to get 32-34 mpg on the highway cruidsing in 6th gear. Their X5 gets a little more than half that. You would think that an SUV or the 7 series would be the first place BMW would look to introduce hybrid technology.
I also recall seeing a Discovery Channel show several years ago in which BMW was acknowledged as the leader in hydrogen fuel technology. They estimated at the time (at least 6-7 years ago), that hydrogen vehicles would be on the road by 2010. That date doesn't seem so far off anymore.
Transpower
Even with the added weight of batteries a gasoline hybrid MDX should accelerate better than the current model and better mpg won't hurt. The question will be can one save enough in fuel costs to justify the added cost of hybrid power. Once the government tax credit/incentive goes away one may find they are paying extra to save a few gallons.
Second, I assume from the posts above that premium fuel really is recommended.
Third, any reason to believe that the MDX would not get the same 4-star rollover rating as the Pilot. I don’t think the Pilot has stability control but, on the other hand, the Pilot is seems wider and less prone to tip.
Also, anyone have any knowledge on the used MDX market in the SF Bay area or whether dealers, in general, come down much on the listed certified pre-owned prices. I’d like to stay under $25k but all the Autotrader listings are in the $28-29k range.
If you really nitpick at the numbers, the Pilot does have a very slightly higher static stability factor (SSF) so you could say it has a fraction of a star higher. But nothing significant, and the NHTSA's rating has been roundly criticized.
The main reasons I would not buy the Pilot in its current form over an MDX:
- The Pilot still has the old design transmission. Honda has supposedly addressed most of the issues, but there is an active recall on that transmission (used also in the 2001-2002 MDX and Odysseys). The 2003 MDX started a new design, which may or may not be more reliable than the older one. But the older design transmission is the same basic design that Honda has found problems with and even extended the transmission warranty on with certain models.
- The Pilot still lacks stability control and side curtain airbags, two important safety features that its major competitors have. In this day and age, it should have them.
Regarding the transmission issue, I have a different take. It is my understanding that current 2004 Pilots have had the transmission lubrication system updated and are apparantly fixed. Used 2001-2002 MDX's have the old, unfixed transmission. I would be wary of buying a vehicle that may be in need of a new transmission soon after your purchase. Hopefully, it would be covered under a transferable extended warranty, but it's still a pain in the ___.
As far as safety considerations, I really think the Pilot and MDX are equivalent, side air bags and stability control advantages to the MDX notwithstanding. I read an anlaysis of the MDX stability control system in practice and it appears that, by the time it's activated in an emergency manuever, you've pretty much compromised the stability of the vehicle and it didn't help that much to regain control. According to Consumer Reports, the emergency avoidance manuever speed of the Pilot without stability control was actually slightly higher than the MDX with it. If safety is your primary concern, then the Volvo XC90 is a better choice over either the Pilot or MDX, both in it's structural integrity/safety features, and in the way it drives and handles.
I am a big fan of both Honda and Acura, having traded my 2002 S2000 for a 2004 TL 6-speed in May. So don't take my comments as being anti-MDX and pro-Pilot. They are both great vehicles, but unless you could get a phenominal deal on a used MDX (unlikely), I would be inclined to go for a new Pilot and avoid transmission worries. Especially if you intend to keep the vehicle for several years and put a fair number of miles on it. If you can spring for a new or slightly used 2003/4 MDX, that may be a different story.
On the transmission issues, was there a recall? Is this a progressive problem that can't be fixed until it breaks?
As far as stability control, when was it added to the MDX? I was mistaken that it was included with the original design ('01). It's hard to believe that it would not make a difference. A New York Times test (albeit very unscientific) of the X5 v. E-Class Mercedes revealed equal results in the same maneuver with stability control turned on in both vehicles.
I've had two cars with stability control and I found the system helps a lot when driving in rain but no as much when on dry roads.
The transmission recall for 02 MDXs is an inspection and usually the addition of parts needed for additional lubrication for second gear.
Honda has been quite elusive in providing details of their transmission woes. There were denials when many TL's and CL's had problems, and finally Honda publicly acknowledged a higher-than-expected failure rate and extended their transmission warranties. But they didn't say it affected the MDX.
Afterwards, they acknowleged another flaw and recalled 2001-2002 MDX's plus 2003-2004 Honda Pilots, and Odysseys. It did NOT affect the 2003-2004 MDX's because they have a different transmission redesign and didn't have the design issue. The recall is basically a band-aid to provide additional lubrication to prevent heat buildup.
Then several months later, they expand the recall to over a million vehicles, this time getting Accord V6's, TL's, and CL's.
What's the next shoe that will drop? Is this really the end of the transmission woes, or just the tip of the iceberg as the fleet ages?
Some defenders say that the recall fixes issues once and for all. If you read between the lines, it fixes one specific issue. But Honda submitted a 1,000+ page report to NHTSA detailing issues in the older transmissions that lie in more than one place. E.g. the third gear clutch disk not being smooth enough after manufacture of the disk was transferred from Japan to a U.S. plant, and then to another U.S. plant.
All manufacturers have problems, but this is very un-Honda like. People pay a premium for Honda to avoid problems like this, or even concerns. Very disappointing. Add to this the problem in earlier 2003 Pilots with bad driver's airbags causing potential head injuries in collisions, and a similar, larger recall for CR-V's announced in the last few months, and you wonder what's going on at Honda.
Finally, there's really no excuse for the Pilot not to have side curtain airbags. Especially when the competition has it. It's a basic safety feature that one should be able to get without having to go Volvo.
Notwithstanding the supposedly fixed transmission in the new MDX, I've read about and heard complaints of vibration and whining in certain gears at certain speeds. My Acura service manager believes that the full "iceberg" has not yet been exposed and actually advised me to wait until the 2005 model comes out to buy anything.
Wishful thinking on my part, but the quickest way for Acura to sell me a 2005 MDX would be to drop a version of the 6-speed manual from our TL into it. According to the same service manager, short of outright owner abuse, Honda's manual transmissions have proven pretty bulletproof. He drove an Acura Legend GS 6-speed for over 225,000 miles on the original clutch.
Since my first new car in 1978 and my wife's first new one in 1979, neither of us has owned an automatic. It appears that we will now be forced to break that streak and, to add insult to injury, our top choices in the SUV category (Honda, Acura and Lexus GX470) have had transmission problems of one sort or another. The only stick choice we are remotely considering is the X5 3.0 and that opens up a whole other can of worms, not the least of which is a shortness of "utility" for the sake of "sport". Hopefully our choices, and everyone's transmissions, will improve for 2005.