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
MSRP of 2005 MDX Touring Package with Navigation System and Acura DVD Entertainment System adding just running boards and door visors comes to $43,775.
2005 Highlander 4WD V6 Limited w/3rd Row adding:
17" Aluminum Wheels w/P215/55R17
Aggressive Two-Tone Package
Driver & Fr Passenger Seat Side Mounted
Heated Front Seats
Leather Seat Package Includes:Leather Trim
Window Tint
Accent Stripe
Carpet Mats/Trunk Mat (req. Third Seat)
DVD Entertainment Sys Includes:
JBL Prem AM/FM/Cass/6 CD in dash Changer
Touch Screen DVD Navigation System
...comes to MSRP of $40,235.
And it seems people are getting far better prices of MSRP on the Highlander compared to the MDX...according to Edmunds TMV report anyway.
Granted, it's a Toyota- not a Lexus, but it does share the RX330's chassis.
I really wish one didn't have to order the Touring package on the MDX in order to get the NAV.
Seems Toyota has come out with the Agressive Two toned paint and fender flares, running boards to pep up the bland image.
I know the 05 Highlander isn't really out and about yet...but any thoughts?
I do think the voice activation NAV and wireless cell phone connection and OnStar is pretty cool on the MDX.
Regards,
Dean
I am also considering the MDX touring from the new Acura dealer in cleveland. I think I'd like an 05. Do you think that 1k over invoice is reasonable? Also what did they use to value your trade, and how did it compare to Edmonds, NADA, KBB etc.
-SE Touring Package
-Navigation System
-Mobile DVD Entertainment System
-Chrome Wheel Package
-Dynamic Control Package
-XM Satellite Radio
MSRP $41,480
Invoice $37,342
And SE AWD without this stuff is about 30k and that is not bad, and my favorite feature is that all models come with a 6.3 in info display monitor even if you dont have a nav system
I just picked up my 2005 MDX Touring w/ Nav and RES for $41,500 from a dealer in North Louisiana. This price was $2,845 below MSRP and rougly $1,500 over invoice. The improvements to the 2005 are well worth the extra cash. The XM radio is very cool, especially the way that song and artist titles can be displayed on the navigation display. Also, the improved voice commands and Onstar are great. Larger fuel tank is nice too. I highly recommend this vehicle.
Does the U.S. Government Want You to Buy a Large SUV?
Steve, Host
The MDX is a luxury vehicle.
The Highlander rode rougher and louder. Third seat was much smaller.
Trade-in was very near the KBB price. Edmund's values seem inflated to me, at least for this region. I didn't pay anywhere near the price they calculated for a 1 year old Mercedes or get offered anywhere near their value for trade-in, even after haggling. KBB price was where everyone ended up.
Went back on Saturday to get the front license plate frame installed. Very nice treatment, immmediately got a mechanic to install the frame and wash the car. Starbuck's coffee. They also did the paperwork with my insurance agency.
I sold my 96 Accord 2 weeks ago after purchasing a 2004 MDX last month. I sold it for exactly what KBB said I would...$4500. Tried higher ad(5200.) but the market wouldn't bare it - didn't get 1 call! That was based on Edmund's figures. Finally got bites at $4690. and sold for 4500. Still took 3 weeks... [NYC northern suburbs].
We have an Acura TL and are strong believers in Honda/Acura quality. But I must admit that I don't particularly care for the looks of the MDX and am very impressed with the way the Volvo drives and handles, not to metion my wife's preference for the easier entry / exit. There are several things I like better in the MDX - nav system, bluetooth, third row seat, etc. But the Volvo also has several pluses on it's side and might be worth considering if you are looking for a more car like feel (certainly beats the Pacifica you were considering).
It doesn't drive or really feel like a truck to me though. I think it has a very car like feel in handling. My other truck is an Isuzu Trooper, that drives like a truck.
If you want the seating capacity, cabin space, AWD, etc, there are not a lot of choices besides something in the SUV Class. I agree with your opinion on the Volvo, especially if the dealer is far away, there is a potential for a lot of back and forth.
If you don't want the truck feel, try out a pacifica? Not sure if I would get a Chrysler for the same reasons I wouldn't get a VW based vehicle, Volvo, ford and GM car (GM Trucks seem to have a better reputation).
Another good vehicle to check out is the RX330, that might give you more car like feeling, it is a compromise on space, but probably larger than most car choices.
I suppose I should look at the RX330 again. I looked at it when I first started my search, and was surprised at how austere it looked on the interior. We had an LS400 and thought the 330 interior looked pretty cheap in comparison. And I didn't like the way the console was laid out. And the sales guy was way too snooty. I was in my Home Depot shopping clothes that day and I don't think he even wanted me to sit in the car, much less take it for a drive. So, I suppose I could put my prom dress on and go try again.
There are only two of us and two 9 lb. dogs, so I don't need a great deal of seating capacity, but I'm always hauling things from Home Depot and Costco and driving on the highway between our home and my mother's 200 miles away. So I want something relatively big and safe. Every time I get on the highway, squeezed between vans, trucks, SUV's and big rigs, I feel like a bug about to be squashed in my little Audi. Also, don't need AWD and where available have been looking for a FWD vehicle.
Edmunds has a lot of good reading prior to buying, I highly recommend.
Another option is a used RX300, you can let the dogs rip it up and not feel as bad as a new car.
Anyway, the XC90 2.5 FWD might have been your ticket, if the dealership was closer. We have friends that got a 2.5 AWD. He researched the heck out of it and, for the 2005 model year, it appears they worked most, if not all, of the bugs out. The XC90 appears to be the best vehicle made by Volvo. But we're still considering the very truck like GX 470 as well as the MDX/Pilot.
I actually did make an offer on a 2005 MDX. It was ridiculously low and I figured if they took it I would end up with a good car at a great price and could get used to driving it. The sales guy just laughed, but he did tell me what their bottom line was, which was actually a little lower than what I thought they would take.
So, still don't know what I want to do, but sincerely appreciate the shopping advice.
Funny, the MDX is shrinking every day. There are so many cars out there that are so much bigger. It is really mid-sized...duh...it's a mid-sized luxury SUV. Rides like a car - except for very bumpy rough potholed roads...then it feels like a van/truck.
Never going back to a sardine can...
What's the latest on the navi and XM issue? I have an 04 MDX with NAVI and DVD and am considering adding satelite radio.
Thanks,
Brian
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
- MSRP 49,900
- INVOICE 43,000
check it out' it looks good too
When we hit some roads that had snow the ABS kicked in and we made it around the corner with ease.
My only complaints are that the kids won't let me get more than 1 or 2 songs from my CDs per trip, so while I load up with 6 great discs, it is either the DVD or Barney tapes.
But would I trade my MDX for it? No, the Jeep has just 67 cubic feet of cargo space vs. 82 cubic feet in the MDX. And the gas mileage of the Jeep still is considerably less. But the performance of the Jeep, with a hemi 330 hp V8, is outstanding. Reliability remains to be seen, but has been dismal in the past.
Hopefully the next version of the MDX will have something similar to QuadraDrive II.
Sounds like the 2005's ride has improved...but I'm sure it still isn't near the MDX.
By the way, has anyone heard from WMQUAN? Has he switched out of the MDX or does he still have his 2001?
This is purely speculation on my part (and on that of others), but it's quite possible the next generation of MDX will have the SH-AWD system that is in the new Acura RL. It seems like an evolutionary improvement in VTM-4, applying power to individual rear wheels for cornering and more stability. Though since the MDX isn't a sports sedan, I'm not sure how much difference the SH-AWD system would make.
It won't be the QuadraDrive II you've mentioned. But like VTM-4, it should be more than adequate for the majority of situations that MDX owners will likely encounter.
Besides the practical reasons you mentioned, I wouldn't go near a JGC because of concerns over reliability and safety. Previous JGC's haven't done well in reliability, and they didn't have very good crash test scores either.
As for the SH-AWD, it seems to be practically the same as the VTM-4. To differentiate the MDX from the RL, one would hope that Acura would put something better in its SUV, like something similar to the QuadraDrive II. If they don't, I'm looking elsewhere.
Speaking of traction, what kind of tires do you have now? With 69k miles I figure you're on your second set.
We're at 52k miles and the original Michelin Cross Terrains. A number of MDX owners have tried the Goodyear Fortera's, which have good reviews on tirerack.com and with Consumer Reports. The latter's tests rank the Fortera's very highly while the Cross Terrains don't do too well overall.
I'm probably going to try the Forteras as our next tire. Our MDX has done well over the mountain passes in the Cascades, but better snow traction would be nice.
Consumer Reports claims that the Fortera's are much better than the Cross Terrains in handling and dry braking. They also gave the Fortera's the edge over the Cross Terrains in wet braking and hydroplane resistance. The Cross Terrains had an edge in ice braking, and were much better in rolling resistance. Snow traction, ride, and noise were considered comparable between the two tires.
So far, the feedback from MDX owners going to Fortera's, after their first set of Cross Terrains is very positive. I've only seen posts from a few owners in various forums, but all claim the Fortera's are a significant upgrade.
It looks like the competition in this passenger tire segment is heating up. It used to be that one had to look at light truck tires for alternatives.
Speaking of reviews, did you see the November 2004 issue of Motor Trend--the one featuring the Land Rover LR3 as the SUV of the year? The Jeep GC with QuadraDrive came in a close second; on p. 67: "All the above was considered during a spirited debate that nearly degenerated into arm-wrestling and name-calling before the final vote was taken and the Jeep was narrowly defeated."
Back on p. 66: "After the burly QX56 dug and scratched its way up the course and the Nissan Pathfinder (with open front and rear differentials and no traction control) excavated gigantic ruts trying unsuccessfully to climb the hill, the new Jeep ambled up as though traversing suburban speed bumps, throwing less dust and gravel than even the Land Rover LR3 (that truck uses its brakes to equalize torque on the front axle)." (The LR3 has an open front differential.)
What probably lost the contest for the Jeep was the braking on the downhill descent: "The Landie's brakes also trumped the Jeep's, descending the hill at a similarly brisk pace with no fade, while the Jeep's binders were burning." (p. 67). C'est la vie. Hey, our 2001 MDX won its contest!
I think that the Cross Terrains' performance in Consumer Reports rating wasn't as bad as it looked. It's true they placed 19th out of 22 (the Fortera's were #1). But the review had a bunch of light truck tires mixed in there too.
Fans of the Yokohama Geolander point out that the variant that CR tested wasn't the best one, so it's hard to say how that particular model would have done.
Interesting comparo on the LR3 and JGC!
Unfortunately, I don't place much stock in Motor Trend's Car/SUV/Truck of the Year awards. I think the winner is as much decided by what manufacturer wants to pony up the most money to perform a marketing campaign based on the award. Not that the LR3 isn't a capable vehicle, it seems very strong. But I'd keep my MDX over the LR3 for our own needs. I wonder how reliable the LR3 will prove to be
Say, on another old-timer subject -- have you had any issues with your transmission? I did have one incident of a violent transmission shudder, but it was about 20k miles ago. I've had the recall applied and they installed the add-on but did not replace the transmission. I'm still nervous about it, but hopefully it'll go until late 2007 when we plan to replace the MDX.
I will have to research the Fortera's. From what I have read all the past goodyear SUV tires I have read about have not been very good, with poor wet/snow traction.
CR is not influenced by advertising. They do not accept advertisements.
I've never had any transmission problems. I did have the fix applied, and posted here when I did. My MDX has been very, very reliable. I'm just looking for more traction, which the Jeep GC has. I'm also looking for better fuel economy, which the Jeep hasn't. Curious that the Jeep Liberty can be ordered with a Diesel, though.
The Motor Trend review included the Ford Freestyle, a car-based SUV with only 203 hp and a CVT. It does get 18/26 EPA mileage. However, the editors basically trashed the vehicle, saying that "it's not really an SUV at all. But tag it with that nebulous term, 'crossover,' and it makes a good car." (p. 63). Funny, one of the article subheading's (p. 62) is "Ford Freestyle: Are you sure you're meant to be here?"
Along with the Jeep, I recently tested the 2005 Buick Rendezvous Ultra. Remember how we used to always criticize the Rendezvous for it's pitiful old 185 hp engine? At least, now, the Ultra is rated at 245 hp and gets fairly decent mileage; it's also roomy inside. Alas, it turned out to be awful to drive; the shifter is on the steering column, and the ride was bouncy and very noisy. No wonder there's going to be a new Rendezvous for 2006!
We are considering an MDX and GX470. The GX qualifies for the accelerated tax write off, making it less expensive after tax than the MDX by a significant amount. The 2005 GX470 has a more powerful (270hp/325 ft.lb) VVti engine. However, my wife still prefers the size of the MDX and the MDX is rated 2-4 mpg better than the GX.
If you aren't getting the EPA ratings on your MDX, let me know. I might not feel as guilty getting the GX.
And if you can wait, an engineering friend of mine just returned from Japan, where they checked out the RX400 hybrid. It will be available here in April. They are supposedly capable of 0-60 in 7+/- seconds and 25+/- mpg in the city. The RX doesn't fit our size and utility needs, but it probably will steal some market share form the MDX.