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 put Michelin Pilot Sport A/S on my 2001 LLBean Outback 30K miles ago and expect to get another 10K miles. They are amazing tires...like riding on rails in the rain/snow...and they corner great.
A few more test drives will help, including testing something besides the MDX for comparison.
Steve, Host
The model we looked at had the Rear Entertainment System, does all models have this? This could be a deal breaker for me as I don't want to spend $40K and have the vehicle look like crap in 6 months.
Thanks
The most noticeable sign of wear is in the leather. Cleaning and conditioning it with something like Lexol helps.
I have an '04 Honda Pilot and have been succesful using DVD-R discs with no problem. If you have to use DVD Xcopy program to do any backing up of your movies you will need to remove the warning screen with a tool called ifoedit. you can get some info I posted last year about this in the Pilot forum.
I haven't made the final decision yet but it looks like I'll be getting a 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee, with the 5.7L Hemi V-8 and Quadra-Drive II. Nothing against Acura, but at 40K or more, an SUV should have a V-8 and a "real" 4x4 system. But do I have concerns about Jeep reliability...well, yes. Speaking of strange things--how could Acura put a V-6 in the 50K 2005 RL?
Thing is, they sell so many of the JGC/Explorer, there is bound to be a few lemons.
"Speaking of strange things--how could Acura put a V-6 in the 50K 2005 RL"
I read somewhere that the RL will race through the quarter mile in 13.8 seconds... Not too shabby for a 4000lb car with AWD.
Spencer
I may be dating myself, however I used to read mad magazine as a kid and remember one funny x-ray comic...it had a gas station with 3 different pumps all tied into the same underground tank. I think you should be fine with any stations gas. I would think most gas stations in an area get the same gas since it would be difficult for 1 company to manage a distribution network to only its gas stations.
Steve, Host
Frankly, I can't seem to bring myelf to put Jeep or and Ford or GM product on my shopping list due to my demands for high build quality. The fact that some Jeeps and Explorers last 100k+ miles is of little consolation if they start rattling after they are about 20 miles away from the showroom. I realize that Land Rover isn't on the top of JD Power's list either, which will probably keep it out of our garage. But at least the LR3 appears to have good fit and finish, and the interior - compared to Jeep, Ford and GM - doesn't look like it was put together by an ergonomically challenged, blind committee.
P.S. I probably agree with your comment on the RL - at $50k+ it's V6 is a little short in the "sport" department. We have a 2004 TL 6-speed whcih is noticably quicker. The report of a 13.8 quarter mile time must have been pushing it off a cliff. It is nowhere near that quick and light years behind the 545i.
aggie76: The LR3 is a beast and cannot be nimble. It does have the space, though. The front differential is open, not limited-slip as in Quadra-Drive II.
If Acura would make an MDX with a V-8 and with something equivalent to Quadra-Drive II then I would stick with the MDX--I like the style, size, and dealer service.
I did get the MDX out last night for a quick warm up ride. I managed to plow through over a foot of snow without any problems. It handles the snow as good as my trooper, just different characteristics as it is front wheel drive biased.
The MDX's AWD system may not be what a G500's is, but neither is the Volvo's AWD system. The VTM-4 system has some advantages over the XC90's system, and vice versa. I don't think one will clearly outperform the other.
Ultimately if you want a real snowmobile you should commit to winter tires.
Steve, Host
The Volvo XC90 V8, however, has a more sophisticated AWD system that always has the system "pre-charged" as they term it, making the switch to AWD instantanesous and seamless. My wife and I seperately test drove the V8 over the past two days and, althoguh we couldn't plow through snow here in DC, the rest of the drive, acceleration and handling was very impressive. We still like the MDX for a variety of reasons - size and 3rd row access being chief among them - but the XC90 V8 is an exceptional car.
I am also not having much luck finding out more about the 2005 MDX's stability control system. All the brochures and sales people are able to tell me is that it's "improved" over 2004. I'm not buying a $40k box of laundry detergent, for goodness sakes. I'd like a little more real info. Especially since Volvo is proud to write up highly detailed descriptions of the XC90's anti-skid AND anti-roll system and make claims - whaich appear to be supported by the automotive press - that they have the best, safest system in the business. The Acura system, by comparison, has been criticized as qquite primative and not particularly good at actually helping avoid losing control in emergency manuevers.
One of the reasons we are trading our Trooper after 9 years is that I think we've used up all of our luck in an un-safe SUV. Volvo has, without a doubt, prioritized safety more than Acura both in engineering and marketing. But I'd like to know for sure that the Acura "VSA" system is at least reasonably good. So far, what I've heard is that it rates far, far below anything form Europe. Given that my 2004 TL's ABS only engages and works above 8-10 mph and allows the brakes to lock up at slower speeds, I am not impressed. My 1995 Maxima's ABS system will not permit the brakes to lock up at any speed and, based upon tests this past week on packed snow and ice in our neighborhood, the Maxima stops considerably shorter and straighter than the TL from 15 mph.
So, not only are not all AWD/4WD systems created equally, neither are ABS/VSA/Stability Control Systmes. And my unscientific test puts Acura under serious question as to the effectiveness of their system. Not to mention other reports/complaints I've read of experiences of the MDX VSA system simply not engaging. I have seen nothing but praise of the Volvo system.
I known people who had japanese SUVs, european cars, american SUV, etc, and their brakes did not work once they hit black ice. Nothing can protect you from black ice. Drive at slow speeds during bad weather condition. AWD can help pull you out of situations and give you better traction when driving through steep hills especially during bad weather.
Volvo does have a good rep with safety but not to fond about Volvo's Ford engine or tech. XC90 & Toureag does have a better looking body design. But Im content with the MDX. MDX is my 4th Honda.
Also, I did lose control with my TL going up a steep hill during a major snow storm. But so did every other cars ahead of me. Everyone was slipping and sliding going 5 mph. Thats why I've decided to purchase a SUV. So, I do hope it will help a little.
One problem with the Volvo system (or otherwise) is that you can't "force" torque to go to the rear, when you're trying to extricate yourself. You have to try to drive, and make the computer will detect the slippage and then engage the system to get you out. I'm sure most of the time it will get you out.
With the MDX, you do have the VTM-4 "lock" mode which permits you to force torque to the rears to try to get yourself out of a sticky situation. E.g. your vehicle has been sitting in snow for a while and a plow came by. That mode will force up to 50% power to the rears, split equally across the axles (if one wheel slips, that's okay, the other will still get torque), and it helps get you out.
The Volvo V8 system tries the precharging trick which is useful once slippage is detected, but still not as good as just saying, "just gimmee power in the rears."
That said, in most real-world situations, it may be a wash. Neither vehicle has an AWD system like, say, a Jeep Grand Cherokee. Then again, most buyers don't need something like that.
FWIW, a friend of mine whose knowledge I consider comprehensive and I trust, has driven both the XC90 and MDX. Based on his impressions, he thinks the XC90's system is quicker to send torque to the rears than the MDX's. It's purely a seat-of-the-pants judgement.
My problem with the Volvo is always going to be its reliability. I don't care that some folks find convenient ways to overlook Consumer Reports and JD Power IQS ratings, and sure the MDX has had some issues, but the XC90 is going to come up short relative to the MDX.
You mentioned that you keep your vehicles for a long time. The XC90 may prove as durable as the MDX, and perhaps more durable. But at what cost? I sure would not buy the XC90 without an extended warranty, and after that, there's no protection against the very high cost of Volvo replacement parts. Some of the more rabid Volvo fans will say it's the exclusivity and quality of the parts, but in many areas it's cheaper to service a Mercedes than a Volvo.
Mind you, I wouldn't rule out an XC90, and I would buy one if I valued its extra safety features. But I wouldn't buy an XC90 without an extended warranty, and I wouldn't keep it beyond that point. Also, make sure your local Volvo dealer's service department is a good one. That'll usually be the key to how any issues will affect your ownership experience.
Finally, it's quite possible that later this year, Acura will introduce the replacement for the current MDX. Volvo has the benefit of having a newer design out there. I'm sure the next MDX will be a significant improvement on the first. The other problem that Volvo has is that their vehicle cycles are very long compared to the Japanese manufacturers. 7-8 years compared to 5-6.
A couple of responses, however. On the snow/ice capabilities, I wasn't looking for a vehicle that could overcome the laws of physics. It is odd to me, however, that Acura's ABS system - at least on my TL - does not function at below 8-10 mph. In working my way through my neighborhood in DC to plaowed and salted streets, there are half a dozen 4-way stop intersections that I was sliding to reach a full stop at. Granted, my HPT (summer) tire package didn't help, but the ABS system in my 10+ year old Maxima IS better , at least in this situation.
Even though we have chosed the MDX, I would never fault anyone on the choice of the XC90 V8. Awesome performance, near sports sedan like handling, and the best seats in the business are just a few features that we'll miss in the MDX. The Yamaha 4.4 liter V8 and 6-speed transmission is getting praise from all directions. I never would consider the XC90 with its 2.5 or T6 engines. As for JD Powers and Consumer Reports, yes, Volvo doesn't rate at the top of their list, although the XC90 fares well. However, I've got to ask, were these industry "quality Police" eating doughnuts when the thousands of Acura/Honda automatic transmission failures were tow-trucked by?? I have a TL 6-speed and the 2005 MDX appears to have one of the few unaffected auto transmissions made by Acura, but this ongoing problem is not very comforting to me that Acura/Honda are really doing their best to deliver on their reputation. Sometimes - perhaps in the case of Volvo - the underdog that has to work harder to earn respect delivers a better product, while the kings of the hill (Acura & Lexus - GX470) rest on their reputation a bit too much. We'll see, but the fit and finish of the interior of the Volvo was superior to the MDX, IMO.
Finally, I have a different take on longer vehicle cycles being a "problem". The XC90 is credited with having the highest percentage resale of any SUV. I believe that short life cycles are more marketing driven than engineering driven. The XC90 V8 is a huge improvement to an existing vehicle. Acura has "facelifted" the MDX once or twice, but waits to intorduce a new model for serious improvments. I have a friend with a 2002 TL that's worth nickels on the dollars he paid for it. That does have me hesitent on buying the MDX so late in the cycle, but my wife claims she'll be happy driving it for the next 7-10 years, even if it is two generations old by then.
Good dialogue and I appreciate your comments.
There's no doubt that the transmission issues are very un-Honda/Acura-like, and they exist. Sure, it doesn't hit the reliability reports as much, but it's probably because of the frequency. It's certainly a concern for me, but I suspect the newer models are much better. Also, the XC90 does NOT fare well by Consumer Reports. CR has it well below average. Volvo fans can try to spin it however they want, but that's how it is.
As far as resale value goes, the MDX is no slouch. The XC90's top resale value has to be taken with a grain of salt. It's still a relatively new vehicle in this segment and newer vehicles do well. However, as the vehicle ages, that pattern will change. In fact, the MDX wore the crown of highest resale value for at least two years.
If you look at it by brand, Volvo historically has poor resale value. It's one reason I wouldn't buy a new V70/XC70. My dealer has a ton of unsold models, and two year-old units go for a song.
Another measure of resale is manufacturer discounts. The MDX still does not have deep factory discounts, though its price has at least come downward towards invoice -- but the vehicle has been around since the 2001 model year. Meanwhile, the Volvo was introduced as a 2003 model (mid-year, though?) and Volvo is already offering dealer incentives. That means resale value will soon dive.
Question for you: how did you find REAL cargo capacity compares between the two vehicles? I've always wondered how "real" the Volvo cargo capacity measurements are. Sometimes the cubic foot measurements are very different between manufacturers, and not reflective of truly useable space. Obviously the Volvo has the flexibility of folding down the front passenger seat for long items. But what about cargo room behind the 2nd row, when the 3rd row is folded? The MDX is, simply, cavernous in that regard. Is the Volvo really about the same despite its narrower width?
Now, this all said, if I was buying a vehicle today, I probably would buy the XC90 V8 over the MDX -- if I had the extra cash. I would not be interested in the overseas delivery (too much going on to take such a trip), so the price difference would be very significant. The comparison then becomes kind of strange, because spending more money should buy you 'more stuff,' and I think with the Volvo V8, it's quite true.
I would buy it with no illusions on what the reliability might be. I would buy it primarily because I want the extra safety features it provides (including ones that go beyond existing, superficial crash tests). The better fit and finish/materials would be a plus as well as the power (who doesn't want more power, despite what 2.5T owners claim). But the primary reason would be the extra safety features, which I'd be willing to get at the expense of reliability. Realistically, it won't spend a lot of time on the side of the road. Oh, it might spend a few extra days at the dealership each year, but I'd just drive a safe Volvo loaner in the meantime.
But that's just me, and a lot of people will assign different priority rankings.
As for you, it really, really sounds to me that you think/know in your own heart that the XC90 is a better vehicle by your definitions. I know you've been shopping for a long time, and I've teased you about it from time to time (but I don't give you the Lev treatment either). But you're conflicted as even you've admitted that even the cheaper 2.5T is more than adequate for your needs. You say that the MDX has better third row access but you also mentioned that the XC90's is adequate.
I know that your wife will be the primary driver but I'm sure you can use your influence on the positive vehicle attributes of either one. I'm sure she'd be quite happy with either vehicle. I'm not quite as sure you'd be happy with the MDX, especially if some of what you identify as flaws start to gnaw at you. I suspect that you can love the XC90 V8, while you might just like the MDX.
Go with your heart. You are going to have to live with the vehicle for a long time. Ultimately, while we can compare specs ad nauseum as we love to do here, you buy a vehicle that you desire. If not, we'd all be driving the same gray, faceless vehicle.
I'm glad that your car search is about to bear fruit. Good luck!
A vehicle with a "locked" 4WD may help you accelerate from a stop a nanosecond quicker but my experience with them is that they tend to understeer in the curves. For mud bogs a locked 4WD is better but for driving on snow-ice covered streets AWD is the way to go.
Enventually if you go trough too deep snow, your vehicle will jack up; that is snow will build up underneath the body, wheels will spin and dig trenches, and you will end up with your 4 wheels dandling in the air. It all depend on the depth of snow and it's condition. Heavy wet snow is more prone to creating this. There the savior is ground clearance. On that aspect, I think the XC90 has an edge.
Guy
The dilemma for me between the XC90 V8 and MDX is that there is no clear winner. So, rather than debate it until I wear out my welcome at every Edmunds forum, I put the decision in the hands of my wife. My past tendencies would have been to challenge whatever decision she made to make sure she had weighed all the factors, but this time I elected to let the chips fall where they may.
Fortunately, after 8+ years with an Isuzu Trooper, either vehicle would feel like a huge step up in both safety and luxury. And, strange as this may sound given the number of times I've posted on Edmunds, there are other priorities with our kids that are taking my attention away from wanting to continue to analyze my SUV choices for another year!
Thanks for you thoughtful comments.
Steve, Host
The MDX is great in the snow. It is simply the fact that when plowing through a foot of snow I worry about other people hitting me, getting hung up on a snow bank (where the underside of the truck rides across ice chunks), tree limbs falling, tracking a ton of snow into the interior, etc. So my *truck* gets the abuse.
When I take the family out we go in the MDX. When I take the trooper out I am just playing in the snow.
1. Acura MDX still represents a "Best Buy"; it does lack a V-8, a six-speed transmission, and a "real" four-wheel drive system, but it still compares well with other brands. The tan 2005 model looked sharp, especially with the separated dual exhausts.
2. The Lexus models were all very luxurious inside. The 67K LX-470 has an instrument panel with an amazing number of colors. But the one negative (other than price) is that the third row seats don't fold flat; the same goes for the GX-470. The LS-430 was super nice inside, but the exteriour seemed rather plain to me.
3. The Land Rover Range Rover remains my favorite SUV as far as exterior looks go, but the interior wood seemed a bit light (as did that in the Audi A6). The new Range Rover Sport was there--but locked! The problem with both vehicles is there small cargo area (although no one knows what the exact value will is for the Sport). The LR3, also there, is just too big to be nimble.
4. None of the Nissan/Infinity models impressed me much. The Armada is just too big.
6. The Mitsubishi Endeavor has a very nice, comfortable interior and an attractive exterior; but it's a V-6, four-speed, and the company seems to be in financial difficulty.
7. Honda was there with all its vehicles, but showcasing the new Odyssey. Minivans aren't my cup of tea, but nonetheless the Odyssey is tough to beat for overall value; I also checked out the Toyota Sienna--if I were in the minivan market it would be tough to decide between the two. The Sienna has a wood steering wheel, as does the Volvo XC-90.
8. Speaking of Volvo, I thought that it made good use of space inside, but I didn't like the sloping dash. The tail-lights look sort of like those on the Honda CRV (which is a nice compact SUV, with a flat floor in the rear). The XC-90 seemed rather narrow, but it has a very long wheel-base.
9. The minivans had flat rear floors, like the MDX and the Lexus SUV models. But the Audi Allroad and the Cadillac SRX and the Infinity SUV all have big rear humps (which I don't like). The hump in the Jeep Grand Cherokee is relatively small.
10. The Jeep is still my number one replacement choice for my MDX; I asked the Jeep rep in attendance when the Dynamic Handling System would be available--she had no idea of what I was talking about! The fake wood in the Limited is very nice, but the materials in the Laredo are very "pedestrian."
11. The Chrysler 300C models at the show looked at least as cool as the Bentleys on the third floor. The third floor had a Rolls Royce, Bentleys, Lamborginis (sp.?), an Audi A8, and a Maybach. This latter is something else; there were dual DVD screens on the seat backs, with concert-level sound. If I were Bill Gates, I'd probably purchase a Maybach.
12. The VW Phaeton struck me as one of the most beautiful sedans at the show (the others being the Maybach and the Chrysler 300). The dash of the Phaeton is magnificent. The trunk is very large--and there is a central hole for your skis. But I'm sticking with SUV's.
13. The Mercedes models at the show, including the 2006 ML-350, just didn't excite me. Something seems to be lacking--the models seem cold and uninviting, kind of forbidding.
Has anyone else reading this been to the Philadelphia Auto Show this year?
Did you get your Edmunds T-shirt?
ateixeira, "Subaru Crew - Meet The Members II" #23816, 5 Feb 2005 9:47 pm
Great summary - thanks!
Steve, Host
Steve, Host
You might be interested in its AWD system. I think it's 45/55 normal torque distribution. It won't have the system of the JGC, of course.
Where the MDX makes a strong showing is that most of the SUV's you've mentioned are all significantly younger than the MDX. The MDX will be replaced either late this year or next year, and that version should have a lot of updates.
I keep a log of actual fuel added vs. odometer miles, and for over 30k miles the car has averaged almost 17 mpg. Freeway mpg (speeds around here are 75+) is normally around 21 or so (19-23) and local is around 15 mpg (14-16). Tank to tank mpg varies greatly, even on trips.
The car gets about 8% better mpg using premium than using regular.
I have noticed that hills really pull mpg down and so do headwinds (cruise control used virtually all the time on the freeway). In addition, an extra person in the car resulted in 5% less mpg on a trip last year (two 700 mile round trip drives two weeks apart - same roads, same speeds, similar weather - only significant difference was 3 aboard for the second trip instead of 2).
In the case of my 2004 TL 6-speed, I get close to the EPA 30 mpg highway rating at 75+/- mph on the highway, but I consistently get 16 mpg in moderate in town driving (EPA City rating = 20), with occassional DC Beltway runs at 65 mph.
So the fact that the MDX managed to get 21.9 mpg with the 45 miles of in town driving included is a good start, IMO.
Thanks!
Steve, Host