Last post on Jul 29, 2012 at 6:31 PM
You are in the Volvo XC90
What is this discussion about?
Mercedes-Benz M-Class, Acura MDX, Lexus RX 330, BMW X5, Cadillac SRX, Toyota Highlander, Volvo XC90, SUV
#166 of 1084 IB - check out the ML320.
Sep 10, 2001 (9:37 pm)
I just opted for one over an Acura MDX, mostly because of the safety factor (MB makes one safe damn car).
The comparisons were very close - but ultimately, the pricing, included maintenance, safety features, luxury and the service of the Mercedes beat out the Acura.
If you're looking for a 2k1 - ML320's are serious discounted right now ($2k off invoice, factory to dealer incentive). You can score one fairly cheap, although there were some nifty improvements to 2002 that made me switch to a 2002 instead.
I'd say try them all out first though. The MB had the more rugged, truck like feel. The Acura had the more car-like feel. Acura's acceleration was better, but nothing beat the MB's stability control, excellent sportshift transmission, and real full-time 4WD.
#167 of 1084 If you got the moolah
Sep 11, 2001 (9:07 am)
Go for the Mercedes ML55 AMG.
#168 of 1084 MDX v. MB-M v. Lexus RX 300
Oct 16, 2001 (7:33 pm)
I entered the SUV market in May and test drove the Acura, Mercedes and Lexus. I preferred the MDX for reasons I'll outline below but waited until now to finally purchase--I wanted to see the MDX safety numbers and hoped the price would come down. I have now put a down payment on a 2002 MDX. I gave each of the vehicles very aggressive test drives and preferred the MDX hands down. The Mercedes steering was hard and unresponsive--I had to ask the salesman whether the steering was utterly unassisted. I felt like I was driving a tractor or golf cart. Although the MDX has been widely criticized for its lack of interior polish and faux wood finish--the only sign of true luxury I was sure ofwhile test driving the MB was the emblem on the grille. The Lexus clearly had the nicest interior of the three. However, as a tall person I felt cramped, the ride was minivan-like, and the exterior look--tall station wagon. The MDX handled extremely well during medium grade off-road test drive (I took a Highlander on the same route and my wife who came along with me for the ride hit her head on the roof during the Highlander test drive). The bottom line is that my wife lobbied hard for the MDX and we decided to go for it--we liked the ride, look, and safety specs of the MDX but only the safety specs of the MB and Lexus. This is admittedly the biased view of a man who has just spent more than 16k for a new vehicle for the first time--not necessarily because of a lack of money but because of a general lack of interest in cars (or SUVs) or driving. I have to say, I am sincerely looking forward to driving our new MDX--when/if it finally gets here.
#169 of 1084 Paul - the luxury in the Acura is clearly below..
Oct 16, 2001 (8:30 pm)
the others. This was my first luxury purchase as well - but at no point did I feel that either the M-class or RX-300 weren't heads above the MDX. The MDX was essentially a Honda Accord with leather seats.
#170 of 1084 What about the X5 ride and handling?
Oct 17, 2001 (6:38 am)
If you didn't like the handling and ride of the M class and RX300, did you try the X5 3.0?
#171 of 1084 donlino--X5 ride and handling
Oct 17, 2001 (9:02 am)
were great! The handling was superior but the ride was a little less smooth than the MDX. In terms of overall performance and exterior appearance, I'd clearly give the nod to the X5 over the MDX. However, I was less sure about X5 reliability and its interior finish was more spartan sport than luxury. The bottom line was the bottom line--I couldn't get myself to pay the extra $$ for an X5 similarly equipped as the premium MDX.
#172 of 1084 PAUL166--REST EASY -- MDX IS a GREAT suv
Oct 18, 2001 (5:59 pm)
I bt my MDX in March and am very happy that it is the choice gives the very best combination of performance, utility, safety, luxury and value! Most complete 7 lux. SUV comparison test was in the Dec. 2000 Car& Driver: MDX #1, X5 3.0 #2, RX300 #3, ML320 -tie for 4th ("trucklike").
Exterior styling is too subjective for me to address, but the MDX simply does everything VERY well, and can actually be called "fun to drive" to an extent remarkable for its size and weight. Luxury is NOT a list of expensive options, but more the ability of a car to do what is asked of it with responsiveness, comfort and simplicity--at least to me . BTW, I also own a BMW 7, a couple of older Porsches, & a M-B 280 SL --so hopefully I understand the concepts of luxury and performance without too many prejudices.
Hope your wait isn't too long!!
#173 of 1084 Choices
Oct 19, 2001 (10:40 am)
If the MDX wasn't predominatly a FWD vehicle, or if it had TRAC (to make up, partially, for the FWD bias), VSC and HID, I would definitely put it on top of the SUV list.
I noticed not just a few posts comparing the RX300 to a MiniVan. Good point, that's really all it is, the Chrysler T&C AWD Limited is priced about the same although not nearly as luxurious. Both are basically FWD with a viscous clutch coupling to carry some minor portion of engine torque to the rear. The major difference is the RX300 only routes about 5% normally whereas the T&C has a much more tighter and "robust" viscous clutch coupling, so much moreso than the RX that it must be by-passed with an over-running clutch during braking.
I have little doubt that the X5, except for pricing and the BMW nameplate, belongs at the top of this list, head and shoulders above the rest.
I could overlook the price much easier than the nameplate.
Oct 20, 2001 (8:25 pm)
Byt you gotta hand it to Honda- the MDX's panel gaps are amazingly tight for a vehicle this size.
#175 of 1084 MB ML500
Oct 22, 2001 (4:01 pm)
Having driven a X5, MDX, RX300 etc, and having owned assorted domestic SUV's, I recently drove a ML320 and a ML500. I bought the ML500! Ride, safety and now performance! I've had it for a few weeks now and it is the best truck I have owned!