You are here: Forums SUVs Acura MDX Acura MDX (pre-2007)

Acura MDX (pre-2007)

6469 messages,  Last post on Oct 28, 2009 at 3:40 AM

You are in the Acura MDX Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester

What is this discussion about? Acura MDX, SUV

Messages Page 6 of 647 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 647 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#51 of 6469 MB, RX and Lemmings by ardvarkus Nov 21, 2000 (6:29 pm)
A while ago I noticed a post from someone lamenting the scarcity of MDXs on the roads and hoping to see more in the future so that he wouldn't be the only one driving an MDX. I though: "Here is someone who ought to be sticking with the MB or RX if he felt the need to be like his negihbors." I purchased a 90 Q45 for two reasons: It was an awesome machine, and NOBODY else was driving them (they were all buying LS400s) I LIKE the fact that the MDX is rare. I like the fact that it will be limited in volume. I DON'T want to drive a vehicle I see all over. It does not make me feel "safe" or conforming to be like other consumers. I believe that, in part, the "higher resale" percentages and popularity of the ML is due to this human (lemming) desire to be part of the "in" crowd and to conform. I also think that this human emotion is at the root of why some folks feel the need to insult and belittle others not in their club. (Auto-centric?) Ard
#52 of 6469 marksmac -- Acura of SV by albert123 Nov 21, 2000 (7:10 pm)
If you were promised MSRP at the time of deposit, you may have a chance like I did. And you're right, they charge accessories close to Acura site's price(<15% more). Good luck....
#53 of 6469 sfaridi by diman1 Nov 21, 2000 (7:31 pm)
You can write your experience with that dealer on www.acuramdx.org
#54 of 6469 Ard by dfc101a Nov 21, 2000 (7:46 pm)
Completely agree with your post - well said!!
#55 of 6469 wmquan by brillmtb Nov 21, 2000 (8:26 pm)
Consider this from Australia " .....Mitsubishi’s new Pajero GLS (Montero 01 in the US) has raised the standard for four-wheel drives in several areas, and beat the Mercedes-Benz ML320 and Toyota 100 Series LandCruiser GLX to the best 4WD title. On the road, the Pajero delivers class-leading ride, handling and steering, and braking, attracting consistently good scores. The change to a unitary construction (with no separate chassis) has helped Mitsubishi to deliver best in class dynamics. The new chassis combines with fully independent suspension to provide an outstanding ride/handling compromise. In this respect, it makes the LandCruiser feel like a truck. Although the Toyota LandCruiser’s 4.5 litre engine delivers more pulling power in the low to mid rev range, the Mitsubishi Pajero’s 3.5 litre V6 also performs strongly. New to the Pajero is a five-speed, adaptive auto transmission with a tiptronic-style manual shift mode. Off the bitumen, the LandCruiser still has the edge but the Pajero is now very close. With a good approach angle, a smooth and willing engine, solid engine braking and reasonable wheel articulation, the Pajero copes with terrain that would have defeated the previous model. For the money, the Pajero GLS also offers a long standard equipment list. The ML320 uses the same great engine as the E320 sedan, but has limited off road ability, and the Pajero is at least equally capable on the road."
#56 of 6469 brillmtb by wmquan Nov 21, 2000 (9:20 pm)
I'm sure the Montero is a fine vehicle, and has nice off-road capability. However, one thing all these comparisons demonstrate that many fail to comprehend in their zeal to promote their vehicle of choice is that everyone has different priorities and preferences. Do they want an off-roader, do they even need an off-roader. Do they like the styling, is it feminine, is it masculine, is it minivanish, is it too trucky. How important is it to them to have a prestige brand, and what do they consider to be a prestige brand. What is the trade-off between cargo room, passenger room, etc. Do they want something more in the "image" of a truck or a car. How much do they value safety. Etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. No need to put someone down because they (god forbid!) prefer a car-like SUV, or a truck-like SUV, or want an off-roader, or never take the vehicle off-road. No need to apply brand and/or class snobbery either. (Brillmtb, this part of this post is not directed at you, it's just a general comment.) As Ken always says, put together a list of your priorities of what you want in a vehicle, before you shop and start narrowing down vehicles. Don't shape your priorities based on an initial desire for one particular vehicle; let your needs drive what you select. If you find that your priorities list favors vehicle Y, but you don't WANT vehicle Y, then there's something wrong with your priorities list -- reassess your needs, search your heart, and re-rank your priorities and their weight. I found the MDX to be the best vehicle for my family's needs. It's not god's SUV, it's not the right choice for everyone. Same goes for the Sequoia, Montero, ML320, ML430, RX300, and so on. That said, one thing that automatically makes me nervous about the Montero (since I value a reasonable degree of safety) are its IIHS crash test scores. The IIHS front crash tests are more realistic than NHTSA's, and the Montero didn't do as well as one might hope from a new model.
#57 of 6469 Nicely said, William by kenyee Nov 21, 2000 (10:57 pm)
Couldn't have said it better myself Safety is also my highest priority. I'm looking forward to seeing the MDX's crash data...
#58 of 6469 Crash data by railr Nov 21, 2000 (11:02 pm)
kenyee Do you think they will crash test the MDX...? It appears that they haven't crash tested any Acura models -- is this because of the lower number of Acuras sold in comparison to other vehicles tested, or because the Acura name isn't as high profile as other vehicles which have been selected for testing? The results for the Odyssey are available though, and I'm guessing should signify a similarity to the results we can expect for the MDX. Regards. Rail
#59 of 6469 wmquan by brillmtb Nov 21, 2000 (11:58 pm)
I think my post started off with this "consider this...." I do agree that there is a different SUV for everyone. I agree that you should begin with a list of what your needs are then look for the SUV that best fits your top 10 expectations/needs. I disagree that the Montero did poorly in the crash tests, the one I remember was actually better than I had expected. Since the MDX doesnt even have a test yet if I read the post correctly after yours then I would wait and buy after the test if crash test results are of great importance to you. I do think the Montero is a better value, fully loaded LTD (with rear air) are now selling at 34,500 thanks to the pressure out there with the MDX and Sequoia. I hope MDX and Sequoia buyers will soon benefit as well because the dealers are just plain ripping folks off now with MSRP or close to it pricing.
#60 of 6469 brillmtb by wmquan Nov 22, 2000 (1:00 am)
Thanks, points taken. I do agree with the tough pricing for the Sequoia and MDX. However, I think the latter will wear off pretty well. My issue with the Montero crash tests was that "acceptable" is not "good" in the IIHS framework (I never said it did poorly, though it's obviously not as good as some will prefer). A lot of newer, more modern-designed SUV's easily get a "good" in the IIHS test now (X5, RX300, M-class). These are probably the only reputable crash tests available today, as the NHTSA tests for the 2001 Montero won't be available until January. One would have hoped that the 2001 Montero, being a new design, would have incorporated more features to ensure a "Good" rating. In fact, the previous generation Montero actually performed slightly better in one area of the IIHS test! That is especially disquieting since next-generation vehicles usually perform better in crash tests, not worse or about the same. That implies that Mitsubishi cut some corners when it comes to safety. That of course would make some buyers nervous about it. You're correct that MDX crash test results are not yet available. However, experience has shown that vehicles based on similar platforms tend to have similar crash test results. Because the MDX is based on the Honda Odyssey, which had an overall "good" rating in the IIHS test, expectations do tend to anticipate a "good". Acura also claims that the MDX will achieve the "good" rating in the IIHS test (and 5-stars in the NHTSA tests). Obviously this can be marketing blather, but it is based on their internal tests, and they do have some stake in this. Combine that with the MDX's ancestry and it's pretty "safe" (pardon the pun) to say that the MDX's crash test results will be as good as the Montero's and, in all likelihood, probably better. Obviously MDX owners will freak if what we think is likely doesn't turn out to be. If someone wants certainty, they should, of course, wait, or look toward the X5, ML320, or RX300. And, to split hairs, I do believe (own opinion) that the X5 and ML320 have additional safety margins beyond just their crash test scores. On a side note, the IIHS also produced some interesting bumper damage costs. Dunno if the MDX will fare worse or better. Anyway, I'm not saying that the Montero is a bad vehicle. Again, I think priorities will determine if it's the right vehicle for a prospective buyer, and it should be considered.

Messages Page 6 of 647 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 647 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums SUVs Acura MDX Acura MDX (pre-2007)