MDX Vs Commander - READ ONLY

35 messages, Last post on Oct 31, 2005 at 2:38 AM

You are in the Future Vehicles - Archived Discussions Forum. Your Host is kirstie_h

This discussion is ARCHIVED. To reactivate the discussion, post a request in the Lost? Ask the Future Vehicles Host for Directions! discussion.

What is this discussion about? Acura MDX, Jeep Commander, SUV

Outline

Messages Page 4 of 4: 1; 2; 3; 4; Prev; Next; Last

#26 of 35 Re: blkhemi [blkhemi] by shopper8 Oct 11, 2005 (11:32 am)
Replying to: blkhemi (Oct 10, 2005 9:28 pm) I just traded in my '96 Grand Cherokee with 80k miles on it to buy a brand new Acura MDX and got a bowl of soup and a handshake as a trade-in ($2500). I took it to another dealer and they offered half a bowl of soup and a hand shake ($1500). Jeep trade in values are horrible - I have owned 4 over the years. They are throw away cars at 120k mi. In an earlier posting, you mentioned that you traded in a brand new JGC, bought new for $43k (a record transaction for Jeep by the way) and sold it back with a couple thousand miles on it for $38k to buy a Commander. Your convinced you got a good deal? The car depreciated 12% in one month and your doing a victory lap on the resale value of Jeep/Chrysler. My prediction: trail rated Commander will be gone in three years. Families won't buy them because of price, styling, gas mileage, and safety. And traditionalist who really want a true off road vehicle will still buy the Jeep Grand Cherokee or Liberty. Replies to this message: blkhemi (Oct 11, 2005 1:01 pm) rctennis3811 (Oct 11, 2005 3:52 pm)
#27 of 35 Re: blkhemi [shopper8] by blkhemi Oct 11, 2005 (1:01 pm)
Replying to: shopper8 (Oct 11, 2005 11:32 am) Your predictions are ridiculous. Jeep took huge flack off of the 84-01 Jeep Cherokee because it was not "mainstream" enough when newer model vehicles were coming from all major automakers. Yet somehow, they kept rolling them off of the assembly line for 17 YEARS!!! And made huge profits off of them. So Jeep will NEVER discontinue the Commander in three years because for (1), they have to much invested in it, and (2), they have never discontinued a vehicle without it running it's forecasted course. Oh, I got a sour deal? The JGC I bought was factory-ordered (which means it had things on it that other JGC's didn't, to help you understand the price). It didn't have a couple thousand miles, more like 9100. Any vehicle that you drive off the dealership lot, (oh , and this includes Acura), will lose at least $7k. So to tell me that I got a bad deal, you may want to look at the deals you've made when continuously (4 of them you say) buying such a "horrible" vehicle. ANY car with over a 120k miles won't be worth anything. No car is immune to that. What does a bowl of soup have to do with buying a car? I only got a Coke when I was in the process of making the dumbest decision of buying an MDX, however, I was offered clam chowter when I was buying the Commander. Interesting. Oh and for the record, families are buying these things in droves. It has been selling faster than JGC and the redesigned Ford Explorer, which the Commander and Explorer was released similtanuously. Was your '96 optioned to the max like my '98 5.9 Limited? Probably not. And you mentioned styling. If GM can move Hummer H2's like hot cakes in the middle of a gas crissis, I assure you the last thing Jeep is worried about is some car-based SUV lover calling the Commander "ugly". The Commander refuses to blend in, unlike the vanilla bland MDX. Price. Umm, last I checked the MDX was "pricier" than the Commander. I know that they are tick-for-tat when fully optioned, however you can get a Commander for around $28k. Try that with even the base MDX(no roof rack, which is standard on the Commander) and you come up with roughly $35k just to start. If you want to save gas, go with the V6(17/22). Safety, I don't remember the MDX getting a great crash-test score either. Nice try Shopper. Replies to this message: rctennis3811 (Oct 11, 2005 3:52 pm)
#28 of 35 Re: blkhemi [blkhemi] by rctennis3811 Oct 11, 2005 (3:37 pm)
Replying to: blkhemi (Oct 10, 2005 9:28 pm) 1. I never said they were releasing it to the hip-hop crowd, that's just your misinformed self saying that. I provided a rebuttal against your claim that Ward's said the HEMI was refined, but in fact it said nothing about refinement regarding the HEMI on their 10 best list. In fact, I never worded a sentence like that at all. 2. Since it's inception, the MDX has received a new navigation system, a new Bose audio system, rear video camera, faster DVDROM processing unit, new seats, new gauges, new steering wheel, new center console, refreshed exterior, new wheels, side-curtain airbags, new exhaust system, stability control with traction control, Brake Assist, OnStar, Bluetooth, projector-style headlamps, ambient lighting, and more. Yes, I'd call those continuous updates. 3. The MDX had no power loss, just number loss. A 2006 model will still accelerate just as quickly as a 2005 model, since it has the same amount of power coming from the 3.5. The SAE just restated the HP in lower numbers through the new, fairer testing methods. A loss of power would be if the exhaust were more constricted for 2006. You need to be careful with how you word your sentences... 4. The Jeep Liberty is a truck-based compact ute, so of course it will tow more than say a CRV or something of that class. What I mean is the MDX is on-par with the SRX, Highlander, Pilot, B9, etc. in terms of towing. And I assure you, most people in my suburban community don't tow very much. Our SUVs are considered "mall cruisers." 5. Since when does the fact that vehicle is truck-based essentially make it better? If there was no point to car-based SUVs, then how come almost every automaker is jumping on the bandwagon and the public is buying the "hype" up? You make it seem as if every single American needs to tow and go off-road. Sorry, we don't all live in Maine. By the way, something cannot be in "mind condition" if it was supposedly in service for half of its ownership period. Your friend does know that all states have Lemon Laws, right? 6. Again, you're putting words into my mouth when stating that I said I would rather drive a Chrysler-Dodge-Jeep vehicle when my car is in for service. I said they offer the choice of those vehicles. 7. Hey, we finally have something in common! I've never had to wait more than an hour for an oil change either! It just so happens that Acura gives loaner cars for the day when I need to get to work.
#29 of 35 Re: blkhemi [blkhemi] by rctennis3811 Oct 11, 2005 (3:52 pm)
Replying to: blkhemi (Oct 11, 2005 1:01 pm) 1. Jeep didn't discontinue the Cherokee because it wasn't "mainstream"...it was outdated, period. The Liberty is a MUCH better vehicle than the Cherokee ever was. 2. Any car driven off the dealer lot will lose at least $7,000 including Acura? Say it ain't so, as I traded my 2004 MDX Premium for a 2005 MDX Touring and the value of the 04 only lost $4500. Don't believe me? I can scan the sales contract if you'd like. 3. Ever heard of eBay Motors? Apparently, many cars are sold there with over 120,000 miles and the seller still gets money for them. Ahem. 4. People are buying the Commander in droves? Oh, don't you mean the H3? 5. While I'm not calling the Commander ugly (in fact, I think it looks pretty good; much better than the "new" Explorer), it's nothing special in the design department. There's no huge wheels like the H2/3, no big chrome grill, no high ride height, no available Yellow exterior color, and no HUMMER badge. It basically just looks like a 2001 Jeep Cherokee, which DCX has already said. 6. Safety!?! The MDX got great crash-test scores! A "Best Pick" by the IIHS. http://www.hwysafety.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=149 5 Star Frontal/Side by the NHTSA http://safercar.gov/NCAP/Cars/3214.html Apparently, the 2005 MDX has a lower head injury rating (frontal crash), thoracic trauma index (side crash), and chance of rollover than the 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee. How's that for ***** safety?
#30 of 35 Car-based guy a little touchy??????? by blkhemi Oct 11, 2005 (6:53 pm)

#31 of 35 VAN-based guy a little touchy??????? by blkhemi Oct 11, 2005 (7:23 pm)
I stand corrected about the crash scores. Unlike some people, I can take a little criticism. I meant to say the H2 because I was talking in terms of " style". The H3 has more of it than the H2. And if you're talking about the H3 in terms of sales, GM says in the monthly reports that I get (36 year retiree) that the H3's are selling even slower than the H2's even with the better fuel economy. I'm glad to here that you got more for your MDX as that's not always the case. You might want to go back and read your post as you did say something in reference to the hip-hop crowd and the HEMI besides what Ward's said. Funny, didn't see Honda/Acura motors listed. Oh and speaking of the HEMI, just picked up my new copy of Truck Trend and they are praising the HEMI engine for its smothness in operation, so read up on it. A person who pays a seller on the Internet anything over what is worth on a vehicle is nuts. Never said the Acura lost power for '06 but rather lost rated power. I have a problem when a manufacturer is mis-leading in it's advertising about power. You as a consumer should as well. I was merely stating that while the Liberty is in the compact class, it still out-tows the MDX. And I know most MDX or RX330 owners aren't towing anything, but it just doesn't seem concievable that a truck so powerful can only tow so little. And just to let you know, it doesn't have anything to do with being car-based. The Ridgeline tows a healthy 5000 pounds. It's all about packaging. Oh and yeah, my buddy's MDX was in mint cond. as he didn't have to worry about scuffs and scratches on it because it was on a freakin rack 15 days out of month. If you take the time and read the MDX's problems post on this very site, you'll see that there are just as many people complaining about problems as on the Jeep forums. I have no doubt of Honda's engineering. IMO, it's better than Toyota's. But it's not perfect. And finally, I can agree with you on something. Both Commander and the MDX is better looking than the supposedly "newly invigorated" Explorer. I could go on and on about the MDX and Commander. Truth is that they are remarkable vehicles on different sides of the tracks. However, if our federal government doesn't get it in gear and do something about the energy crisis, both me and you will be battling over hybrids next........... ........hopefully I worded my sentences properly Replies to this message: anonymousposts (Oct 30, 2005 12:45 pm) blkhemi (Oct 30, 2005 10:09 pm) kirstie_h (Oct 31, 2005 2:38 am)
#32 of 35 opinions by kirstie_h HOST Oct 12, 2005 (4:32 am)
Let's tone down the hostility and argumentative nature of the conversation. Deciding which vehicle is best is a subjective matter, and no one is going to "win" the argument. People have different requirements and tastes in vehicles, and no one vehicle suits everyone.
#33 of 35 Re: VAN-based guy a little touchy??????? [blkhemi] by anonymousposts Oct 30, 2005 (12:45 pm)
Replying to: blkhemi (Oct 11, 2005 7:23 pm) 1. Honda never mis-led in its advertising its horsepower. In fact they should be commended for being one of the first manufacturers that retested thier whole line-up and restated power using the "new" criteria. maybe the other manufacturers were "smarter" by figuring many consumers would find it hard to comprehend that only the way they measure the horsepower changed and not the actual amount of power. 2. Truck trend...Tells you right there what the smoothness frame of reference is. 3. Frame based vehicle tow more as a rule. So I would expect nearly any frame based SUV to tow more. But I also would expect it to be much a less refined and poorer handling vehicle. That's why car-based SUV's sell so strongly. many people want the truck "look" but not the truck NVH tradeoffs. 4. MDX problem board has 920 posts from April 26,2002. Whereas the Cherokee had 2129 from about a year earlier. I scanned some of them and for the most part it looked like the problems with the Cherokee were more serious and pervasive. Funny thing is I once wanted another Daimler-Chrysler product, The C-Class Benz. I went into that forum to get a little information on them and that was the only time I was told NOT to buy the car and expect Honda/Toyota reliability by its occupants. The MDX/Cherokee discussion is rather simple though. Do want a truck or a rugged car. If you have lived thus far without a truck and just want something a little more rugged looking, you'll probably do best with an MDX. It's not "trail rated" but I'm sure not it's capabilities would be more than adequate. But if you spend time far off the beaten trail and need to tow a lot of stuff often, you'd better get the Jeep. Replies to this message: blkhemi (Oct 30, 2005 10:09 pm) kirstie_h (Oct 31, 2005 2:38 am)
#34 of 35 Re: VAN-based guy a little touchy??????? [anonymousposts] by blkhemi Oct 30, 2005 (10:09 pm)
Replying to: anonymousposts (Oct 30, 2005 12:45 pm) Up until Sept.30, 2005 they were bragging about the MDX's "supposed" 265hp. I don't know what you'd call misleading, but if a carmaker is saying the vehicle has more power than it does, that is cheating the consumer. Although it didn't lose any power, it still is bad business to advertise a vehicle with a higher power rating than it really does. The new SAE rules were in effect 1/1/2004. So for 2 model years, Honda and Toyota "mis-led" the consumer. Wonder what would've been the outcome if DC or GM had "lied" about horsepower ratings? What's so interesting is that the domestic makes actually either stood pat or gained power ratings. The new Z06 Vette gained 5-hp under the new testing. So since it was Acura/Honda and Lexus/Toyota, were supposed to just overlook that? I think not. You failed to type about all those tranny failures in the MDX's. "Serious and pervasive"? I'd say so Your expectations of the Jeep truck platform vehicles should be higher. Pick up a copy of the latest Consumer Reports(those guys love Acura's) and they talk about how quiet and refined the Commander and JGC is. Oh, and the ride quality rated "HIGHER" than that of the MDX's. Interesting. Replies to this message: kirstie_h (Oct 31, 2005 2:38 am)
#35 of 35 Re: VAN-based guy a little touchy??????? [blkhemi] by kirstie_h HOST Oct 31, 2005 (2:38 am)
Replying to: blkhemi (Oct 30, 2005 10:09 pm) Since this discussion is no longer about future vehicles, and it seems to be simply an argument between a couple of memers, we're going to close it. If you want to discuss these two SUVs, please hit the SUVs board. Thanks.