Last post on Jan 03, 2012 at 6:28 PM
You are in the Acura MDX
What is this discussion about?
Acura MDX, BMW X5, SUV
#54 of 185 Re: Business Week Review [anon3]
Mar 18, 2007 (6:23 am)
A loaded MDX will cost about 20-24K less than a loaded X5. That's a significant issue for many who might be considering both vehicles. I agree with you that the latest variation of third-row seating is ridiculous and I believe they should be a no-cost option. I disagree with you that a typical "Japanese car buyer" will just pick a car off the lot with options that "someone else" picked; every car dealer has product on the lot that they ordered for stock with their selection of options. I happen to have a Subaru and a BMW; I could get 3 Subaru's for the price of the one BMW, but I don't have to worry about where I park the Subaru as often, it does all the "dirty work" of hauling things for me, gets me where I want to go and it's fun to drive but the road noise is annoying at times - that's how they help keep the cost down. I haven't had the BMW long enough to judge reliability, but in many ways it is superior to the Subaru and yet I tell people all the time, that if they want many of the same qualities of a BMW in a more affordable package, to make sure they thoroughly check out every model of Subaru. I'm sure that Acura is trying their best to be considered the best choice for the customers they are wooing. It creates a volatile, competitive environment; little wonder there is so much disagreement across the many discussions here. My next vehicle almost certainly will be either an Acura, BMW or Subaru, whichever one has more benefits than drawbacks - for me. Cars are too expensive to not take seriously; I'm always looking at alternatives no matter whether I'm in the market for a new one or not. Good luck finding the perfect one for you!
"I trust my personal experience over the anecdotal complaints of this or that person who had a bad experience with an 8 year old BMW. The fact is that newer BMWs are extremely reliable. My family has had 11 BMWs in 10 years, including 5 X5's. With the exception of my 2002 745i, they have all been extremely reliable. None of my X5's has ever gone back to the dealer for warranty repair. The MOST unreliable car I've ever owned was an Acura; not a month passed without a warranty repair visit to the dealer. Further example: the Acura RL has a miserable repair record.
The problem here is that Japanese car buyers are used to buying whatever mass-produced-truck-dressed-up-as-a-luxury-SUV happens to be on the lot with options chosen by someone else. It's just a car, so why put any thought into it? Just buy one of the hundreds of cars just like it on the lot.
The X5's rear seat is an option because not everyone wants one, so they give you a choice. I ordered an X5 without a 3rd row seat. You could have done the same. (This isn't a mini-van. I agree that the 3rd-row seat is pointless in a vehicle like this.)
Every BMW is made to order either to a customer's or dealer's option spec. You can have a custom-optioned X5 delivered in as little as 6 weeks if you can't find one on the lot that fits your needs. When your X5 moves along the assembly line in Spartanburg, SC, it has your name and your option choices attached to it from beginning to end. At any time, your sales person can tell you which stage of production your car is in, when it's on the truck, and which day it will arrive for delivery. (Try custom ordering an Acura or Lexus and see how long you wait and whether they can do the same.)
You must be the only person on the planet who thinks the X5 is NOT about performance. The choice of an Acura over a BMW is never about BMW performance shortcomings. It's usually about price. And it's about buying a dressed up Honda (Acura) off the lot cheap and quick because it's good enough. Anyone who is happy with cars that are just "good enough" would be smart not to pay the premium for a BMW.
#55 of 185 MDX has hard drivers seat
Mar 18, 2007 (1:45 pm)
I was checking out the SUVs at Mercedes and stopped into the Acura dealer close by. The first thing I noticed when I sat in the MDX is how hard and uncomfortable the drivers seat is. That was enough for me to write them off. I hear the same complaints on the 2007 Escalade. Is this a trend?
#56 of 185 Re: MDX has hard drivers seat [gagrice]
Mar 19, 2007 (10:47 am)
It is a trend. Manufacturers are migrating more and more towards performance, which requires sport seating. Sport seats tend to be very firm with more dramatic side bolsters to hold you in place during higher speed curves and cornering. A hard seat and a firm suspension can yield a punishing ride with harsh vibration. The trick is to design a seat that holds you in place, transmits some road feel (data transmitted to the driver's butt in the form of vibration and slippage tells you what's happening at the rear wheels), protects you in an accident, but is still comfortable on long trips.
Personally, I consider the seats to be just as important as the engine, suspension, etc. I recommend asking each dealer about seating options/upgrades. After having rented, driven, or owned many Acura, Porsche Cayenne, BMW, Audi, Cadillac, and Lexus vehicles, I personally prefer BMW's upgraded contour/comfort seating over anything else that I've experienced. I would vote for them as the the best front seat in any vehicle in that price range.
#57 of 185 Re: MDX has hard drivers seat [anon3]
Mar 20, 2007 (5:23 pm)
Sadly I could not find a salesman at BMW of San Diego to let me sit in an X5. I wandered through the showroom and lot. I may find a year old 4.4 with low miles. Save that initial hit out the door. They seem to be nice vehicles. I need to drive one for myself to be sure I like the seats. I am disappointed in some of the trends in vehicles.
#58 of 185 11 BMWs in 10 years
Mar 21, 2007 (11:33 am)
Wow. I wish I could afford 11 BMW's. It sounds like you don't necessarily keep a car long enough to experience the long term problems, or go out of warranty. Or again, you might be lucky... see below.
To contrast with anon3, I've had 1 Mercedes ML320 in almost 10 years, and frankly, it's been very reliable. Now, if you check Consumer Reports, Edmunds, and every forum, you'll easily find out that the Mercedes is the junkiest piece of c**p out there. Is there something wrong there? No, it's just my dumb luck. But I'm not about to push it again. I'm expecting to keep my next car 10 years. And that's why I'm buying the MDX.
#59 of 185 Re: 11 BMWs in 10 years [choiski]
Mar 22, 2007 (4:36 pm)
I would go sit in and drive the new MDX. If you are used to the ML320 seats you will probably hate the seats in the new MDX. Felt like 1/2 inch of foam on a piece of plywood.
Welcome to the Forum.
#60 of 185 Own an 01 4.4 X5 - moving to another vehicle.
Mar 27, 2007 (8:42 am)
In the process of trading our car in. And we're confused. Looking at Acura MDX, Volvo XC90, and Audi Q7. Safety is my primary concern. We're a family of 4 and planning on adding another child in the next year - so we'll need three carseats.
I'm concerned about what was in the above thread about the MDX 3rd row being in the crumple zone.
Any thoughts on the 3 vehicles are considering? X5 is out b/c of price. Audi is obviously more expensive than the volvo or MDX. Price is a concern but safety and handling come first.
#61 of 185 Re: Own an 01 4.4 X5 - moving to another vehicle. [kaia1]
Mar 27, 2007 (9:14 am)
That's a tall order. There are many ways to compare safety. Let's start off by asking if you've covered the basics and gone to the NHTSA and IIHS pages? Did you compare the raw data or just the "stars" and rankings?
"I'm concerned about what was in the above thread about the MDX 3rd row being in the crumple zone."
Consider the source. That's something a BMW sales person told a potential buyer. I have no idea if that information is correct or not, but I have treat it with a very healthy does of skepticism.
#62 of 185 Re: Own an 01 4.4 X5 - moving to another vehicle. [varmint]
Mar 27, 2007 (12:27 pm)
I saw this on wikipedia regarding Acura MDX rear safety:
The MDX is ahead of the competition with regards to its construction in rear collisions: It will withstand a rear collision up to 50 miles an hour, well above the the basic 35 mph standard currently required by the NHTSA.
Again, I don't have any data from a credible source to back this statement up, so take it for what it is.
BTW, do check out the next issue of Car and Driver (I think May) - they have a SUV comparison and rate 07 MDX #1.
#63 of 185 Re: Own an 01 4.4 X5 - moving to another vehicle. [justg0]
Mar 28, 2007 (9:20 am)
Who cares if the vehicle can withstand a 50mph collision, what about the occupants!?!? Questions like that make it very difficult to put all the information into proper perspective.
Looking at the raw data, it looks like the MDX ranks above the XC90 and Q7 when it comes to rollover tests. However, the XC90 does have a very nice anti-roll system built into the stability control programming. Then again, the MDX is the only one where the stability control ECU can route power via SH-AWD as well as use the brakes to stabilize the vehicle. Who can say which method is more effective?
In a rear crash, the IIHS ranks the XC90 higher than the MDX, and the Q7 is untested. But that test looks only at whiplash, not motion of the whole body or resistance to intrusion.
With the NHTSA and IIHS front and side impacts all of these rigs do well. Looking at the raw data you'll probably find only the difference between an A grade and an A+. At that point, we're starting to split hairs.
While safety is king, I'd probably let other factors dictate my choice between these three. They're all safe. Or, as safe as we can tell with the limited data available.