Ask the Car People.SM


Crossover SUV Comparison

7326 messages,  Last post on May 17, 2013 at 1:14 PM

You are in the SUVs Forum.

What is this discussion about? GMC Acadia, Hyundai Santa Fe, Ford Taurus X, Toyota RAV4, Nissan Rogue, Honda Accord Crosstour, Dodge Journey, Car Buying, Car Comparisons, SUV

Messages Page 109 of 734

#1073 of 7326 Re: 2009 Ford Flex [arumage] by gregg_vw

Apr 05, 2007 (7:13 am)

Replying to: arumage (Apr 05, 2007 6:17 am)
Exactly. The Flex has a Land Rover-ness to it that will serve it well. On the other hand, the Quest was radical like the 1996 guppy Taurus was radical. Sometimes radical is not attractive or appealing in any appreciable way. Also, think Honda Element or Scion xB v. Pontiac Aztec. while many people cannot stand the xB, some find it very appealing. But no one thought the Aztec (or Quest) was cool. When a vehicle looks pregnant or badly misshapen, buyers do not flock to it.

#1074 of 7326 Re: Ford Flex seems alright [arumage] by wlbrown9

Apr 05, 2007 (7:13 am)

Replying to: arumage (Apr 05, 2007 4:59 am)
Okay, I went to the Flex site and took a look. From the side view it looks as if they took my '00 Isuzu Trooper and stretched it out a little and left the spare off the rear door.. Also, it looks to be just a little shorter in height than the Trooper. I like my Trooper, but I just don't think Ford building the replacement is a real fit.
 
Sorry, but this comes in a distant last in style compared to the CX9 & Lambadas. Might be an attempt at a 'retro' style, but IMHO it just does not work.

#1075 of 7326 Re: Ford Flex seems alright [gregg_vw] by gagrice

Apr 05, 2007 (7:43 am)

Replying to: gregg_vw (Apr 05, 2007 5:45 am)
I agree, Ford needs the Flex now not in a year or more. Sounds like a Microsoft promotion. I do like the pictures. I have hated most of the egg shaped SUV/CUV offerings over the last 5 years. Then I lean toward the last generation Suburban and Tahoe designs. I need to go look at the Acadia. I will have bought a new SUV or CUV by the time the Flex hits the showrooms.

#1076 of 7326 Drove a CX-9 last night by loach

Apr 05, 2007 (7:57 am)

As those who have read my posts probably know, I have been leaning toward the Acadia. I had tentatively eliminated the CX-9 from contention at the auto show based on the interior being a bit too tight for our family (and my wife's reaction to the size of the rear doors). But I liked it well enough that I thought I'd better at least drive one. So here are my brief thoughts (drove a Grand Touring because memory seats are a requirement for us):
 
Handling - Overall thought it handled a little better than the Acadia. I agree it drives "smaller" than it is. Body roll in corners seemed similar to Acadia.
Ride - Acadia rides better. I suspect part of this is the 20" wheels on the GT. The 18's may be better but that doesn't help me.
Visibility - This surprised me a little because I expected it to be no better than Acadia given the rear styling, but I felt it offered a better 360 degree view of the road than Acadia.
Interior space - Much tougher to get into the 3rd row of CX-9 than in the Acadia. Couldn't adjust all three rows to be comfortable for me (6'0" tall) at the same time. Could in the Acadia.
 
Overall, I like both vehicles, but it still looks like Acadia will win for us due primarily to our interior space needs. But if I was replacing my Pathfinder instead of my wife's minivan, the CX-9 would be a stronger contender because interior space wouldn't be as big an issue and I could blow off the memory seats and get a model with the 18" wheels.

#1077 of 7326 Re: 2nd Row CX 9 [arumage] by jcorn20

Apr 05, 2007 (8:32 am)

Replying to: arumage (Apr 04, 2007 6:21 am)
I see the 2nd row legroom in the Acadia is 36.9. Is this the figure with the seats moved all the way back or is this a minimum value?

#1078 of 7326 Re: 2nd Row CX 9 [jcorn20] by arumage

Apr 05, 2007 (8:45 am)

Replying to: jcorn20 (Apr 05, 2007 8:32 am)
If you want 34" in the 3rd row, you only get 37" in the 2nd row.
 
On a side note, here are the dimesions for the Ford Flex vs. the Freestyle
 
Length: F 202.3 | FS 200.3
Width: F 79.9 | FS 74.9
Height: F 67.6 | FS 67.4
Wheelbase: F 117.9 | FS 112.9

#1079 of 7326 Re: 2nd Row CX 9 [arumage] by jcorn20

Apr 05, 2007 (8:50 am)

Replying to: arumage (Apr 05, 2007 8:45 am)
I guess my question should have been "what is the max legroom in the 2nd row of the acadia with the 3rd row folded flat"? and the cx9? i like the convenience of the 3rd row, but i am more concerned with legroom in the 2nd row.

#1080 of 7326 Re: 2nd Row CX 9 [jcorn20] by arumage

Apr 05, 2007 (9:03 am)

Replying to: jcorn20 (Apr 05, 2007 8:50 am)
The max 2nd row legroom in the CX-9 is almost 40" as it is listed on their website. The CX-9 in the showroom had stickers on it that said as much. I'm not sure how they measured the Acadia though.

#1081 of 7326 Re: 2nd Row CX 9 [arumage] by stevedebi

Apr 05, 2007 (1:36 pm)

Replying to: arumage (Apr 05, 2007 8:45 am)
"On a side note, here are the dimesions for the Ford Flex vs. the Freestyle
  
Length: F 202.3 | FS 200.3
Width: F 79.9 | FS 74.9
Height: F 67.6 | FS 67.4
Wheelbase: F 117.9 | FS 112.9"
 
I don't see how the Flex can be on the same platform as the Freestyle, as some have stated here. The width is VERY different.

#1082 of 7326 Ford Flex by rossdm

Apr 05, 2007 (2:16 pm)

Sorry, but that Flex is BUTT UGLY.
 
Way to go Ford.

Messages Page 109 of 734

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement