Last post on Jul 29, 2012 at 7:31 PM
You are in the Lexus RX 300/330/350
What is this discussion about?
Mercedes-Benz M-Class, Acura MDX, Lexus RX 330, BMW X5, Cadillac SRX, Toyota Highlander, Volvo XC90, SUV
#1065 of 1084 Re: Mercedes ML vs. MDX vs. Lexus vs. X5? [bidder5000]
Mar 17, 2008 (12:59 pm)
I faced a similar decision recently and went with the 2008 X5 (w 3rd row seats) after owning the RX300 for 8 years.
The previous generation RX (Japanese made) was incredibly reliable - not a single problem in 88,000 miles and had adequate space for family with 3 kids and dog. Unless you are doing any offroad driving, the performance differences are not significant between X5 3.0, RX 350 and MDX. MDX has horsepower advantage and has better 0-60 but for most daily driving I guess you would not notice. Looked at XC90 also but have heard reports of reliability issues and found the V6 underpowered.
RX and X5 felt more luxurious than MDX and as a former owner of an earlier Acura car, I spent most of my time with that wishing that I had bought something else
#1066 of 1084 Re: Mercedes ML vs. MDX vs. Lexus vs. X5? [storo]
Mar 17, 2008 (4:38 pm)
I think ur decision was good. is it the 4.8?
Can you tell your experience how it has been till now.
I have the same problem choosing well off course i am in no hurry for a purchase.
I like the x5 but since hearing reliability issues i dont know what to choose anymore
I ldo like the rx but well the design is old and guys don't really drive it much
mdx well not for me volvo dont consider.
I am hoping lexus bring a much better rx or a new suv to compete with x5 cayenne and ml
#1068 of 1084 Used SRX is a Bargain
May 08, 2009 (6:44 pm)
As a new car, the SRX takes a tremendous depreciation hit; however, a used '07-'09 SRX (especially CPO) is probably the best automotive bargain in America.
#1070 of 1084 2010 MDX vs 2010 Cadillac SRX Premium
Jan 07, 2010 (6:55 pm)
Has anyone else compared these two vehicles? We drove the Cadillac last week and really liked the ride and the looks of it. You can get most of the perks of the MDX's advance/ent in the premium for about $5000 less. From what I can tell the only thing we would be giving up would be the third row seat. If we purchased the MDX, the most we could afford would be the tech/ent. For a $1000 more for the Caddy we would get ventilated seats, front/rear park assist, passive lock/push button start, onstar, the ability to fill up with regular gas and two entertainment screens vs one.
The Caddy could be purchased and serviced locally where as the closest Acura dealer is more than an hour away. They also claim that the new 2010's are selling faster than they can get them in so no discount off MSRP.
We have an 01 MDX with 145,000 miles that the tranny is giving us problems, so have to do something in the next week or two.
Would love to hear your thoughts if you've compared the two.
#1071 of 1084 Re: 2010 MDX vs 2010 Cadillac SRX Premium [bren_va]
Jan 09, 2010 (12:45 am)
I'd go for the 2010 SRX. Not only is it a better looking vehicle, but it's also a better bang for the buck suv. Better gas mileage, better gadgets, etc. The only negative would be if you need the 3rd row seat, which the MDX would have. However, the 3rd row on the MDX is really only suited for kids, and you would give up most, if not all, of the trunk space. The SRX would only seat 5, but has generous room in the trunk. Did I mention how much better looking the SRX is?
We also have an 02 Acura TL with about 140K miles, and the tranny is already slipping. So much for Acura reliability...We are also looking into dumping it for a new car.
#1072 of 1084 Re: 2010 MDX vs 2010 Cadillac SRX Premium [cal_92]
Feb 18, 2010 (5:23 am)
Yes - I would agree - we have a 2007 MDX with Tech/Ent package and when my wife's XC-90 needed to be replaced recently - we ended up choosing the 2010 SRX over the XC-60, MDX, and RX-350. There were aspects of all of them that we liked. The Volvo is a nice car - and a pretty good value in that you should be able to get decent deals on them - but she was looking for something a bit different. We decided we didn't want two MDX's and didn' t need to have 2 cars with a 3rd row since we already have the MDX.
I would recommend you test drive the SRX with / without the 20" wheels. Some folks like the softer ride that you get with the 18" wheels - the 20" wheels definitely give a firmer ride and there is no sense in paying extra for that if you are not going to be happy with the change in firmness.
We ended up going with the 2.8 Turbo AWD Premium - which for that model is pretty close in price to what you would pay for an MDX with all 3 packages. If you are someone who is sensitive to power at takeoff - you should drive both the turbo and non-turbo versions to get a feel for whether the difference is worth it to you. One warning though - the Turbo not only adds several thousand to the cost of the vehicle - it also requires premium gas - so that is another cost issue to consider when going with that model.
#1073 of 1084 Re: 2010 MDX vs 2010 Cadillac SRX Premium [srjacobs]
Feb 18, 2010 (8:59 am)
Turbo would also mean a detuned/derated base engine resulting in poor hwy FE.
#1074 of 1084 Why I picked the RX over the others
Sep 04, 2010 (7:57 pm)
After months and months and months of shopping for a new SUV, I finally bought the RX450h. I looked at every SUV on the market. And I do mean every single one. Some we drove three, four and five times over. To the point where I had to go to different dealerships for the same car because I was embarrassed with how many test drives I took. That doesn't include the countless magazine articles, blogs, owners I spoke with, etc. I could spend pages talking about all the ones I considered (and I have the stacks of papers to prove it!), but in a nutshell here's the reasons I went with the RX and didn't go with the competition:
1. 450h = Lexus reliability (we hate spending time at the shop, causing one or both of us to miss work and such a hassle to rearrange schedules), really liked the new exterior design, interior layout was very nice, rich leather, ample space, velvety ride, ultra quiet, expecially the hybrid version along with 30 mpg gas mileage, remote touch navigation is better than the others I tried, and just an overall upscale feel inside and out. It would have been nice to have a 3rd row option to use in a pinch and ports shouldn't be so hard to get to in the arm rest, but otherwise this car fit the bill in every way. IMO, it's perfect for a family who needs an all-purpose luxury car to commute to work, run daily errands, take the kids to school, take the family on a 1,000-mile road trip for the weekend, and then show up to a black-tie dinner.
2. Acura MDX/RDX - great reliability. However, while the handling was a touch better than the RX, the ride is not nearly as refined, there's more noticeable road noise, and the transmission is not as smooth. I didn't like the "bagel slicer" front grill and the controls were a bit too busy looking. This was tied as our 3rd place car.
3. Audi Q series - really nice handling, but that's about where it ended. Reliability was a major issue for us, and although Audi's record in that department has improved somewhat over the past few years, it's not reached Lexus reliability. Interior was not quite to the level of the Lexus. This was tied for our 2nd place car.
4. BMW X series = on par with Audi in terms of handling, but road noise was pretty loud and interior was not even close to the other brands. Ride was on the harsh side. 3rd row option was nice though. Reliability is better than Audi and MB, but still not a Lexus or Acura. We liked the exterior design, but overall, it was never really in the running.
5. Cadillac Escalade/SRX - we test drove the Escalade once, and once was enough to know it wasn't what we wanted. Way too big, bulky, and pretty gaudy all around. The SRX was better, but we weren't at all impressed with the quality of the interior, the fit and finish, or the ride comfort. The exterior was a bit edgy as compared to the others, and we liked it.
6. Infiniti Fx/Qx - As with the escalade, the Qx was just too bulky for us, but it drove a lot smaller than the Caddy. As for the Fx, the design didn't really do anything for us, although we liked the interior and the ride quality. This was tied for our 3rd place with the Acura.
7. Land Rover - different, but that was about it. Reliability? 'nuff said.
8. Mercedes GL and GLK -- We really liked both of these. Alot. The GL's exterior is really striking, has an aggressive stance, although the interior could be nicer. Navigation needs to be improved big time. The M B Tex a.k.a. pleather, also was a turn off at this price point. But, unlike the other larger SUVs, this one drove really small for its size. This was our 2nd place car, and we probably would have bought it but for reliability history for the GL (not good, to say the least), and the poor gas mileage. If both of these improve in the next five years, we're getting this car. As for the GLK, if we went with MB, we would have gotten the GL over the GLK.
9. Porsche Cayenne -- test drove it once, was not impressed with the ride quality, then came back again in a month and confirmed it was not for us. Bouncy ride (better not put any hot coffee in those cup holders), jerky accelleration, just overall not a comfortable ride. I couldn't imaging taking it on a road trip of any significant duration.
10. Volvo XC series - a few years ago these would be high on my list. Since then, every other car on my list has equaled Volvo in the one category that Volvo used to be the leader in - safety. Who feels unsafe in any of the cars above? Once you get past the safety advantage, there wasn't much the XCs offered that wasn't surpassed by the other cars. Plus, the reliability has dropped off over the last few years.
11. Other cars never in the running -- Hummer, Lincoln, Hyundai.