WOW. What a wonderful SUV Acura engineered. :thumbup: I got the chance to drive the Sport and non Sport model. (Its long so bare with me)

When I walk up to the dealership's front door, the first thing I notice looking through glass is that big bold chrome and metal grill. In my opinion its not attractive at all, but I have seen worse. The model on display was a dark grey on grey interior with a bunch of Acura accessories which really set it off (roof rack, running boards etc). The overall design of the SUV is very nice. Gone is the raised minivan looking 1st gen MDX in exchange for a sharp edge designed SUV. Every design aspect seemed to come to a point or triangular in shape. The headlights, tailights, mirror turn signals, the character line running down the side and down the middle of the SUV (its going to be wierd to see license plates on the front of this truck with that pointy front end). It is very aggressive with muscular fender flairs and meaty tires and wheels. What I particularly don't care for is the plastic lower body cladding on the front and rear of the car (and of course the grill), however if I am not mistaken Acura offers body colored or silver painted accessories that fit right over this area.

The salesman (which happens to be one of my best friends) gives me the keys to a black on black MDX with Technology, Entertainment, and Sport packages (about 48K). When you open the doors all the lights come on as do the trick guages. Only the blue rings light up, followed by the needles and numbers upon start up. Between the speedometer and tachometer there is a small digital readout which is very similar to the one used in the new LS460. A nice welcome sign comes on when you start the engine and it also doubles as the multi information display (MPG, SH-AWD readout etc). I then notice how wierd the steering wheel is shaped. It is a heavily padded and sporty feeling three spoke wheel that contains many buttons on the face of the wheel and behind it. It feels very nice and portrays confidence, but it is also very cluttered looking.

The center console is very nice, though the mass of buttons throws me off a little bit. A large expanse of wood flanks both sides of the main controls and runs down to around the gear selector as well. The Navigation screen is very high up on the dashboard (really reminded me of the Navi position in the Volvo XC90) and covered by a large hood to reduce screen washout from the sun. However, once again, the dashboard is way to cluttered with a sea of buttons. It reminded me of an early 90's Alfa Romeo with all the identical buttons. The buttons will definitely take some getting used to. But here is the killer. With all of these buttons on the dashboard you also have a iDrive like mouse on the center console as well. :egads: Talk about getting the &)%* end of the stick. This is where the 06 MDX has it beat. Everything was easy to use and it didnt take long to find out where everything was. However if you really study it and look at how they organized the buttons, you have a small screen for the Tri-Zone climate control, right below it are the most used radio buttons, followed by the CD/DVD inputs, then the big Navi wheel. In the center console under the armrest is a huge box with a 115v outlet. So you now you can make your coffee, put a hot iron to your hair ladies, or in a more sensible way, you can bring your home cell phone charger with you and store it inside the box.

The front seats are very supportive and has a tremendous range of adjustments. I actually couldnt believe how well bolstered the seats were. They seemed to be taken right out of a TL Type-S or IS350. :thumbup: Plus the leather quality has rising a bit too. So to match the sporty feeling steering wheel, you have the sporty yet comfortable seats.

Moving to the second row seats I was also pleasantly surprised. The outboard seats are pretty much contoured like the front seats. :eek2: Sporty, hugs you, nice lower back support. Its great that they did this instead of adding your usual flat park bench rear seat. The two outside seats are also heated as well and rear passengers have their own climate controls. Plus there is plenty of rear seat leg room. Despite the extra room that SUV's offer over sedans, I never found the rear seat leg room enough in midsize SUV's for me. This is perfect. With the entertainment package comes a huge 9 or 10in flip down rear screen. It blends in nicely with the roof and the screen looks crystal clear. There are audio and video inputs with the Red, Yellow, and White jacks as well. So hooking up any video game would be cake. However, what didnt make sense to me is that the Rear lift gate only comes with this entertainment package. :uh: I don't find much entertainment with a power rear lift gate. Thats a convience feature and should have came standard or bundled with the tech package.

Now for the fun part. :) I started up the engine, reved it up a little bit as this new 3.7L engine comes to life. I put it in reverse to back out of the parking spot guided by the wonderful backup camera system and headed out to the highway. Driving along I noticed that the blind spots are STUPID HUGE!! You end up not seeing a big chunk over your shoulders. But once you can get past that under normal acceleration this truck is quiet and the shifts are butter smooth. At around 3500rpm, the engine makes a distinct snarl and you can start to hear the exhaust note a little more. Above this rpm range, the engine and exhaust sounds wonderful!! It is sporty, yet it is not overbearing. The first thing I said to my friend was "I love the way this truck sounds". The engine is much more responsive and in typical Honda/Acura fashion, loves the upper power band. On the open highway I was able to get the truck up to exactly 105 mph. From zero all the way to about 95 it pulls very nicely, but after that it seems like it hits a wall and doesnt pull nearly as strong. After this high speed run, I tested out the brakes by doing a nice moderate slow down where the brakes exhibited well controlled and grabby pedal feel. In a quick panick stop, the brakes did a good job as well.

But in my opinion the main attraction or biggest improvement on this SUV was not the nice features, the competitive price point, or the 300hp engine...it was the balanced and well controlled handling for such a big SUV!! So now to tie in the thick feeling wheel and the sporty seats we actually have a sporty driving SUV. :thumbup:

Acura claims that they tested the SUV on the Nürburgring (heh, seems like the in thing to do these days) and they probably did because this SUV can dance. Those early reviews that we read did not exaggerate this one bit. Seems like they were gunning for the Cayenne and X5 this time around. The SUV is incredibly rigid. Its a solid strong truck that displays minimal body flex. When you hit a big pothole, all you hear is "thump". The MDX laughs at potholes!! I want to drive this on the streets of NYC. It doesnt ride overly stiff either. In my opinion it is well calibrated and well controlled. The sport model includes an Acura first electromagnetic adjustable suspension. Its system I think (and correct me if I am wrong) is very much like the system used in certain Cadilalcs and even the Volvo S60R models. It uses some special fluid to firm up the suspension in corners yet smooth out the ride for comfort and to maintain good ride quality. The difference between Comfort and Sport settings while not night and day in my opinion are still a good variation. Coupled with the SH-AWD this truck seems to love running through turns. I noticed that most of the time the front wheels power the truck, but when the turns come or when you gun the acclerator it switches more power to the rear and to whatever wheel needs it most. The great thing about it is that it is always on.

There is a long high speed S-turn near the dealership that I took on my testdrive and I must say that this truck went through those turns rather quickly. Of course it rolled, its a truck, but the amount that it did roll was not as much as one would expect. It felt composed and you actually feel confident taking those turns at faster speeds. I had the VSA off the entire time and with the suspension in sport and the SH-AWD working its magic felt great!!


Well how does it compare to the RX400h that I drove the following day at TOL?? Pshh. Whats a RX400h?? The MDX does everything the RX does but better(minus the MPG thing). It has more room, nice features, better handling, more power, and its more comfortable. Right now, IMO it would be HARD to consider a RX over the new MDX. Acura did a GREAT job on the MDX and this thing is going to sell.

WOw, great review!! Seems Acura pretty much hit the nail in the head. I am sure most owners will not exploit its sportier nature though. Seems Acura will continue the MDX hit.

I'm glad Acura decided to step up a notch and started offering more of what the consumers want. Looks like they even stepped up on the interior quality too. I wouldn't doubt if all of the sudden, the Acura's whole line-up has SH-AWD. The RX and MDX are the two SUVs that does it for me when it comes to midsize SUVs.

Seems like the best SUV ever just became even better.

thats great
if i was looking into an SUV, id really look into the MDX or RDX

i wonder how similar the new CR-V is to the RDX in terms of the mechanics
and what is the Honda version of the MDX?

Seems like the best SUV ever just became even better.

I wouldn't go that far:D but it sure is nice.:)

Sounds like a great SUV, I actually love the the new design I think it looks great...:thumbup:

the suspension fluid can change viscousity and therfore dampening rates by applying a voltage to it. You used the sport mode right, theres a button on the center console below the shifter to switch from comfort and sport

My mom is looking for an SUV and shes definately interested in a pearl white/parchment Tech + Sport MDX, she test drive a Tech today, and I pushed her to get the Sport (so I can have fun driving it)

Local dealer got 6 in today, 2 are sold already

thats great
if i was looking into an SUV, id really look into the MDX or RDX

i wonder how similar the new CR-V is to the RDX in terms of the mechanics
and what is the Honda version of the MDX?

RDX I believe is its own platform, as its chassis is designed for a AWD drivetrain, and the CR-V is FWD only, probably derivatives of each other but not the same chassis

Now you are making it harder. I've been contemplating swapping my 02 MDX for an 06 (since there are pretty nice deals on them). I wanted to wait a few years for the kinks to get worked out of a new model. Hmm...

:)

http://cwimg.us.publicus.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?Site=CW&Date=20060825&Category=FREE&ArtNo=60825004&Ref=AR&Profile=1024&maxw=490
http://static.blogo.it/autoblog/suzuki_xl7_04.jpg
http://autoreview.belproject.com/media/1/20060418-2007-suzuki-xl7-suv-side.jpg
http://www.thecarconnection.com/images/scrapbook/thumbnails/2488.jpg

I find the side profile of the new Suzuki XL-7 and the MDX very similar.

Over all it is a nice truck. If I were to buy one I'd definately look for an alternative grill, and definately take it to the paint shop to get the bumper cladding color matched. I color matched the non painted lower trims on my RX and I think it looks much better than flat black plastic. The one thing I don't really care for in the interior is the steering wheel.

Thanks for the review, this is one car I would like Mmarshall to review if he gets a chance.

I am almost certainly going to be buying one of these in the next 6 to 12 months, probably in the spring of 07.

I can't think of another SUV that would compare on price/features. The Volvo XC90 V8 may, but supposed not to handle as well as the Acura.

I want to hold off a bit just so they may work out any first month bugs. But I'm un-decided about the looks, they definatly are not playing it safe. With that grill and the steering wheel etc..

:woot:

Very nice review, I too have been thinking about a smaller SUV lately...hmmm

Seems like the best SUV ever just became even better.

lol...slow down. :D I would say it's arguably one of the best SUV's in its class currently though. :)

My mom is looking for an SUV and shes definately interested in a pearl white/parchment Tech + Sport MDX, she test drive a Tech today, and I pushed her to get the Sport (so I can have fun driving it)

Local dealer got 6 in today, 2 are sold already


Good luck to her. I dont know what kind od deals they are offering, but the dealership I went to is offering over $700 a month with 5K down for 36 months. :thumbdn: I would wait a little bit until the deals get better.

The sport is definitely fun to drive, but the non-sport is also quite capable as well. Its still a sporty SUV even without the Sport option. Dont forget the Sport already comes bundled with the Tech package(45K). As far as I know you cant get Sport only.

they wont budge on MSRP but they said they would throw in lifetime oil changes and some other stuff, like accessories at cost. Since its new and MSRP only the deal breaker will be the service we get and mainly extra goodies like oil changes. Going to check another dealer later on. Yea I was aware sport includes tech, which we wanted anyways, its about 46. Tech was about 47 drive out, so sport maybe a little under 50k. Her current vehicle is an 01 Avalon, carmax offered 13k for it. Shes going to pay cash probably since current interest rates 6%+ are pretty crappy even with real good credit.

She wanted a used GX470 before but seeing how this MDX came out and dimensions are very similar, but much more loaded (used GX bare bones probably high 30s). I suggested she spend a little more on a brand new much improved vehicle. Since I got my IS she was gunning for a Lexus but seeing how loaded she can get this all new MDX I think she forgot what a GX was

Good luck to her. I dont know what kind od deals they are offering, but the dealership I went to is offering over $700 a month with 5K down for 36 months. :thumbdn: I would wait a little bit until the deals get better.

Unless you need one now and has the $, I would agree with this. My last few cars were first year full MSRP because of impulse buy with unfortunate timing. I said no more. This time around, I am waiting for at least the 3rd year. Nothing really wrong with being bleeding edge. It always seem to turn out that I like the refresh/tweaks in the 3rd/4th year. Plus, by then, they are not selling for MSRP anymore.

I know that is a long time to wait but I think it will be fine in the long run. :)

its my fault, after I got my car she caught new car fever, I really doubt she can wait 2 years. By then a new similarly equipped GX might be out but its going to be priced much higher than an MDX Sport/Tech. My mom really liked it tho she said it felt like a car an for a moment she forgot she was driving an SUV. I looked at the brochure and acura claims .85g lateral acceleration

its my fault, after I got my car she caught new car fever, I really doubt she can wait 2 years.
Is it just a new car or the new MDX? ;) The "old" MDX can be had for a great deal now. The new MDX is pretty nice on paper. I will more than likely sell my 02, get an 06, wait a few years, and then swap for the new MDX.

I've been looking at used and new X5s, Cayennes, Q7, FX, XC90, RX, GX, Toureg, ... Since we are not made of $ ;), the MDX is still the only SUV that meets our needs at a good price point. The others are nice but not perfect. I would be just as happy with any of the others but not SO MUCH happier to spend the extra $. Of course, everyone's needs and means are different. :D

Thanks. Great job reviewing. You also saved me some time.....I reviewed the outgoing 2006 model and was going to do the 2007 if there was any interest...now I won't have to, and can use the time on another vehicle.
( I've got a REAL surprise for you guys coming up at Christmas;) )
I was disappointed with the advance specs I saw on the new MDX a few weeks ago showing the switch from 60-series to 55-series tires...I'm glad your experience shows that it hasn't hurt the ride too much. The switch from wood trim to brushed-metal trim inside was also, IMO, a disappointment at first, but based on what I saw in the MDX's almost identical-looking little brother RDX, the silver metallic trim was EXTREMELY well-done, and quite solidly attached.

I've been looking at used and new X5s, Cayennes, Q7, FX, XC90, RX, GX, Toureg, ... Since we are not made of $ ;), the MDX is still the only SUV that meets our needs at a good price point. The others are nice but not perfect. I would be just as happy with any of the others but not SO MUCH happier to spend the extra $. Of course, everyone's needs and means are different. :D

Did you consider checking out the '06 Explorer Limited like I got? (I got the V8 RWD version) you might be surprised if you can by the 'down to earth' dealerships! :)

All those other you mentioned are a bunch more money.

And if you really want to save a bunch you might consider looking at the new Suzuki Grand Vitara or even the Saturn Vue - friends have one and it's really very nice inside and the ride is great - has the Honda 3.5V6 in it which is extremely smooth.

Is it just a new car or the new MDX? ;) The "old" MDX can be had for a great deal now. The new MDX is pretty nice on paper. I will more than likely sell my 02, get an 06, wait a few years, and then swap for the new MDX.

I've been looking at used and new X5s, Cayennes, Q7, FX, XC90, RX, GX, Toureg, ... Since we are not made of $ ;), the MDX is still the only SUV that meets our needs at a good price point. The others are nice but not perfect. I would be just as happy with any of the others but not SO MUCH happier to spend the extra $. Of course, everyone's needs and means are different. :D

My problem with a used MDX was that they hold their value so well. 2003s with 60K on them were still going thru the auction at 28K+. Our 2006 fully loaded went for $39K plus tax. My wife LOVES the new one however (pics alone) - I've instructed the sales guy to not let her near it. :)

mom saw the old MDX and she said it was really plain and boring inside vs the new one. Now she wants to test drive a used GX, women cant make up their mind, no offense to GX owners but its very dated vs an MDX

I took a test ride in the 07 MDX earlier today. I noticed that the MDX is lacking in power down low in the rpm band and also the mid reange power isn't that great. My 06 GX definitely is more responsive in those power zones. What I'm saying is the MDX certainly doesn't feel like it has 300 hp.
The MDX also isn't as quiet doing down the highway as my GX. I could hear more wind, engine and road noise than the GX. The sunroof shade and the sun visors had a cheap feel to them. But Acura has made advances since the previous version. And overall the MDX just didn't have as solid of a feel to it as does the GX. And when you get one loaded up, its very close to 50 grand, which is in the GX territory. I can't wait to see what Lexus has in store for the 2009 GX.

Well, your GX has a V8. Displacement will always win. The MDX I am sure has 300hp but its all up high like other Honda engines. It has lots of power for its class range which would put it next to a RX330. The GX is also a lot more expensive so you would expect it to feel better made.

Thanks for the review. Too bad they always come out after the RXs. Now for a woman's point of view--we do like luxury, driving is nice, but to drive everyday well, I'd have to try it. Gas and size are always issues. I prefer a slightly smaller car. I've been spoiled having to buy gas only once in 2 weeks with the 400h.

mom might sell her car to her sister NEXT year so the MDX idea is going on the back burner for now, i guess we can avoid 1st year bugs and maybe by then it can be negotiated

Yes like I said in the review, in typical Honda fashion, the truck really starts to move when you get into the higher rev range. I also think that the truck is way faster than the previous one, however it is no where near as dramatic during hard acceleration which is why it probably doesn't seem as fast. 47hp in a truck that only weighs 100lb more is a big difference. In the 1st gen(the 253hp version) under hard acceleration there was a lot of rear end squat giving you that feeling of a lot of power. The new MDX is more controlled IMO. Not as much rear end squat. It is faster and the delivery is smoother. Just my opinion.

1. I don't understand a high revving low torque SUV or truck? The hell?
2. The MDX forum ain't exactly head over heels over the truck.
3. The Price near or at 50k loaded has a lot of people looking like RL prospective buyers..wtf.

I still predict its gonna sell like nuts.

You mean there is actually a forum for the MDX?!?! :D

I wonder what the allocation is for the new MDX. To get to that 50K price tag (well 48K to be exact, but whatever) you have to add the entertainment package which basically adds a rear seat DVD player. I just don't see that being a popular option. Other than that, your looking at 45,500 or so for the other 2 packages. Not much more expensive than the 1st gen I think.

I took a test ride in the 07 MDX earlier today. I noticed that the MDX is lacking in power down low in the rpm band and also the mid reange power isn't that great. My 06 GX definitely is more responsive in those power zones. What I'm saying is the MDX certainly doesn't feel like it has 300 hp.

The V6 vs. your V8 is always going to feel slower but in actual numbers it might not be. A Porsche 911 (non-turbo) doesn't feel that quick off the line either because revs have to build, but holy-moly once the rpms are 3500 and up - it flies. You end up just accepting it and driving a bit differently.

Great review, I haven't driven one yet but I must say the interior really surprised me. It was Lexus-like with Honda's personal touch.

aunt wanted initally to pay for moms car in full but we suggested payments, shes a close aunt afterall and either of us wouldnt have to wait a year to get our vehicles, plan got accelerated again. I'll keep yall posted. I know there is an MDX forum on Temple of VTEC but they have the worst forum format and design its like windows explorer

IMO Lexus, Acura, Audi have some of the best simple and clean interiors

Go here I think you'll like this crew better and its format.

http://www.acuramdx.org/forums

The MDX has won 2 comparison tests:

Car & Driver (http://www.bmwcca.org/node/7609) placed it in 1st by a large margin. Article is not online yet but here is summary from a BMW site: BMW’s new X5 may have more technology at its beck and call, but it wasn’t enough to defeat either the equally new Acura MDX and its 300 hp or the aging Cadillac SRX in Car and Driver magazine’s May 2007 review of eight SUVs worth about $50,000 each and around 190 inches long.

In “Eight Tickets to Paradise [Michigan]],” The finishing order was:
1. Acura MDX Sport, 223 points (of 250).
2. Cadillac SRX AWD V-8, 205.
3. BMW X5 3.0si, 205 points,
4. Mercedes-Benz ML350.
5. Lexus GX470, 189.
6. Volvo XC90 Sport, 173.
7. Volkswagen Tourag V-6, 172.
8. Land Rover LR3 HSE, 169.

BMW was first or tied for first in nine of 22 categories: features/amenities, interior styling, exterior styling, fuel economy, engine NVH (noise, vibration, harshness), steering feel, brake feel, handling, and ride.

BMW’s worst score was a 1 (of 10) on cargo space and, surprising given the X5 was lengthened, a 2 of 5 on middle seat space. Car and Driver’s summary judgment favored the “BMW steering, BMW brakes, BMW handling.” The negatives: “Slim cargo space. Still too heavy. World’s least intuitive shifter.” Because the cars needed to come in around $50,000, BMW had to submit its inline-six, which “still needs to produce more than 260 horsepower and 225 pound-feet of torque … before the starter-kit X5 will be inducted into any SUV hall o’ fame.”

The third row seat was essentially useless, CD said. Testers did like the suspension: “ … even with what felt like the firmest suspension - which effectively quelled body motion - the X5 nonetheless tied the Acura and Benz for the silkiness of its ride.” And even lacking a low-range four-wheel drive, BMW’s traction and stability control “proved so adept” there was no problem going in the snow.

The editors unanimously felt the second-place SRX was the best vehicle for a long highway trip. Accolades for the winning MDX, which uses a 300-hp V6, were widespread: “It’s agile in the hills. Superior tracking. Gratifying to drive.” Criticisms were tangental or minor: “Goofy grille. Cluttered center stack. No low-rangle 4WD.” Plus, it had the the lowest as-tested price. (Fully equipped, an Acura MDX still lists under $50,000.)

The fourth-place ML350 “might win a more devoted following if it proves more defect-free than its forebear” while the fifth-place Lexus GX470 is “still the luxury SUV for body-on-frame purists … but it’s feeling a little old.” “We love that [the Volvo XC90 is] almost a car, but why can’t it be sexier?” was the conclusion on No. 6. The No. 7 VW Touareg is “in need of a freshening as extensive as the BMW X5’s” and as for the No. 8 Land Rover, the magazine concluded, “Right now - today - Land Rover must learn to slice 1,000 pounds from every single vehicle it makes.” So in comparison, BMW got off easy.

Cars.com (http://www.cars.com/go/crp/buyingGuides/Story.jsp?section=SUV&story=cc_luxSUV&subject=stories&year=New) also just placed it ahead of Audi Q7 4.2 & BMW X5.

RDX I believe is its own platform, as its chassis is designed for a AWD drivetrain, and the CR-V is FWD only, probably derivatives of each other but not the same chassis

CR-V has AWD optional, although not using SH-AWD.

Thanks for the write-up. How's the third-row seat? I assume you are a relatively tall person as you mentioned you found move mid-size SUV's rear seat not giving you enough room.

The Acura MDX is a real winner here.:thumbup:

I can't wait to see what Lexus has in store for the 2009 GX.


I am waiting for either next gen RX (later on this year), or next real Land Cruiser (later on this year)...

Land Cruiser might be too big though... we will see..

When I sat in the new MDX, I was really surprised on how nice the interior was. I recommended the MDX to a friend on another forum myself. Very nice, comfortable SUV. Not quite a SAV, but very close.

On a side note, are the seats different in the IS350 than an IS250? You referenced it in your review.

P.S. I liked the in-depth review, thanks!

I drove one for a day - I think it was the base model or close to it. It did not have nav.

The interior was extremely nice, though that's probably a lot of what caused the big jump in price.

The acceleration and overall pedal response was 'ok', at best considering they kind of market it as being sporty.

Handling and steering dynamics were better than I expected for an SUV of that size, though I had heard it was good, and I wasn't even driving the one with the magnetic ride control struts as are in the sport package.

Interior noise level was good, but not amazing. Road noise and wind noise were pretty low, but engine noise was unnecessarily loud. I think they made it loud on purpose to sound sporty, which is just stupid in an SUV, IMO.

I drove one for a day - I think it was the base model or close to it. It did not have nav.

The interior was extremely nice, though that's probably a lot of what caused the big jump in price.

The acceleration and overall pedal response was 'ok', at best considering they kind of market it as being sporty.

Handling and steering dynamics were better than I expected for an SUV of that size, though I had heard it was good, and I wasn't even driving the one with the magnetic ride control struts as are in the sport package.

Interior noise level was good, but not amazing. Road noise and wind noise were pretty low, but engine noise was unnecessarily loud. I think they made it loud on purpose to sound sporty, which is just stupid in an SUV, IMO.

Believe it or not, the new MDX only went up about $2K when you compare options for options. I find it the best darn deal out there in the SUV arena. Now why are the sales not reflecting it - that's what I want to know.

Believe it or not, the new MDX only went up about $2K when you compare options for options. I find it the best darn deal out there in the SUV arena. Now why are the sales not reflecting it - that's what I want to know.

Luxury Crossover market is rough these days. Everyone wants a piece of that pile.

X5,MDX,RX,GX,XC,Q7,FX35/45,X3, and much more.

Back in the days, it was X5, MDX, and RX.

That might be the reason the sale numbers aren't reflecting that.

Handling and steering dynamics were better than I expected for an SUV of that size, though I had heard it was good, and I wasn't even driving the one with the magnetic ride control struts as are in the sport package.



If you ever feel like driving the MDX with the sports package, let us know! It's suppose to be on par with the BMW X5 as far as steering and handling:thumbup:

As stated, the market is now over cooked. Even Lincoln has the MKZ thing. Also I honestly think that MDX face is ugly enough to turn people away.
Its still a very solid seller for Acura though.

Acura has really thrown down the gauntlet here. Lexus has a lot of ground to cover for the next MY. At this price point, it looks like Acura not only sets the standard, it's put it out of reach for the next year or two.

Acura has really thrown down the gauntlet here. Lexus has a lot of ground to cover for the next MY. At this price point, it looks like Acura not only sets the standard, it's put it out of reach for the next year or two.

Wait until the RX-F comes out. Then Lexus will show them:p

Thanks for the write-up. How's the third-row seat? I assume you are a relatively tall person as you mentioned you found move mid-size SUV's rear seat not giving you enough room.

WOW back from the dead. :)

Not that tall. Around 6ft. Those who know me know that I like to really stretch out. :D Usually in a SUV of this size my knees are always pressed up against the backs of the front seats. I had some room to spare. Just enough to cross my legs.




On a side note, are the seats different in the IS350 than an IS250? You referenced it in your review.

P.S. I liked the in-depth review, thanks!

Nah, I dont think they are. :uh: The IS seats fit me nicely. Could use some improvement on actual space for more comfortable driving, but the seats werent to bad for me.


I think they made it loud on purpose to sound sporty, which is just stupid in an SUV, IMO.

Yea, above a certain RPM, the exhaust takes on a second life. It seemed kinda quite to me, but once you open it up, its kinda growly. I liked it. Seems like a nice fit for what they are going for. The Bimmer X5 isnt necessarily quiet either IMO.


Acura has really thrown down the gauntlet here. Lexus has a lot of ground to cover for the next MY. At this price point, it looks like Acura not only sets the standard, it's put it out of reach for the next year or two.

+1. It just about does everything better than the RX. But I have confidence that Lexus will once again one up the competition.

They're not in the business to get outdone by competition in a segment they created. :)

The MDX has won 2 comparison tests:

Car & Driver (http://www.bmwcca.org/node/7609) placed it in 1st by a large margin. Article is not online yet but here is summary from a BMW site:

Cars.com (http://www.cars.com/go/crp/buyingGuides/Story.jsp?section=SUV&story=cc_luxSUV&subject=stories&year=New) also just placed it ahead of Audi Q7 4.2 & BMW X5.


This is pretty cool. I see they liked just about everything I liked about the MDX. It handles great, has nice power, very comfortable and sporty interior. But the center stack is just to busy and definitely has a love hate design. With a bunch of accessories (and maybe a custom body colored grill :) ) I think this MDX looks pretty cool.

Still like the X5 a little more in the looks department, but the high price tag kills it for me.

The MDX is definitely on the list when it is time to retire my 02 MDX. :)

Just curious: do people consider the MDX a RX or GX fighter? I always assumed that it competed against the RX bc they were both mid-size luxury crossover vehicles w/ 6 cylinder engines. However, I am reading more & more that it competes w/ the GX bc of size & therefore, the RDX competes w/ the RX. Not sure if there is an easy way to classify the Acuras bc they are always off doing their own thing {like the 4 cylinder TSX**.

I am sure Lexus will pull out all the stops on the next RX but I am not sure what the next GX is going to be like since that market is losing ground to the crossovers. I see a GX hybrid @ some point but will sales be any better than a GS450h?

Just curious: do people consider the MDX a RX or GX fighter? I always assumed that it competed against the RX bc they were both mid-size luxury crossover vehicles w/ 6 cylinder engines. However, I am reading more & more that it competes w/ the GX bc of size & therefore, the RDX competes w/ the RX. Not sure if there is an easy way to classify the Acuras bc they are always off doing their own thing {like the 4 cylinder TSX**.

I am sure Lexus will pull out all the stops on the next RX but I am not sure what the next GX is going to be like since that market is losing ground to the crossovers. I see a GX hybrid @ some point but will sales be any better than a GS450h?



As a person who cross shopped the two - NO! For our needs, the GX was a joke. The 3rd row seat is just silly, the high step in height does not suit my 5' 2" wife at all. The door style tailgate limits where you can open the rear hatch, the gas mileage... well you get the idea.

The 3rd row in our MDX is down 80% of the time. When it is down we have full access to the entire storage area. When needed (and we rarely know in advance when it is going to be needed), we simply pull up the 3rd row seat - all is good.

Basically we wanted a car based sport ute that had three rows. We did not need the truck so the GX was crossed off the list really quick (the $10K price savings was just icing on the cake).

I am going to buy a mid-large SUV for my wife in the next 6 to 10 months. She tells me she wants 3-rows. Not that the rear most seat needs to be all that big but just in case.

The MDX is what I am leaning towards, but the all new Pilot and Highlander will come out this fall as well as the new Subi B9.

I am going to buy a mid-large SUV for my wife in the next 6 to 10 months. She tells me she wants 3-rows. Not that the rear most seat needs to be all that big but just in case.

The MDX is what I am leaning towards, but the all new Pilot and Highlander will come out this fall as well as the new Subi B9.

I suppose I should have said MDX was the best darn deal in a Lux SUV arena, because dollar for dollar, nothing beats the Pilot or B9. Both great vehicles for what they offer. Unfortunately when your SO does not like the styling of the either, they get erased rather quickly. Alas, on our recent road trip with the kids watching the DVD and I watching the NAV, I realized that we would not have had that luxury in the Pilot where you can't get both the NAV and DVD.

Doug,

I must have missed the post. For some reason I thought you went with the Volvo. Congrats on the MDX. :thumbup:

Car & Driver (http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/12669/eight-tickets-to-paradise-we-compare-eight-50000-luxury-suvs.html)
Eight Tickets to Paradise: We Compare Eight $50,000 Luxury SUVs - Comparison Tests
X5 and MDX take on ML350, Touareg, XC90, LR3, GX470, and SRX.
Introduction
Eighth Place: Land Rover LR3 HSE
Seventh Place: Volkswagen Touareg V-6
Sixth Place: Volvo XC90 Sport
Fifth Place: Lexus GX470
Fourth Place: Mercedes-Benz ML350
Third Place: BMW X5 3.0si
Second Place: Cadillac SRX AWD V-8
First Place: Acura MDX Sport
BY JOHN PHILLIPS, PHOTOGRAPHY BY AARON KILEY

Given a choice of driving destinations, you’d pick paradise, right? So that’s what we did, except this was Paradise, Michigan, in the northeast corner of the Upper Peninsula, and it wasn’t exactly paradise. “In winter,” complained managing editor Steve Spence, “this place makes you long for biting flies.” It was eight degrees on our first morning there, and the 600 residents were preparing to shovel 51 inches of snow — which is what falls in January alone.

There’s one paved road through pretty Paradise, and it runs past the spectacular Upper and Lower Falls of the Tahquamenon River, whose original Algonquian translation is thought to have meant “the river where the women were lost.” It is a wild place. The freighter Edmund Fitzgerald broke apart on Lake Superior near Whitefish Point, just north of Paradise, and the region — crisscrossed with unmapped two-tracks and 200 miles of snowmobile trails — is famous for northern hardwoods that are 300 to 400 years old.

More important to us, it is also famous for the Tahquamenon Falls Brewery & Pub, for the Bear Butt Bar & Grill, and for the Yukon Inn, where, in years of extra-heavy snowfall, snowmobilers park their machines on the roof. Seemed like a good place to test eight SUVs. If we could get there.

Each of our ice-caked utes, nicely equipped, hovered around the $50,000 mark. We wanted mid-size luxury SUVs only, so we tried to include those whose overall length was as close to 190 inches as possible. One of the oldest in our group, the Cadillac SRX, was also the longest, at 194.9 inches. But this admittedly arbitrary length stipulation precluded at least one notable that might otherwise have qualified on price: the Audi Q7. Two other contenders might also have tagged along — the Infiniti FX45 and the Porsche Cayenne S — but were left at home for having already been defeated in previous comparos. A loaded Jeep Commander might have acquitted itself well, but we felt that its cockpit lacked sufficient bling.

Our attention was keenly focused on a trio of old faithfuls — each in its second generation and all three of which have been recently freshened: the Acura MDX, the BMW X5 3.0si, and the Mercedes-Benz ML350. We were also curious about the VW Touareg V-6 and Lexus GX470, both recently infused with more horses.

In total, we motored more than 1000 miles through the sort of blizzards that would depress an Iditarod musher, encrusting our SUVs with so much solid precipitation that the proximity sensors honked and bonged incessantly. On the other hand, we lost no women. Except those we tried to chat up at the Yukon Inn.

Eighth Place: Eight tickets to Paradise: 2007 Land Rover LR3 HSE
Highs: Vast off-road prowess, quiet cabin, a 360-degree view of the world.

Lows: Vague steering, an overwhelmed V-8, dismal fuel economy.

The Verdict: Right now — today — Land Rover must learn to slice 1000 pounds from every single vehicle it makes.

Climbing out of any of the other SUVs and into the blocky Land Rover was like moving out of a condo and into a Congressman’s house. At 5772 pounds, the LR3 was by far the heaviest of this bunch, with meager skidpad grip and the poorest power-to-weight ratio. No surprise that it was the slowest to 60 mph and through the quarter-mile. Combine that with wooden steering, and the LR3 wound up being voted least fun to drive.

Of course, it’s big inside, too: towering headroom, the greatest front interior volume, and the only third-row seat that could accommodate two adults for an hour. Moreover, the military-ish LR3 boasted the most upright and airy cockpit, lending a commanding view of the snow-packed world all around. That’s a priceless asset off-road, where the LR3 was predictably a mountain goat, ascending hills coated in 16 inches of virgin snow. As is Rover’s custom, every off-road tool was on offer: height control, downhill assist, a locking center diff, terrain control, 10 Jesus bars, extraordinary wheel travel, an air suspension that soaked up impacts, and Goodyear Wranglers that were unfazed by slush, ice, and the occasional fir sapling.

The Rover was also serene. It matched the BMW for quietest idle, was tied with the Benz for quietest 70-mph cruise, and proved quietest overall at wide-open whack.

Unfortunately, our LR3 nearly bankrupted us at the pumps, delivering observed fuel economy of 14 mpg, and it wasn’t a fluke. Our long-term LR3 managed a rotten 15 mpg, and during that vehicle’s 40,000-mile life with us, it was beset with too many mechanical trifles.

Still, the Land Rover’s dashing legacy — a mythical mix of off-road adventure, single-malt Scotch, and supple leather — must never be discounted. “If I could have just one of these SUVs,” declared our off-road guide, Steve Keck, “it’d be this Baby Huey right here.”

Seventh Place: Eight tickets to Paradise: 2007 Volkswagen Touareg V-6
Highs: Light steering, supple ride, confident off-road.

Lows: Cramped back seat, too many rattles, no personality.

The Verdict: In need of a freshening as extensive as the BMW X5’s.

Soon after VW’s Touareg was introduced, a V-8 version finished first among eight SUVs in a 2003 comparo and then landed on our list of 5Best Trucks. By the end of 2003, however, that same Touareg wound up dead last in a four-SUV comparo. And by the spring of 2005, a V-6 Touareg — then making 237 horses — finished only fourth of six utes. For 2007, the V-6 has been replaced with one that produces an extra 39 ponies, but it’s still not enough to pluck this bland 5203-pound Vee-Dub — built in Bratislava, Slovakia, of all places — out of the doldrums.

Right off the bat, our Touareg lost points for requiring the longest braking distance of this pack; for an engine whose raspiness was noticed as early as 3000 rpm; for a transmission that whined whenever the vehicle was coasting; and for wipers that, uh, didn’t. Back-seat room — with either two or three persons — was the slimmest in this contest. What’s more, the proximity sensors were almost immediately defeated by snow and began to beep incessantly. We could disable them manually, but they’d default to “on” every time we relit the V-6.

The Touareg did offer light steering and a supple ride off-road — where, by the way, it felt confident and secure, in part because of its terrific ground clearance. Its handsome IP includes analog gauges for water temp, oil temp, and volts — a rarity. And this SUV is capable of towing an amazing 7716 pounds of bass boats and Arctic Cats.

The Touareg never felt insubstantial, yet it returned from Paradise with rattles in the dash, the gauge cluster, the left-rear suspension, and the cargo bay. And its windshield had developed a 30-inch crack.

In the end, the “Twarr” didn’t satisfy — not enough sport, not enough personality. Every night at dinner when we discussed all the vehicles, editors would say, “Jeez, you know, I can’t remember much about it.”

Sixth Place: Eight tickets to Paradise: 2007 Volvo XC90 Sport
Highs: A rocket in the passing lane, agile in traffic, an SUV Ralph Nader could love.

Lows: Wrong tires, jittery ride, way too little luxury for 50 grand.

The Verdict: We love that it's almost a car, but why can't it be sexier?

We’re drawn to Volvo’s SUV because it’s not a traditional SUV. More like a big box of Swedish rye crisp on stilts. The XC90’s V-8, built by Yamaha, produces 325 pound-feet of torque, the most in this group, and proved the perfect partner between 50 and 70 mph, where most passing is undertaken. Still, this V-8, like the Land Rover’s, evinced the sort of thrashiness that is mutually exclusive to anything attached to a $50,000 sticker.

Speaking of which, this Volvo sported a paucity of features and amenities and never felt luxurious, although our test sample did arrive with the optional $595 blind-spot warning system, which clogged with ice and was thereafter useless.

The XC90 also took abuse for its vague steering, a driver’s seat that couldn’t be lowered far enough, and a back seat that forced the center rider to straddle the transmission hump while resting his boots atop the front seats’ enormous inner rails.

What also hurt the Volvo was its behavior in snow, where a lack of low-range gearing, combined with its performance-biased 19-inch Pirelli tires, did damage to its cold-weather rep. When the tires lost grip, the stability control would cut the throttle and grab the brakes so aggressively that forward momentum was often nixed — not good as we tried to bull our way through 16 inches of powder to the Buck Nekkid Camp. [No, he did not make that up—Ed. ] What’s more, the tires encouraged a high-frequency ride harshness we judged inappropriate to any SUV laying claim to luxury.

The XC90, however, did offer the greatest cargo capacity behind the middle seat, simple HVAC controls, and wipers worthy of an Atlantic trawler. Plus, there’s a third-row seat that any child will love as long as he’s the size of a bag of groceries.

This Volvo lacked the passion, refinement, and styling of the other tall wagon in the group — the Cadillac — and its gotta-have-it factor consequently sank like a sack of Swedish meatballs.

Fifth Place: Eight tickets to Paradise: 2007 Lexus GX470
Highs: Solid platform, fearless off-road, full-luxo interior.

Lows: Scattershot switchgear, still not enough power, undisciplined body motions.

The Verdict: Still the luxury SUV for body-on-frame purists, but it's feeling a little old.

It used to be that “real” SUVs featured body-on-frame construction and a live rear axle — the purists’ mandate for serious towing and dirty off-roading. In this group, only the Lexus would satisfy those guys, but it’ll satisfy the crossover cultists, too, because the GX470 never feels truckish.

In fact, it delivered a ride almost as plush as the Acura’s and BMW’s, with plenty of suspension travel for even the worst two-tracks. It was the Lexus that floated over a snow-camouflaged culvert that just about jammed the Volvo driver’s skull into the headliner. And despite this SUV’s creeping age, the interior remains as plush as any, with Bentley-quality leather seats, genuine bird’s-eye-maple trim, and a tilting-and-telescoping wheel slathered in leather and wood and stitched as tightly as a Spalding baseball.

Equally appealing, the GX470 — with 28 more horses than the last sample we tested — was unstoppable off-road. The purists will love its manual low-range shifter, with its own beautifully stitched leather boot. They’ll also appreciate its downhill control assist, locking center diff, ride-height control, and adjustable shocks. And the thin A-pillars, combined with this SUV’s towering height — taller even than the giant Land Rover — gave the driver a truly wide-screen view of Paradise. What’s more, access to its $2030 third-row seat was excellent — push one button and the middle-row seats tumble out of the way.

The GX470 might have finished higher, but it lost points for its scattershot switchgear, a middle seat too tight for three adults, running boards — simply anathema off-road — and the sort of body roll you’d expect from, well, a luxury car. And the truth is, Toyota’s admittedly refined V-8 needs to top the 300-hp mark before this truck-based SUV will ever be called athletic.

Fourth Place: Eight tickets to Paradise: 2007 Mercedes-Benz ML350
Highs: A quiet freeway cruiser, silky seven-speed transmission.

Lows: Cheap- and dull-looking dash, mysteriously mushy brake feel.

The Verdict: Will win a devoted following if it proves more defect-free than its forebear.

Out of Alabama comes this second-gen ML, eschewing body-on-frame construction in favor of a unibody, and it took about 10 seconds for us to appreciate its longer wheelbase and wider track. For starters, the ride is now cushier.

On the way to Paradise, the ML350 proved more refined than its forebear and, once there, felt more solid off-road. Every editor remarked how quiet it was during long freeway slogs — in fact, the Benz tied with the Land Rover as the quietest cruiser at 70 mph — and the relationship between the driver’s seat and the primary controls further encouraged relaxation. The ML earned bonus points for its silky transmission — the only seven-speed in this group — although the column-mounted shifter’s odd pattern continued to baffle those of us with gray hair.

MLs aren’t available with low-range gearing, but ours made the most of its standard downhill speed control, hill-start assist, and electronic program that subtly altered traction control and throttle tip-in when we were bounding through drifts, including one that had at its core a parking curb that should have bent a 17-inch wheel but didn’t.

Our voters logged rude comments about the ML’s fat A-pillars, squishy brake-pedal feel, and relentlessly gray, plasticky dash. The burled-walnut trim offered on the ML500 ain’t offered at any price on the 350. We’re also ill at ease with the baseball-bat-size stalk that controls front wipers, rear wipers, washer fluid, turn signals, and bright lights. The stalk is hidden behind a steering spoke, and several of us pulled a full Quasimodo trying to decipher its innumerable movements.

At speed, the steering’s heft and accuracy were judged bang-on. Below 10 mph, however, the wheel was a little too heavy and uncommunicative — a problem on icy lumber roads. Third-row seats? Nope, only in Benz’s R- and GL-classes.

Still, this ML represents an ambitious second effort and will develop new loyalists, as long as it is free of the quality-control quirks that hounded its Dixie pappy.

Third Place: Eight tickets to Paradise: 2007 BMW X5 3.0si
Highs: BMW steering, BMW brakes, BMW handling.

Lows: Slim cargo space, still too heavy, world's least intuitive shifter.

The Verdict: More and more closely resembles a 5-series sedan.

Although this larger second-gen X5 is almost all-new, it’s still quite familiar — a good thing. The inline-six produces an extra 35 horses, and the radical control-arm front suspension — radical for BMW, anyhow — has improved tracking while matching the Acura for the surest real-world handling. Brake feel was superb, with the shortest stopping distance in this group. The steering told us what we needed to know, although effort at parking-lot speeds was too high. And even with what felt like the firmest suspension — which effectively quelled body motions — the X5 nonetheless tied with the Acura and Benz for the silkiness of its ride.

BMW’s inline-six still needs to produce more than 260 horsepower and 225 pound-feet of torque — the weakest outputs in this group — before the starter-kit X5 will be inducted into any SUV hall o’ fame. But at least the engine was dead quiet at idle and delivered the best observed fuel economy.

Our X5 was fitted with third-row seats ($1700), but they delete the space-saver spare, add weight, and proved so tight for two adults that we weren’t able to lock the center seats in place. And did we mention that, in this octet, the X5 will haul the least cargo?

Off-roaders will still rue the lack of low-range four-wheel drive, but BMW’s traction- and stability-control systems proved so adept — and so transparent in their disciplinary actions — that the X5 rarely had trouble digging through drifts.

We still wonder why we must insert a key fob into an ignition switch and then hit a power-on button. And why, when we push the turn-signal or wiper stalks, do they resist our touch and return to their original positions? And why does the X5’s new shifter, which resembles a Nokia phone, require us to push forward to go backward? And why must we depress a wholly separate button to park? At least the manumatic was among the best we’ve ever sampled, matching revs like Nick Heidfeld, who drives a BMW that doesn’t weigh 4915 pounds.

Second Place: Eight tickets to Paradise: 2007 Cadillac SRX AWD V-8
Highs: Car-like in all its moves, shark-like silhouette, 320 horsepower.

Lows: Narrow footwells, restricted off-road potential, too much wind noise.

The Verdict: Still one of the proudest and most unexpected successes in Cadillac’s history.

We’ve loved Cadillac’s SRX since we first set foot in a prototype early in 2003. Later that year, an SRX won a C/D comparo, beating a Porsche Cayenne S, no less, likely the first time a Cadillac ever humbled anything conceived in Weissach. Then this chiseled-nose crossover went on to earn 5Best Truck honors — three times.

Since then, not much has changed, although there’s finally a sixth gear, and the dash has been greatly improved. We still wish the shifter didn’t squirm in our hands and that there weren’t so many vinyl-like surfaces. Plus, we’d like to injure the person who placed the rear-wiper control on the headliner.

That the aging SRX finished so highly speaks volumes about the vehicular ingredients that never fail to seduce: 320 twin-cam horses delivered in a steady, fluid torrent and emitting an exhaust note that recalls a Pratt & Miller Corvette at Elkhart Lake. To 60 mph and through the quarter-mile, no competitor here could even read the SRX’s rear plate.

The Cadillac is the longest, lowest, and narrowest vehicle here, riding on the greatest wheelbase. Like the car that it’s based on, the SRX squirted through the sort of city traffic that bottled up behemoths behind it — notably, the Land Rover and the Volkswagen.

Of course, the SRX is also car-like off-road and not the vehicle you want to be piloting if you’re breaking the trail. For one thing, its high beltline obstructed the view, and its traction control permitted more right-foot delinquency than was sometimes prudent.

Once we ventured north of Paradise, the Cadillac was more sideways than Bode Miller on a post-party downhill run. One of us spun it 360 degrees on a road about 10 feet wide. On purpose.

At the brew pub one night someone asked, “If you had to drive from New York to L.A. tomorrow, which of these would you choose?” Unanimous reply: the SRX.


First Place: Eight tickets to Paradise: 2007 Acura MDX Sport
Highs: Agile in the hills, superior tracking, gratifying to drive.

Lows: Goofy grille, cluttered center rack, no low-range 4WD.

The Verdict: As much sport as utility, and, hey, it’s a Honda.

In comparison tests, it sometimes happens that the winner on paper — the vehicle with the superior test-track numbers — isn’t the winner on public roads. Readers never fail to remind us of this, usually in letters that begin, “Dear Morons.”

You’ll be happy to know that this second-gen Acura MDX — which still sounds to us like a medical condition — was victorious almost everywhere it poked its gaudy grille. Check it out: Greatest skidpad grip. Highest lane-change speed. Second-quickest sprint to 60 mph. Best driving position. Best back-seat comfort. Lightest curb weight. Steering and brake feel that were tied with the BMW’s. A ride as cushy as the Benz’s. And a fun-to-drive rating equaled only by the Cadillac’s. All of that for the lowest as-tested price.

On the freeway, even pushed by icy 30-knot sidewinds, the MDX tracked like an S-class Benz, with the sort of on-center feel you’d expect from an Audi. In turns, it took a firm and true set, requiring no midcourse corrections, always whispering to its driver, “Go ahead and nail it, chief — I may look like an SUV, but I’m actually a 300-hp wagon.”

Don’t get us wrong, the MDX proved plenty practical. Behind the second seat there’s more cargo space than you’ll find in the gigantic Land Rover, in part because this is the widest SUV in the group. And the split-folding third-row seat comes standard, although it can be accessed from the curb side only.

Complaints? The center stack’s 50 buttons and switches looked like something NASA would reject. The MDX has no low-range four-wheel drive or ride-height control, although the traction- and stability-control systems mitigated that oversight. And the somber wraparound dash felt constricting to some, although it was in keeping with the MDX’s anti-ute mission.

On comparison tests, early pronouncements are discouraged. But only 370 miles into this test, the Acura’s grace and charisma sparked four editors to write in its logbook, “Looks like we have a winner.”

the SUV id get if I wanted an SUV. SUV that handles like a sports sedan, practicality of a SUV, good enough power to get around, adaptable suspension, lotta gadgets, cant really ask for more at that price. I dont need offroad ability, this is a SUV for on road