Test drove the 2007 Acura MDX over the weekend...
04-04-07, 03:43 PM
#46
Out of Warranty
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.
04-04-07, 09:57 PM
#48
Speaks French in Russian
Thread Starter
Not that tall. Around 6ft. Those who know me know that I like to really stretch out.
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.
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. They're not in the business to get outdone by competition in a segment they created.
Last edited by GFerg; 04-04-07 at 10:06 PM.
04-04-07, 10:01 PM
#49
Speaks French in Russian
Thread Starter
The MDX has won 2 comparison tests:
Car & Driver placed it in 1st by a large margin. Article is not online yet but here is summary from a BMW site:
Cars.com also just placed it ahead of Audi Q7 4.2 & BMW X5.
Car & Driver placed it in 1st by a large margin. Article is not online yet but here is summary from a BMW site:
Cars.com also just placed it ahead of Audi Q7 4.2 & BMW X5.
) 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.
04-05-07, 03:54 AM
#51
R X or G X
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?
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?
04-05-07, 05:48 AM
#52
Lexus Champion
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: IL
Posts: 2,854
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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?
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?
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).
04-05-07, 08:05 AM
#53
Lead Lap
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 620
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
04-05-07, 10:39 AM
#54
Lexus Champion
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: IL
Posts: 2,854
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
04-21-07, 07:55 AM
#56
Full Comparo
Car & Driver
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.”
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.”
04-21-07, 08:00 AM
#57
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
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post