By CL member request, a review of the new 2007 Acura MDX.


http://www.acura.com/index.aspx?initPath=MDX


In a Nutshell: A rather unique mixture of form, function, quality, and cheapness.



Acura, in response to the exploding popularity of mid-sized, car-based SUV's, introduced the first-generation MDX several years ago to a car-buying public that just couldn't get enough of this type of vehicle (and, to an extent, still can't). The MDX went into strong competition with the (at that time) Lexus RX300, BMW X3/X5, Mercedes ML320, Audi All-Road, Volvo XC70, and Subaru top-line L.L. Bean and VDC Outbacks, although the All-Road, XC70, and Outbacks were more car-like and sat a little lower than the MDX. Lower-priced MDX's, to some extent, price-wise, even competed with loaded versions of the top-of-the-line Toyota Highlander Limited.

The MDX was quite successful in its early years (supply exceeded demand, though it was not a classic follow-the-crowd vehicle), and dealers could charge a premium, and there some waiting lines, though not terribly long. The MDX was successful enough that Honda saw fit to introduce its own version, the Pilot, which was a little larger, more boxy-styled, more space efficient inside, and, IMO, a better value overall (more on that later).

However, successful as the first-generation MDX turned out to be, it was, like other Acura products, somewhat overshadowed by its Lexus competition, primarily the RX300/330. Unlike Toyota/Lexus, at that time, Honda only used the Acura brand name in the U.S, having introduced it in 1986.......the same vehicles, overseas, carried the Honda name instead. The Lexus RX300/330 trumped the original MDX in ride quality, noise isolation, powertrain refinement, interior plushness, and dealer service. However, the MDX, despite somewhat less refinement, like the RX300/330, had the build quality and reliability for both it and the RX to trump their European competition in that department, primarily in electronics.....in that area, choosing between the RX and the MDX was like Tweededee and Tweeledum. Both vehicles, as a result, enjoyed a good reputation in the marketplace and low depreciation.

With Lexus having introduced a second-generation RX330/350 model a few years ago, and, more recently, an expensive, high-technology RX400H Hybrid, the folks at Honda/Acura marketing felt that it was time to replace the old MDX with something that they felt was more up-to-date. However, unlike Lexus with the RX, Acura has not chosen (yet) to do a Hybrid version. The new 2007, like many of today's new and redesigned vehicles, is clearly designed with a more "sporting" factor in mind, and aimed at a younger buying audience. Gone are the softer-riding (and clearly preferable, IMO) 60-series tires in favor of firmer-riding 55's. The interior has more of a space-ship styling to it, not unlike the Subaru Tribeca's dash and console (although the dash-console sweep in the MDX is not as pronounced as the Tribeca's). The power steering effort has been increased a little to imitate a BMW's a little more (a feature I DO like), although it is more artificial-feeling than a Bimmer's. The suspension and anti-roll bars have been stiffened. The interior wood paneling is a grayish, more "sporting" wood trim than the warmer, brown look of the old one. And, last, another feature that I like, the superb SH-AWD system from the Acura RL, has been made standard....as it has in the smaller, less-expensive Acura RDX as well. And, of course, more power...the new MDX has a typical-Honda VTEC V6 that now makes a full 300 HP and 275 ft-lbs. of torque.....but at typical-Honda, annoyingly high RPM's (and of course, reviewing brand-new cars, I can't take them anywhere near redline).

Three model/trim lines of the new MDX are offered, all with the same engine and drive train: a base model (which I chose for the review), a Technology-Package MDX with a NAV screen, backup camera, and other advanced electronics (see the web site), and the Sport Package MDX with firmer, more sport-oriented chassis tuning, wheels/tires, and trim.

To put it mildly, I have quite mixed feelings about this new MDX. It is a good, even excellent vehicle in some areas, and somewhat disappointing in others. Overall, I don't think, despite the superb SH-AWD and powerful though peaky V6, that it is quite as good a value for the dollar as the somewhat less-expensive Honda Pilot...but, again, I'll get into that more later.

So, now, lets' have a look at Acura's new RX-fighter in a little more detail:









Model Reviewed: 2007 Acura MDX


Base Price: $39,995


Major Options: None


Destination Charge: $670



List Price as Reviewed: $40,665






Exterior Color: Steel Blue Metallic

Interior: Taupe Leather




Drivetrain: 3.7L SOHC VTEC V6, 300 HP @ 6000 RPM, 275 ft-lbs. torque @ 5000 RPM.
5-speed automatic Sequential-Sport Shift transmission, full-time SH (Super-Handling)
AWD system with Direct Yaw Control.








PLUSSES:



Same superb, seamless SH AWD as its brother RL and the smaller RDX.

Borderline V8 power from a V6....but you have to rev too much to get it.

Smooth, slick-shifting transmission, both in automatic and auto-manual mode.

Reasonable price for its content.

Standard 3rd-row seat for families.

Relatively good handling, by SUV standards.

Better-than-average reliability record.

Convienent, tilt-down exterior mirrors when in reverse.

Well-designed, convienent tire-pressure monitoring system.

Nicely done paint...but not quite to Lexus standards.

Excellent stereo.

clear, well-designed gauges and controls.

Convienent, power tilt-and-telescope steering.

Nice power-steering feel...not quite to BMW standards.

Good legroom, front and rear.

Easy-to-use power tilt/slide sunroof.

Solid-closing, heavy-duty-feeling doors.

Multi-power adjustable seats includes power lumbar support.








MINUSES:


HP/Torque curve too peaky; too many revs needed for power.

Unimpressive brakes.

Poorly designed steering wheel.

Sheet metal of lower-body tuck-in exposed to sand, salt, and road debris.

Flimsier exterior hardware and trim than past Acura products.

Cheesy, plastic chrome exterior door handles.

Difficult and awkward to check the oil.

Lower-profile, 55-series tires this year are not needed.

Firmer than necessary, but not harsh, ride.

Cheap looking and feeling gray cladding on lower front and rear ends.

Dark, grayish Koa wood interior trim not very appealing (to my tastes).

Awkward, hard-to-use parking brake.

Large panel gap and misalignment between the right-front dash and door trim.

Yes, you're probably getting tired of hearing it.....the same old funeral-home paint
colors....and I'm getting tired of complaining about it.

Relatively low roofline compromises front and rear headroom.

3rd-row seat, like most vehicles of its type, very cramped.





The first impression of this vehicle, as you walk up to it, especially if an RDX is parked near it, is the strong (though not identical) styling similiarity between the MDX and its little brother; except the MDX, of course, being one vehicle size and class larger. There are minor differences between the upper/lower grilles, bumpers, fog lights, and lower-body tuck-in, but in general the two are VERY similiar....not surprising when you consider that they both are being marketed to more or less the same age group....RDX buyers, of course, more likely to be single or with small families, and MDX buyers, of course, with larger families. The MDX's exterior styling takes a marked difference from the old MDX, with the roofline being a little lower, the large D-pillars in back being more raked, the front end being more swept-back and streamlined, and the wheels, even without the Sport Package, more aggressive-looking than the old ones. The lower-sides of the body have a pronounced tuck-in underneath, which, while "sporty" looking, allows the paint on the parts of them not directly shielded by the standard splash guards to be exposed to all kinds of stuff kicked up by the front tires....a poor design, IMO. There is a thin strip of black cladding at the very bottom, but it is not wide enough to do much good. The paint job is definitely on the good side (better than average), but, with a slight amount of orange peel, not quite up to Lexus standards, and, oddly, not as well-done as the superb, Lexus-quality paint job on its brother RL. As I stated in the MINUSES column above, it's the same old mortuary paint colors, although the Aspen White Pearl, Steel Blue Metallic (a nice medium blue-gray), and Dark Cherry Pearl were classy...I chose a Steel Blue for the review, a color I've liked for years. The exterior hardware quality ranges from good (exterior mirrors, general trim, logos, etc...) to cheap and cheesy, like the flimsy, "chrome" plastic door handles and thin, matte-black, plastic rear wiper arm. A roof rack is not standard, but can be added as a dealer accessory.


Open the aluminum hood, which, unlike the smaller RDX's, is automatically gas strut-supported, and the 3.7L V6, like most Honda/Acura products, fits in transversely, and it is reasonably easy to reach things not covered up by the now-ubiquitous plastic engine cover. The oil dipstick, with a nice, thick, well-designed flexible metal rod, is great, except for one thing.......it sits so far forward, well under the plastic radiator cover shroud, that you have to awkwardly lean way over the grille and radiator to reach it and stick it back in its tube. Everything else under the hood (engine cover notwithstanding) is fine...no real problems.


Open the doors and get in. As with my recent Dodge Nitro and Audi Q7 reviews, optional running boards are available, but I did not think them necessary except for very short people. Like the roof rack, on the MDX, they are a dealer-installed accessory, if desired. But, for most people, the step-up height is no problem. Shut the nice, solid-feeling doors and you get a rather nice, pleasant "thunk" instead of the "thwick" you get from, say cheaply-made, entry-level Dodges and Chevies. Once inside, the vehicle becomes a rather strange mixture of good and not-so-good. The Taupe-colored seat leather is OK...seems better-than-average....but clearly not as soft or as classy as the leather in Jaguars or some Lexus products. The seats themselves have many power adjustments, even for lumbar support. The lower cushion, for my rather portly frame, was fairly comfortable, the upper-cushion bolsters pressed noticeably into the back of my shoulders. Legroom in the front seat was fine; headroom in front was fine if you lowered the seat way down, thanks to the sunroof housing, which, like in most vehicles, took away 1-2 inches of headroom. The steering wheel was, IMO, quite poorly designed, and perhaps the single worst feature inside. It had nice electric power tilt and telescoping, a feature some other $40,000 vehicles don't, but that was not the problem. It was uncomfortable to hold, had hard, projecting leather stiching that dug into your fingers, poorly-finished pieces of plastic on the wheel moldings that had burrs left on them from the molds they were cast in (this may have been a sample defect.....another MDX I looked at had better-quality plastic on the wheel), and, worst of all, when you turned the wheel for a sharp corner, regardless of whether it was adjusted for tall or short people, the large opaque, triangular center-section of the wheel hid large parts of the instrumentation and gauges. Back to the drawing board, Acura....you can do better then this.

The three primary gauges, like more and more vehicles these days, sit inside of circular tunnels.....this done, of course, to keep sunlight from interfering with their legibility, although the dash lighting, like with most Acura products, was of the Lexus-type electroluminesence to also improve legibility. The design is the usual Honda/Acura blue outer circles, white numbers, and reddish-pink needles. I found them pleasant, easy-to-read, and liked the colors. The Koa dash and door panel wood trim was not quite my cup of tea....too dull a grayish color, too polished, and too un-woodish for my tastes (I like traditional-looking natural wood). There was also a rather large and noticeable gap and misalignment where the wood on the right-front dash joins the right-front door panel....less so on the drivers' side. The dash hardware, buttons, and controls were most well-done, made of good materials, easy-to-use, and legible.....there were a couple of cheap-feeling, flimsy buttons as well, untypical of Honda/Acura. Fortunately, there were no I-Drive-type ***** in this version (the base model), those being restricted to the more expensive Technology MDX models with the NAV and camera package. The stereo was one of the car's best features, and quite impressive...clearly the best one I've listened to since the insanely superb LS460 Mark Levinson stereo I wrote up last December. The high, awkward, step-on, left-foot parking brake, especially for people with big legs like mine, is a PITA to use...it, like the steering wheel, could use a thorough re-design. The sunroof, except for robbing a little headroom, is otherwise well-designed...the easy-to use switches tilt up and down and back and forth for the respective roof functions. Two other features I liked inside, both connected to the multi-function dash computer, were the tire-monitoring display that not only warns you of loss of tire pressure but shows you how much air (in PSI) is IN all four tires any given moment......an excellent feature. Also excellent, although somewhat more gimmicky, is the video display for the SH-AWD system that, with bar symbols, shows you how much torque is being fed to each one of the four wheels....the SH-AWD system is very complex, and you can see the display jumping around to front wheels, back wheels, and side-to-side as you corner.

In back, legroom is fine, even for big, tall people, but the lowered roofline of the new MDX, as oposed to the old one, cuts out some headroom...but not seriously. Like on the Audi Q7, the 50/50 split rear seats both recline (manually) so you can lower your head under the roofline. The rear seats, as expected, are less comfortable than up front, and, like with most Japanese-designed vehicles, are a little short on thigh support. Rear doors, like the front, produce the same solid "thunk" when you shut them.

The third-row seat, of course, when raised, takes up much of the cargo space, but of course, it folds down to form a flat cargo floor. The seat itself, of course, like most third-row seats, is fit only for children or very small adults. When lowered, cargo space is reasonably good for a vehicle this size, but, once again, we get into the same old problem of lowered rooflines and swept-rear ends.....the cargo ceiling is noticeably lower than in the old MDX. Auto designers are going to have to start deciding which is more important......form or function. Generally, I'm on the side of function. Otherwise, the cargo area is well-done, with high-quality materials, though not quite so impressive as the Audi Q7's real metal and real-chrome hardware. A tray lifts up to reveal an additional cargo bay underneath, with the jack tools in a covered sub-compartment.

OK...time to drive. The 3.7L V6 starts up with a VW-style swing-out, button-operated key. No ignition dash buttons.....a departure from many new vehicles in this class. Idle is smooth and quiet....Honda/Acura, like Toyota/Lexus, being experts in producing smooth, quiet engines. Adjust mirrors, seats, belts, etc.....with the well-designed, slick-feeling controls, release the poorly-designed parking brake, ease the slick, smooth, high-quality shifter into Drive and go. The V6, as mentioned, is smooth and quiet, but annoyingly sluggish and short on torque at low RPM's....anything under about 3500 RPM will have Granny passing you in the slow lane, and you don't start to feel any real kick at all until about 4000 or so (with a brand-new car right off the lot, I, of course, didn't go much over that). Torque peak.....and maximum acceleration....comes at 5000. That, IMO, is unsuitable for American-style driving. This V6 is capable of V8 power, but the revs required to get it are too high. Honda/Acura engineers need to seriously consider reprogramming the engine's HP and torque curves to getter a flatter, less peaky range, or just, as with other honda/Acura products, stop using the VTEC valve timing system altogether......the VTEC system seems to be the primary source of the engine's peakiness.

Peakiness aside, the engine, like most Toyota/Lexus engines, is smooth and quiet in normal RPM ranges. The exhaust note is noticeable but not pronounced. The transmission, with its well-made, high-quality shifter (even slicker than the snappy chrome ball on my old Lexus IS300) shifts slickly and smoothly, in both full-automatic and automanual mode, regardless of RPM. There is only 5 gears instead of the more-common 6 in this class of vehicle, but the ratios, and their coverage, are such that you generally don't miss the sixth gear......and with the lower speed limits in the U.S. as contrasted to German Autobahns, you don't need a super-tall 6th gear anyway.

The overall ride, as stated before, IMO, is firm (not harsh), but firmer than necessary, due to the lower-profile tires this year and general stiffening of the underpinnings. This of course, is rewarded by flatter cornering, less body roll, and quicker steering response than last year's MDX (which, IMO, was not particularly sloppy-handling to start with). Bumps are felt, but, due to relatively good noise isolation, (poor road noise isolation has been a Honda problem for years), not heard very loudly. Wind noise, likewise, is fairly well surpressed....after all, this is a $40,000 semi-luxury SUV, not an econobox. The wheelbase is JUST long enough, and the suspension JUST soft enough (despite the firmness over bumps) that you don't get much of the fore-and-aft porpoising over bumps that you do in smaller SUV's...you DO notice that in little-brother RDX.

The brakes, another classic Honda weak point, appear and feel like they are undersized. Honda has a history of putting undersized brake rotors and calipers in many of their vehicles.....particularly the Civic. The brakes on the new MDX don't feel any different from many past Honda products I've sampled.....spongy, unresponsive, and with realtively long stopping distances.....though, like with most reviews, I didn't slam them on or hit them full-force. Still, in normal driving, they felt noticeably weak compared to most vehicles I drive. The brake pedal had a little of the tendency I find in so many vehicles to catch my size-15 clodhoppers lifting off of the gas pedal......not as bad as in some other vehicles.



OK....the verdict? I have mixed feelings about this vehicle. It has a superb transmission and AWD powertrain, and a responsive engine if you keep the revs way up, but, IMO, you should not have to go to motorcycle RPM's every time you want to pass someone....this is something Honda needs to work on. The interior, likewise, is generally very well-done, with some nice, convienent features, but the steering wheel and emergency brake both need a major redesign. The new roofline, while not really cramped, cuts out some space efficiency....in this regard, I think the lower-priced Honda Pilot may actually be a better value than the MDX. The Pilot is larger, less expensive more boxy-shaped, has more room inside, is built just as well (better in some areas), and has a V6 engine that, while not as powerful as the MDX's on paper, feels just as responsive in actual-world driving. The Pilot does lack the superb SH-AWD system, individual tire-monitoring diagram, and a few other nice features inside that the MDX has, but in a pinch, I could live without them. And the Pilot, like the MDX, has a good reliability record. So, if it were my money, I'd take the Pilot home and leave the difference in price in my bank account.



PS......after reviewing the MDX, I took a brief look at several new RDX's (I had briefly looked a couple of them over at the D.C. Auto Show in January), and was invited by both the salesman and sales manager to drive one.....so drive one I did, though I didn't keep it out long enough, or examine it thoroughly enough for a formal write-up and review. At first impression, though, its standard 2.3L turbo in-line 4 (Honda/Acura's first production turbocharged engine in an American-market vehicle, DEFINITELY cures the MDX's low-RPM torque problem, and the interior fit-and-finish, despite being a smaller and less-expensive vehicle, and especially its steering-wheel design, outdoes its more expensive big-brother MDX. If there is sufficient interest, I will do a full RDX review....at first glance, it seems to be a better value, though it lacks many of the MDX's power-operated features inside.

 

I test drove one again today. I agree with everything in the article.

I was exepecting the Nav to wow me. It did not.

 

Thanks.

I don't pull punches when it comes to reviews. I describe the vehicle just as I experience it.

I didn't try out a NAV-equipped MDX, but Honda/Acura is considered the industry standard in making a clear, easy-to-use NAV system.

 

I test drove the new MDX at the Acura dealership in my neighborhood (1 of only 2 in a city of over 25 million) and it is pretty close in terms of its engine response to that of my modified RX300, even with the high altitude and of course 25% less oxygen content. However, I have seen some power issues in this and in the Mazda CX9 in quasi-highway races up hills on a highway even at 70+ mph, so perhaps that engine pickup it is a little slow to respond.

 

The RDX, with its first-ever Acura turbo, should take care of that thin-air problem in Mexico City quite well....if you can find decent gas around there to run it on. Otherwise, the computer will retard the spark way back, and you end up, in effect, with a non-turbo, naturally aspirated engine.

 

The RDX does a way better job in acceleration than the MDX. Have test driven it, but still have not gotten one out to our track for testing.

Too bad Acura vehicles are $$$ down here, http://mx.autos.yahoo.com/newcars/ac...e_overview.php

 

Great review. I agree with the steering wheel. Honda has taken the wrong direction with the steering wheel. Whatever Honda was smoking when they designed it, it sure was one hell of a drug.

 

Interesting read, I gained new knowledge about the history of the MDX from it, thanks.

 

The new MDX looks too robo car like, and I never consider Acura to purchase anyway, but I must said, the new Gen is a big departure from the last///

 

"Poorly designed steering wheel."
If it wasn't because if that steering wheel, I could be a MDX owner now@@

 

I'm not sure, by this remark, if you agreeing with me or being sarcastic, but I did not like that wheel at all. It was cheaply and poorly made, uncomfortable to grip, and hid the gauges in sharp turns no matter how you adjusted it. It was ALMOST as bad an idea as putting the gauges in the middle of the dash, like some manufacturers do, so the wheel can't hide them at all.

 

That's interesting, because you're saying you'd take the Pilot because the MDX doesn't justify the price differential. Yet Roundel (the BMW CCA magazine) said that they felt the MDX was worth it over a Pilot ("not a warmed over Pilot anymore") AND they felt it was a better overall vehicle than the X5 3.0si they compared it to. Hmmm.........

(Then again, I'm not terribly interested in SUVs of this size)

 

Remember, value to each person is different. Value simply isn't a bunch of features jammed into a car and then slapping on a low price. It depends if the vehicle meets the buyer's criteria. If the car has more of what the buyer needs, the car will be the better value.

 

Thanks for the review Mmarshall. I have been very fond of the old one, but haven't drivent this new versions just yet. Seems like most of the minuses you are describing could be applied to the previous version as well - it didn't have that great of a paint job, had flimzy sheet metal on doors and hood, and the wood trim on inside was too obviously fake. Faker than Ikea furniture.

As far as the engine goes, the old one too didn't have much torque down low, but did have some kick at higher RPMs, however unlike Honda's 4 cylinder engines, this engine has a fairly low redline, so the kick doesn't quite last. In any case, it was smooth and sufficient for this type of vehicle. See, my parents leases the MDX for 3 years, and now they bought a Grand Cherokee with 5.7 Hemi engine, and while MDX engine doesn't have the obscene amount of down low torque like the Hemi, it is much more smooth and refined, and I would take it over the Hemi in a heartbeat. Whats even more surprising, is that on the highway speeds in excess of 70 mph, the MDX engine still felt strong while the Hemi runs out of breath. I may be wrong, but I would say that MDX would match the Hemi in 70-100 acceleration. I think one of the reasons it feels underpowered at low RPM's is because Honda didn't give it an adequate high stall converter. In the RX300/330 RPMs jump higher than in the MDX when you step on the gas.

In any case, all these minuses were overshadowed by the plusses. Back when the original MDX was introduced, most other SUV's were still based on truck platforms, and quite frankly rode and handled like crap. RX300 was the only crossover, but it was way too small, rode and handles like a minivan, had a lackluster engine, and interior while very refined, had the dashboard and front seats of a minivan. It's cargo space was a joke, and offroad capability? Yeah, right. And then came the MDX. It combined excellent cargo space and very good offroad capability with excellent suspension, comfortable ride, smooth drivetrain, and contrary to your experience, great brakes. My parents always lease/buy SUV's, and use it for their business, and previously to the MDX they had quite a number of them. Grand Cherokee, Explorer, 4Runner, Qx4 come to mind, all being utter crap. Solid axle, jumpy ride, crappy interior, noisy engines, real crappy brakes, obsolete 4WD systems, fishtailing in 2WD mode in bad weather. I was quite sceptical when they were getting the MDX, expecting it to be just another SUV. I was in for quite a surprise. It rode like a luxury car, handled like a sports sedan, had excellent steering responce and LSD system, and didn't have a single negative characteristic of the obsolete truck based SUV's. I was gunning the hell of it in rainy weather, but no sign of it fishtailing or loosing traction. When winter came, it plowed through snow without a problem, and while it had a 4WD mode, we didn't use it once, the AWD system was well sufficient. I even took it on an empty unpaved lot that was filled with several feet of snow, and MDX handled it with ease. And again, brakes were great as well, and especially the antilock function was very efficient on ice.

This new MDX, according to the pictures I've seen and your review, seems to be improving on some interior and exterior quality, although still not perfect. In the pictures it looks like it's on par with RL, but I guess it's not.

What's disappointing however, is the exterior styling. The previous version was very clean and nice looking, this new one is rather weird. Maybe it will grow on me, but thats only because it's an Acura. See, I'm biased, and if it was a BMW, I would say it looks disgusting. But the bigger disappointment is that they cut down on the cargo space and made it overly sporty. That seems to be the trend with every manufacturer nowadays. Even Lexus managed to ruin LS460 with obscene 19" rims and low profille tires.

 

Did you do a 07 Acura TL type S revies.. I did a search but nothing came up..


Thanks for the MDX review.. I have to give them credit for stepping up to the plate and finally getting some high HP in there cars and SUV's.. I haven't test drove one yet but from the catalog the pics look great and a huge advancement and redesign from last years model.. Anyway i really like the TL type S..