i still say you should check out a Flex.

really quiet, great optional voice activated features, tons of room, no fuel cap, microsoft sync, etc.
http://www.fordvehicles.com/crossovers/flex/

 

yep, Certified Pre-Owned. You pay a little extra, but IIRC, Volvo covers 100% of repairs for 6 years/100k.

I have a Volvo S60R that is a CPO. So far, it has been maintenance free but they have covered everything thus far including a burned light bulb. But it does suck having to change the oil at the dealership (but not every 3k miles like my Lexus so that helps).

 

Yes and no. I don't trust CR's car reviews as much as my own (that's one reason, among many, why I do them myself), but for auto reliability trends, they are simply the best source in the buisness, though, of course, not perfect. If another source for auto reliability comes along that is better, I will use them, but not until.

The Acadia is rather large and bulky, and its repair record has not been good. The Outlander is an OK vehicle mechanically, but its interior is cheaply done and the road manners are rather unimpressive. The slightly larger Mitsubishi Endeavor is also an OK vehicle mechanically and has a well-done drivetrain, but has quirky interior and exterior styling.

I still think the Highlander and Pilot are good choices.

 

I would Highlander ro Pilot. Stay away from the rest.

The Highlander is MSRP priced about $5000 too high in my opinion. Pilot is good too but I don't like the looks. You are taking a gamble with the Mazda or Mercury.

Good luck!

 

Stay away from the GM crap.

 

I've ruled out the Lincoln/Mercury. I really like the CX-9 so I'm curious as to why you say the Mazda is "a gamble"?

 

It's hard to really make heads or tails out of the Consumer Reports' reliability records for the CX-9. CR's records are usually very good, but those for the CX-9 are inconsistant. It seems to have started out poor, then (for the same model year) suddenly jumped to above average, then back down to average. The Highlander and Pilot, of course, have consistantly been much better than average.

The CX-9, though, overall, does not seem to have had any severe reliability problems....most of those reported have been in the trim/body hardware class, which is not that serious (unless maybe power-window hardware fails on you when it's raining). If you like it, you can consider it, but just know that it is not as likely as the Highlander and Pilot to be bulletproof.

 

After all is said & done with this long winded thread, please post up pics of the vehicle of your choice or die

 

This statement is not accurate. The Honda Pilot is not bulletproof, far from it, don't believe these people who has never owned one and yet write like they know what they are talking about. Check out real owners discussing issues/problems regarding the Pilot at hondapilot.org

 

Well then, friend, your beef is not with me, but with Consumer Reports. They show both the Highlander and Pilot with consistantly well-above-average ratings going back to 2003 for the Pilot and 2001 for the Highlander, including the very important areas of engine and transmission.

I have read some of those owner-forums, especially the ones for Subarus, being a Subaru man myself. Some of the posters seem to have legitimate issues raised, others just seem to be talking for the sake of talking. Consumer Reports, however, analyzes the survey data they get, in detail, and publishes the results....from well over a million responses. Some of the CX-9 data, though, admittedly, is scanty, because the vehicle has not sold as well as the Pilot or Highlander.

 

Who the heck knows what vehicle is being considered anymore, so much other junk here?

 

Well, that's the thread title........."Help me Buy A new SUV". Most of the discussion here has (legitimately) centered around which one....and the supporting data for it.

Though the Highlander and Pilot are generally good choices, there are a number of others out there as well.

 

Got it, it was starting to look like trivial pursuit.

Certainly the Pilot and Highlander would be 2 good choices, especially with the 3rd row seats that the OP requires. Just because they are both ugly and dull vehicles really isn't out of the ordinary or important for this type of vehicle which is often used as a "mini-van substitute".

 

Really, a survey with over a million responses. I will take that with a grain of salt. According to Honda's website, they are hoping to sell 140,000 annually, so that makes it less than a million total from 2003-2009. And yet CR was able to survey all of them and then some. Wonder where my survey went?

No beef with you, just making a point. CR is not that accurate. Peace.

 

Yes. CR is very widely read....it is one of the most popular magazines in the country (though you can now subscribe to its website services as well).
CR and J.D. Power probably gather more automotive reliability data than any other organizations in the country. I served, though, for some time, on a long-term J.D. Power automotive focus group, and, to be honest, I wasn't as impressed with their intelligence-gathering as I am with CR, even though I've never been a formal member of CR.