tex2670

Ugh - 13 year old tech? Not for me. I don't see how you can be serious about this.

I just sold our former '12 Mazda CX-9 (which had tech that was a little behind the times when new). I loved that car when it was new, but any time I had to drive it during the last year of ownership, it was night and day over the newer cars in the family. It served the family well for 10 years, but I was more than happy to get rid of it.

SW17LS

The K5 as an example, I had a Mercedes E350 loaner with is a 4 cyl...wanna hear a shocker? The K5 is a better car! Powertrain is peppier and smoother, more refined, rides better, the E Class is RWD and is a Mercedes, but thats all it has going for it over a K5. Now, a higher optioned E Class with a better suspension and the inline 6, blows the K5 away but all the people running around in low option E350s are just driving them for the badge.

xGS350x

The reason why I'm ok with a 12 MDX it is because the bar was set pretty high. I don't need the latest and greatest gadgetry.

When the MDX was engineered and made a decade ago, the design and engineering still stands today. Its an overall package that has almost everything I need and want.

Personally I really like the older modern cars in the 2000's era because it was a time when things were made with class and maturity(especially luxury brands), but not too mature(likes 90's retro).

Unfortunately, it seems that the engineers and managers from the 2000's era were chastitized for being themselves. They're too "boring", too "reserved" etc etc etc. And being human, they succumb to criticism and peer pressure. They essentially betrayed their loyal customers and chased after a new segment of buyers.