| zubinh |
I truly was all gung ho for the X. Planned on getting it at the end of this year. But unfortuneatly, I was walking down the street and saw a murano and the XC90. Went to the volvo website priced it with comparable options to the X and it actuallky comes out $4k less than the X. (Granted not as much HP though).
I think Acura salespeople are about to get a reality check. There actually is choice in the SUV crossover market now. I dont like Murano's interior but that XC90 has got me thinking.
Has anyone else changed their minds about getting an X? |
|
|
| vancouver |
I needed the space so I didn't think the Murano cut it.
I looked seriously at the XC 90. Good looking vehicle. But I decided against the XC 90 because this is its first model year, of a very different model for Volvo, and there aren't many yet on the road to establish a track record. I didn't want to be caught in the Volvo learning curve for a new model. Volvo is a good company (though not at the top of the chart for reliability), so likely the first year glitchs would be minor. But for every manufacturer there is the possibility that the first year problems will be more than annoyances.
The 2003 MDX is already at the proven and stable stage, so I went with that. |
|
|
| vancouver |
| I should add, I've had the MDX for about 5 weeks. Wonderful vehicle. I also hate to have the vehicle in for service. It is pain to arrange. So dependability is important. It may not be the newest thing, but it works just fine. For my needs, I made the right decision. |
|
|
| muller_justin |
I looked at the XC90 as well, but chose the MDX for Several Reasons:
- Equipped Like a Touring w/Nav including the the bigger engine (T6) the car is 4-5K more expensive, not less expensive. And even with the T6 the power band is no where near as smooth as the MDX.
- Local dealer was abysmal, due to lack of inventory they kept trying to get me to buy a V70/Cross Country.
- When asked about ordering one, they had no data and Wanted $1500 to be put on a list which would allow me to Refuse or accept cars when and if they came in. And it appears that not too many are coming in with the Nav (critical for me, I drive 25k+ a year on business, mostly to places I have never been before). I was wait listed with the MDX as well, but was able to firm up options and colors right away.
- Continueing dealer gripes, they literally would not let me out of the place, and kept coming back with counter offers on the V70 (which I did not want, but they had 4 or 5 of them on the lot), Finally I had to walk out.
- Finally was trading in a 2000TL, which I was able to get a better price from Acura dealer, no surprise there and not reallly a point against the XC90 for most people.
Good Luck deciding! |
|
|
| the_cabbage |
I also considered the XC90 before buying my '03 MDX. Here are my takes:
(1) XC90 is not as driver/passenger friendly -- more space in second row; easier entry in front, second and third row; raising/lowering the 3rd row is a nightmare in the XC90 compared to the MDX.
(2) I bought my MDX and plan on keeping it a long time -- I trust Honda/Acura in the long-run much more than Volvo (mostly for little things like electronics, fit & finish, etc.). Also, I didn't want to be out of warranty in 5 years and have to deal with the expense and worry with a turbo.
(3) I live in AZ and the air conditioner and rear climate in the XC90 doesn't compare to the MDX. Furthermore, turbos do NOT perform well at all in warm, dry weather, so that was a negative for me.
(4) The T6 (which is truly the only one to buy -- the T5 is grossly underpowered and should not have been made) has a 4-speed transmission. May not be a big deal, but it forces the car to "hunt" for gears much more than the MDX which makes for less smooth driving. I also just question why any car manufacturer would put a 5 speed in its smaller engine SUV, and a 4-speed in the top model.
The above being said, the Volvo is a nice ride (nice enough for me to seriously consider it) -- but not the value/luxury/performance combo that you get with MDX.
Best of luck. |
|
|
| zubinh |
| Thank you for your takes. Looks like I'll be spending alot of sleepless nights thinking about this. |
|
|
| lak |
The main area that MDX is a bit behind XC90 is the safety features. The disappointing thing is that they could have easily added some of these (e.g. side guard curtain) to the 2003 model, but they chose not to since it is already selling so well.
MDX:
- no side guard curtain (no excuse for this as even the accord has one)
- no HID Xenon (shouldn't this be expected for all Acura's?)
- seat belt pre-tensioners for front seats only (XC90 has it on all 7 seats)
- no Emergency Brake Assist (EBA)
- no Electronic Brake force Distribution (EBD)
- long braking distance (which makes the lack of EBA more detrimental)
Additional XC90 Safety features:
- RSC (Roll Stability Control) to prevent rollovers
- WHIPS (Whiplash Protection System) for all 7 seats
- laminated side windows option (no flying glass, and prevent occupants ejection)
- Boron Steel reinforced roof. |
|
|
| Consultant |
I have my 2003 Touring with Nav for about 2 weeks. It's quiet, rides, accelerates and handles well with a "free" third row. However, Honda cut too many corners for a vehicle in this price range. Can you believe that the body side molding is an option? Some of the ergonomics are terrible. On balance, I'd give it a B+, assuming you pay less than list.
The reports on the Volvo and Murano are mixed. However, the Lexus GX470 is getting rave reviews and the dealers are willing "to deal". If you get the base GX with nav and upgraded sound, you're only a few (discounted) thousand over the MDX. However, for now, Lexus is only importing base and fully loaded GX's.
Expect MDX prices to soften this year. It's already started and Acura is running MDX ads on TV. If I could wait, I would have gone for the Lexus. That said, I need to order some molding. |
|
|
| cmdpm |
zubinh,
if you do not need the 3rd row , you end up with a heck of alot of choices.
i drove the xc90 t6. IMHO, it is a very handsome car (its based off the s80, and so reliability should be better than the s80, but the s80 had many issues) inside (with the tan interior, the graphite makes it look to stark!) and out.
but the engine/tranmission and longish throttle pedal travel makes the car much less lively than the MDX. i like the autoshift feature( which the MDX should have) but with only four gears, whats the point! and the xc90 t6 runs into the mid $40s without nav nor res!
if i did not need the 3rd row i would want the fx35 or fx45 from infiniti-they look awesome and are rear-wheel drive biased for performance/handling.
they just may be the poor man's porsche cayenne.
i really dont think you can make a wrong decision.
good luck,
chris
:7: |
|
|
| tigmd99 |
| Correct me if i am wrong, but doesn't the MDX already has electronic brakeforce distribution??? I think it has this since 2001. |
|
|
| wmquan |
| Everyone's buying priorities are different. We can go on and on comparing the pros and cons. Buy what your heart tells you is the right choice, I think they're all good vehicles. |
|
|
| BaldEagle |
quote:
Originally posted by zubinh
Went to the volvo website priced it with comparable options to the X and it actuallky comes out $4k less than the X. (Granted not as much HP though).
:confused: :confused:
I don't understand how you arrived at the "$4K less than the X" total. :8:
The MDX is MSRP of $35700 or $38300 for the touring.
I just checked the MSRP for the 2WD XC90 and with the Premium package (Moonroof, leather) , and 3rd row seats it is up to $38260. And that is for the Volvo without 4WD and a much less powerful engine.
The all wheel drive XC90 comes to $40010 with the moonroof and 3rd row added. That again is with the under powered 2.5L engine. With the 2.9T (still not up to MDX standards) it is $43610.
I think you will find the Volvo much more than the MDX when a fair comparison is made. |
|
|
| slammerfly |
Yes.
3-4 months ago - I went through the same alsmost daily comparisons.....
Acura MDX = *****
Volvo XC90 = ****+1/2*
BMW X5 = ****
Mercedez ML320 = ***
(infinity & lexus dropped early)
The cost was much higher for X5 & XC90 for comparable vehicle with all the ammenitites...unless you (zubinh) are comparing the T5 model.
Safety = Volvo overall = has more features for sure
- but MDX so far have 5 ***** rating by NHSTA crash tests
3rd row = a must comparison if 3rd row is needed - I found XC90 3rd row to be tighter than MDX (others none)
I suggest you check out Edmund's Message board about the XC90 & test drive it yourself. Our dealere (owner) told us if we really wanted the XC90 that he can get it - but would wait until next year or the following unti all the kinks are cleaned.
Nissan Murano saw one today = looks like a hybrid/cross between a sedan +station wagon + an SUV.
Love my 2 weeks old MDX!!!!
no matter you destination
...enjoy the ride |
|
|
| zubinh |
Yes gents I was using the T5 as my comparison. But I've been told that its very underpowered so I'm back to leaning to the X.
I guess the best thing about murano, XC, RX330 and FX45 is that they all will accomplish the same thing - STICK IT TO THE ACURA DEALER IF HE INSISTS ON MSRP OR MORE !!!! These four sport utes should make mdx dealers a little more humble.
Thank you Nissan, infiniti lexus and volvo. You just helped me keep a few more grand in my pocket when I buy my X later this Year!!!!
Ha ha ha !. You gotta love it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
| mogur |
It depends on how you compare... Here is L.A., my local Volvo dealer is offering the XC90 at $1,000 over invoice. That makes the real world difference in price neglible...
quote:
[i]) it is $43610.
I think you will find the Volvo much more than the MDX when a fair comparison is done. [/B]
|
|
|
| BaldEagle |
quote:
Originally posted by mogur
It depends on how you compare... Here is L.A., my local Volvo dealer is offering the XC90 at $1,000 over invoice. That makes the real world difference in price neglible...
Volvo XC90 2.9L Turbo with AWD and 3rd row seat as the only option invoice plus $1000 = $40659. MSRP of MDX = $35700. That still is comparing the excellent MDX 3.5 with adequate power and great mileage for its class to the Volvo 2.9 Twin Turbo that is still underpowered and overworked to get the power it does have.
My wife loves Volvo's but in a few years when we will again be in the market for a new vehicle we will not even consider the XC90 unless Volvo comes up with a new type of engine to power it.
If the XC90 is already available at $1000 over invoice after only being on the market for a few months it makes you wonder why?
Must not be much demand. ?:8: |
|
|
| navybean |
| It really depends upon what you like. The Murano looks really great. The XC90 will last forever. The MDX is a great blend of both worlds. The Lexus GX470 has Toyota durabilty and Lexus standard:1: |
|
|
| m2pc |
quote:
Originally posted by navybean
It really depends upon what you like. The Murano looks really great. The XC90 will last forever. The MDX is a great blend of both worlds. The Lexus GX470 has Toyota durabilty and Lexus standard:1:
Isn't it nice to have choices :2:
But for my needs (third row seat) and trust in the product (had an Integra & TL) quality of Acura, I put in an order for aan MDX over the Volvo (first year model made me think twice - but I gotta admit, it has nice safety features).
Then you look at the safety rating of the MDX and it is not too bad either (go to http://www.nhtsa.org/NCAP/Cars/2003SUVs.html to take a peek at the ratings so far). So far (Volvo had not been rated yet) the MDX was the only SUV that I saw with a rollover resistance rating of 4 stars - al others had 3 or less - I guess being wide at 77 inches helps).
So all being said, it comes down to preference and what you will be happy with. I have always been :D with my Acuras..... |
|
|
| caroline |
| Friday had my X in the dealership for 7500 mile service, on the way home I stopped and looked at the Murano, didn't drive it, just looked. The salesman made a big deal about the 18" wheels. This is not a friendly car, the stainless interior reminds me of a kitchen sink, and there is something that reminds me of the JETSONS cartoon. I believe that the X's interior and size (more size) will win over the murano. The Murano will be a phase style, not the norm I believe. Sort of like, "nice to visit, wouldn't want to live there". :20: |
|
|
| jofam |
| I don't think the dealers are ready to deal on the GX yet, at least not in CA, even though the MSRP is $6000-7000 over invoice on a fully loaded GX. Compare that with a $4000 difference for an MDX and a $3000 difference (between MSRP and invoice) on a Volvo XC90. |
|
|
| Consultant |
| Before I ordered the MDX in early January, dealers in NY were willing to go $2,000 below list. The deals should be even better now. However, Lexus was only supplying the basic GX or the fully loaded, nothing in between. The basic with the nav & stereo package upgrade is a good deal if you can wait. |
|
|
| zubinh |
Consultant
Can you tell me where in NY the X was $2k less? I will be buying mine in November. If you can recommend a dealer that would be great
Thanks
ZubinH@aol.com |
|
|
| Consultant |
quote:
Originally posted by zubinh
Consultant
Can you tell me where in NY the X was $2k less? I will be buying mine in November. If you can recommend a dealer that would be great
Thanks
ZubinH@aol.com
I listed myself on Autobytel and the other auto buying programs and received many e-mail quotes. Most of the NY Lexus dealers were willing "to deal", unlike Acura. I think Rally Motors on Long Island had the best price but I can't be certain. I dropped it when I couldn't get the vehicle I wanted until May (or later).
If you're interested, get a listing of the dealers in your area and contact the "Internet Sales Manager". I used this approach with the MDX and got about $2K off the total lease. (My 2003 touring with nav and running boards is $580 /mo. for 48 mo. with nothing, zero, down. Tax included.) |
|
|
| zubinh |
Thanks consultant. I am seriously going to look at that RX330 before going to the acura dealer. Who knows maybe they'll lower the price enough to match the X.
Thanks again |
|
|
| xlargebee |
i don't know much about murano
but volvo didn't get good reviews. |
|
|
| megabuck2 |
Had to get a replacement car for my wife and although I was drooling over another MDX, we decided to go for a "cheaper" route and this is my humble comparison so far.
Murano SL: drives well, the cvt needs to get used to a bit, don't feel the gear changing and I kept looking at the gear shift to make sure it was in drive.
Bose in the Murano sounds bit better. Whether its a new system, or calibration, it just sound better and the speed sensitive volume is great.
The suspension is bit stiffer than the MDX but, I guess due to the suspension, it seems to have better handling than the MDX.
The xenon light is awesome on the Murano.
Noise level on both cars, I think is comparable. Although MDX noise level is lower during acceleration, Murano sounds quieter in the 65-75mph range.
Gas mileage so far, favors Murano.
BUT - Overall feel, I like the MDX better - more luxurious than the Murano.
Nissan's birdview on the Nav is great. Also, when Murano's Nav gives directions, it gives one for immediate and one for whats coming up. Example - it will tell you to turn left but it will also tell you that the place you want to go is on the right hand side. So it will be like "Please turn left in 500 ft, then in 1/4 of miles, turn right." So you won't be stuck on the left hand lane on a 4 lane higway trying to get to the far right lane to turn right.
Price - fully loaded Murano @ $34,500 including Nav, leather, etc.
Mike |
|
|
| xlargebee |
quote:
Originally posted by megabuck2
BUT - Overall feel, I like the MDX better - more luxurious than the Murano.
of course!
way better! :) |
|
|
| Wazowski |
quote:
Originally posted by megabuck2
. . . when Murano's Nav gives directions, it gives one for immediate and one for whats coming up. Example - it will tell you to turn left but it will also tell you that the place you want to go is on the right hand side. So it will be like "Please turn left in 500 ft, then in 1/4 of miles, turn right." So you won't be stuck on the left hand lane on a 4 lane higway trying to get to the far right lane to turn right. . . .
I believe the Acura/Honda nav does this, too. |
|
|
| xlargebee |
quote:
Originally posted by Wazowski
I believe the Acura/Honda nav does this, too.
yes, it does! ;) |
|
|
| ndahbar |
MDX beats the crap out of these 2 cars. The HONDA PILOT beats the crap out of the Murano, let alone the 2003 MDX (no contest). The Volvo is a tougher competitor, but please, even their top of the line engine is inferior, it comes with a 4-spd auto (yawn) and doesn't look as good I think. More importantly, the Acura Nav has NO PEERS. Well, the Lexus one is an exception...until I remember you can't play with it while the vehicle is in motion. LOL what a mess...
Anyway, if the Volvo styling and color and options are really turning you on, and if you REALLY value the 4K savings, go for it. But it is NOT going to be as versatile as the MDX, nor as smooth to drive. |
|
|
| DUBYA123 |
| doesnt ford own volvo? Nissan should of done better with that grill on the murano. stick with the X, more quality than the murano, more dynamic looking against the Volvo, |
|
|
| megabuck2 |
Lets just say that MDX and Murano are in a different league.
When I wan t a long, comfortable cruise and carry more than 5 people, MDX is the choice. When I want a short and or long drive and less than 5, Murano gets the call....
I actually, so call me crazy, like the front grill of the Murano... |
|
|
| harmonr1 |
quote:
Originally posted by megabuck2
....so call me crazy, like the front grill of the Murano...
OK - You're crazy!:2: :2: Reminds of a dump truck. But that's just me. |
|
|
| megabuck2 |
| If I could just get a red light behind the grill to move left and right, it would be perfect. |
|
|
| DUBYA123 |
| I saw a murano on the road today, with a custom painted grill to match the body, it looked like a slightly bigger focus, but it was nice looking. |
|
|
| Blessed |
I have more room in the front seat of the Murano than I do the MDX.
It has more leg room and for me that is key. |
|
|
| caroline |
| As my 18 year old niece and I were driving to Jacksonville FL on Saturday (south on 95) I spotted a Murano, black with the big grill, and I asked her what she thought of it, being that she is of that hip age group that Nissan is marketing to. She thought it was strange looking, reminded her of something from a space age cartoon. I actually think that if they got rid of the grill, and made the interior more inviting, it would be a great vehicle. |
|
|
| Wazowski |
quote:
Originally posted by megabuck2
....I actually, so call me crazy, like the front grill of the Murano...
I still need to get used to the smiling grill. It'll probably grow on me eventually -- I'm sure it's a nice car for those that are into that look.
(For those of you that haven't seen the Murano yet, this is what it looks like from the front ==> :D ) |
|
|
| megabuck2 |
"As my 18 year old niece and I were driving to Jacksonville FL on Saturday (south on 95) I spotted a Murano, black with the big grill, and I asked her what she thought of it, being that she is of that hip age group that Nissan is marketing to. She thought it was strange looking, reminded her of something from a space age cartoon. I actually think that if they got rid of the grill, and made the interior more inviting, it would be a great vehicle."
Not sure many 18 year olds can afford a $35K truck, but heck, I've seen 18 years old driving S500...so what do I know about marketing.
Inviting interior...how so? I guess the aluminium trims sort of getting used to, and I wish the driver seat has more side bolster, but the seat (driver) is very comfortable, and from what i hear from the back seat passenger, they haven't complained yet. My 5 year old complain that she does not have control of the conditioner...
Also, Nissan needs to relocate the cup holders in the back. They have it down on the floor(like a little drawer which disappears into the center console)...I have a feeling the holder will probably break when someone accidentally kicks it.
Front too...the holders are too wide for 12oz coke cans.
Had a chance to drive it on to Stockton this weekend...solid feel up to 85mph. I notice more road noise (tires) but less wind noise then the my MDX, and harsher ride when the road wasn't smooth, but handled well.
Alot of stares and finger pointing...whether it was a compliment or redicule, have no idea...one question at a gas station was..."Is this a suv, a van, or a station wagon?"
Mike |
|
|
| Wazowski |
quote:
Originally posted by megabuck2
...one question at a gas station was..."Is this a suv, a van, or a station wagon?"
Good point. I guess this is a new design trend in body styling. I've heard similar questions when the PT Cruisers came out and even the Toyota Matrix. "Is that supposed to be a sporty station wagon or a hatch back or a mini-SUV?" My response is usually :8: . |
|
|
| dmyles |
| All this time, I'd been ignoring the XC90 threads because (quite frankly) all the pictures I'd seen made it look like nothing more than an overgrown stationwagon to me. But tonite I saw my first one pulling into a gas station and it REALLY made my head turn (I'm used to getting that reaction in my MDX--- still! :) ). Anyway, it 's definitely is a lot more striking than its pictures would lead you to believe. It looks a lot like the X5 and is a bit higher off the ground than I was expecting. I don't know much more about it other than what I've read here, but that definitely taught me not to judge any more vehicles based on pictures alone!! :eek: |
|
|
| whynotmdx |
The XC90 is nice, I considered trading in the V70 for it. However the steering boost was way too high for me to enjoy driving. I had a lot of mechanical trouble with the Volvo as well. Over 12,000 in repair all covered under warranty though.
Anyone else test drive one of these?
Have my X now and can confirm the Volvo interior quality was far superior in the Volvo, I do have high expectations for the mechanical quality of the Honda product. |
|
|
| Arzoo |
quote:
Originally posted by XStatic
The XC90 is nice, I considered trading in the V70 for it. However the steering boost was way too high for me to enjoy driving. I had a lot of mechanical trouble with the Volvo as well. Over 12,000 in repair all covered under warranty though.
Anyone else test drive one of these?
Have my X now and can confirm the Volvo interior quality was far superior in the Volvo, I do have high expectations for the mechanical quality of the Honda product.
My wife and I seriously considered the XC90. We liked the looks (particularly in Black), and the interior definitely has a nice European look and feel. But..... after test driving both versions, there was no comparison with the MDX. The XC90 seemed big and sluggish with no sporty feel at all. Also, after 10 minutes, we both had sore bottoms from the seats. |
|
|
| wmquan |
I love the XC90's safety features and its styling. Looks great in person.
What would stop me from buying one is the drivetrain. I feel the 2.5T is underpowered, despite the rationalizations of some posters in Edmunds. I wouldn't want to give up the power I have with the MDX -- power to get onto the highway from a metered ramp, power to pass, pass while going up a mountain, etc.
Thus I would look at the T6. But the T6 is stuck with a lame four-speed transmission. As well as insanely overboosted power steering. It really hurts the T6, so much so that a lot of people do opt for the 2.5T instead.
I hope that by the time I consider replacing the MDX, Volvo will have put a compact 5-speed transmission into the T6. We have companies talking about a 6-speed and even a 7-speed (as well as CVT), and Volvo has a 4-speed in its premier SUV! |
|
|
| RandyMax |
quote:
Originally posted by megabuck2
Front too...the holders are too wide for 12oz coke cans.
Try using the "flip down thingie" located on the underside of the cover.
It took me like a month to find that out! :p |
|
|
|
