| rb101 |
Below From Edmunds: Curious, from '07 MDX owners, how accurate this is. Have an '01 and looking at picking up another MDX.
Thanks
"Acceleration Comments: Engine sounds rough at high rpm — not very Honda-like. Also lacks punch down low — very Honda-like. Brake torque launch doesn't help accel.
Handling Comments: .82g for a 3-row SUV is outstanding. Balance tends toward understeer (duh). Better than so many large cars. SH-AWD works its magic in the slalom by transferring torque in intuitive, easily controlled bursts during transitions. It's obvious what's going on and it's obviously working right.
Braking Comments: Obvious fade after four runs despite consistent pedal feel." |
|
|
| craniotes |
Seems pretty spot-on to me. The handling is the best part of this SUV -- particularly with the Sport package -- followed by the engine and the brakes.
Thanks to its peaky nature, the 3.7 in the X isn't going to win you any stoplight drag races, though according to Car and Driver the acceleration figures are more than competitive with other SUVs in its market segment, including some V8s (0-60mph in seven seconds flat). The engine note is matter of taste, I suppose. Edmunds may not have been impressed, but I find myself winding it past 4000rpm every now and then just so I can hear the VTEC doing its thang.
Car & Driver also recorded some pretty decent 70-0 mph numbers (170'), but they too noted fade after repeated tests. Personally, I find the brakes to be excellent -- terrific feel and predictable "bite", and since I don't anticipate running out and doing a bunch of 70-0 tests, fade isn't really an issue. It might be, however, if you do a lot of towing and find yourself on a long downhill stretch of road.
Overall, I think you'll find the X to be competitive with or superior to pretty much every SUV in its segment from a performance/value standpoint.
Regards,
Adam |
|
|
| Fabvsix |
| That Edmonds editor must have been smoking crack! :confused: :confused: |
|
|
| LionSpeed |
| Thanks for the review rb101. ... I like the Acceleration comments part.. clever. :) |
|
|
| Fabvsix |
LS:
Howsssssssssssssssssss the FOG in BURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRbank?
Muahahahahhahahahhahahah.....My cousins are in full "gloomville" mode in Long Beach......
Its CHELADA time...... |
|
|
| Fabvsix |
| SoCal Long Beach Chelada toast......:cool: |
|
|
| LionSpeed |
Arrrgggggggggg!... $&^#ing Fog makes me sick. Can't do nothing. Can't paint, can't clean the yard, can't see? .... LOL. Freaking chilly today. Gloomvile makes me wanna nap all day. :)
I went to several local groccery market & look for CLAMATA juice (your pix), but can't find any. It sure deliousssss. Any idea where to buy. My skin is kinda pale from staying inside too long. Need some tomato juice to bring back the color. Ya know what I mean.... BURP!!!! |
|
|
| Fabvsix |
| I would call AB at 1-800-342-5283 as I did. The marketing person will ask for your name and mailing address so they can mail you some nifty gifts and a thank you card. First class...... They will provide you your local distributor and they will tell you the "few" places that have it. Mostly found at local liquor stores, 7-11 and SaveMart. It will be in questionable areas, so bring your bullet proof vest........I just picked up 15 cans for the big bird day. I get it at a local liquor store. It will me massed produced nationwide come January 14th 08! |
|
|
| gmc74 |
quote:
Originally posted by rb101
Below From Edmunds: Curious, from '07 MDX owners, how accurate this is. Have an '01 and looking at picking up another MDX.
Thanks
"Acceleration Comments: Engine sounds rough at high rpm — not very Honda-like. Also lacks punch down low — very Honda-like. Brake torque launch doesn't help accel.
Handling Comments: .82g for a 3-row SUV is outstanding. Balance tends toward understeer (duh). Better than so many large cars. SH-AWD works its magic in the slalom by transferring torque in intuitive, easily controlled bursts during transitions. It's obvious what's going on and it's obviously working right.
Braking Comments: Obvious fade after four runs despite consistent pedal feel."
I tend to agree with Craniotes. I finally let my wife drive it this weekend, it has been 4 months after all... and I didn't want to go shopping with her... she commented on how touchy the brakes were, so I am not sure I can agree on the brake comments. Mine are still running strong. |
|
|
| Needsdecaf |
Engine sounds rough at higher RPM? What?!?!?!
I have to say the howl from the VTEC V6 over 4,000 RPM is SWEET.
If you want rough at high RPM, you should hear the raucousness coming from the engine bay of my 2.5L 300 HP Turbocharged 5 Pot Volvo R at 6,000 RPM.
As Car and Driver put it..."sounds like someone's grating a giant wheel of Parmesan cheese". :D
Oh, and the brakes are a bit touchy, but I wouldn't describe them as nearly as grabby as, say, the G35. |
|
|
| shootist |
| I look forward to those uphill on ramps. that give me an excuse to let the engine loose. At 4,700 rpm, the howl of the variable intake manifold gives me goose bumps. 4,500, 4,600. wait for it wait for it, SSSNNNAAAAAAARRRRLLLLLLL |
|
|
| HuMan321 |
Man,
That's teasing a guy with only 80 miles on his...
I can't wait as I have a few spots that may demand some acceleration once mine breaks in.
quote:
Originally posted by shootist
I look forward to those uphill on ramps. that give me an excuse to let the engine loose. At 4,700 rpm, the howl of the variable intake manifold gives me goose bumps. 4,500, 4,600. wait for it wait for it, SSSNNNAAAAAAARRRRLLLLLLL
|
|
|
| kingmdx |
quote:
Originally posted by shootist
I look forward to those uphill on ramps. that give me an excuse to let the engine loose. At 4,700 rpm, the howl of the variable intake manifold gives me goose bumps. 4,500, 4,600. wait for it wait for it, SSSNNNAAAAAAARRRRLLLLLLL
It's going to be a long time before I hear that :( ....sigh* |
|
|
| SharpOne |
quote:
Originally posted by gmc74
I tend to agree with Craniotes. I finally let my wife drive it this weekend, it has been 4 months after all... and I didn't want to go shopping with her... she commented on how touchy the brakes were, so I am not sure I can agree on the brake comments. Mine are still running strong.
I'm going on 4 months as well without wifey behind the wheel. Trying to keep that streak going as long as I can...the first scuff :( :crying: will most likely come from her.
So far she has been good about it. I hope it continues! I feel a bit bad/selfish about it sometimes, but every time I see the X shined up and still unmarred, I feel better. :D |
|
|
| craniotes |
Truth be told, my wife is probably easier on the X than I am (in 3000mi it's already suffered one chip, two scratches and two door dings under my watch).
No, my biggest fear is coming true tomorrow when either my wife's fat, idiot brother, or my not-quite-as-fat (but still an idiot) brothter-in-law gets to drive my X back into the city from NJ, where we're attending T-Day dinner at my wife's cousins' house. Why is this happening? Because my wife and I have to head back to Manhattan early to have dessert at my mother's T-Day party, that's why. Since it's just me, my wife and our son who have to drive in, we're taking her sister's family's car (a beat up, crappy Ford Taurus), while they take my X ("they" = her sister, idiot brother-in-law, their two daughters, her father, and her fat, idiot brother). Now if only the X didn't have that damn third-row, I wouldn't be in this mess...
Pray for me. Pray for my X.
Regards,
Adam |
|
|
| barnowl |
quote:
Originally posted by rb101
Below From Edmunds: Curious, from '07 MDX owners, how accurate this is. Have an '01 and looking at picking up another MDX.
Thanks
"Acceleration Comments: Engine sounds rough at high rpm — not very Honda-like. Also lacks punch down low — very Honda-like. Brake torque launch doesn't help accel.
Handling Comments: .82g for a 3-row SUV is outstanding. Balance tends toward understeer (duh). Better than so many large cars. SH-AWD works its magic in the slalom by transferring torque in intuitive, easily controlled bursts during transitions. It's obvious what's going on and it's obviously working right.
Braking Comments: Obvious fade after four runs despite consistent pedal feel."
rb101,
About 7 months ago, I was exactly where you are now.
We bought a 2001 new, in October of '01, and it's been mainly my wife's car.
It was on the cutting edge of technology then, and we've been very, very happy with it,
although it seemed just a little underpowered, and I didn't like the feel of the brake pedal until after I had its first brake job.
We still own her, with about 63K miles.
All this time, I was driving a '97 TL.
I felt it was time to trade in, at 176K miles.
While it ran flawlessly, it was starting to show signs of rust under the doors, and at the fender/body intersection.
So, I did a little research, and bought myself a new MDX, for more versatility.
The engine is much more powerful, and the brakes are much firmer.
Though hard to describe, it has a different feel driving it, as compared to the '01.
I do not have the Sport, for in asking a knowledgeable source if it was worth the extra 2K, he told me he didn't think so.
The ride in the Tech is much firmer than the '01.
I don't like the side mirrors as well, and I don't care for the design of the driver's side wiper arm, as it impedes hood visibility.
I do think that the drive train and mechanical systems are superior to the '01, (which has been flawless) but being a Honda/Acura product, I would expect nothing less.
Also, although I am a Bose fan, I think that the ELS system is far superior to the Bose in the '01.
So, to sum it up, I'd have to disagree with the magazine, for I feel, with the few noted exceptions, the car is a complete package. |
|
|
| SharpOne |
quote:
Originally posted by craniotes
Truth be told, my wife is probably easier on the X than I am (in 3000mi it's already suffered one chip, two scratches and two door dings under my watch).
No, my biggest fear is coming true tomorrow when either my wife's fat, idiot brother, or my not-quite-as-fat (but still an idiot) brothter-in-law gets to drive my X back into the city from NJ, where we're attending T-Day dinner at my wife's cousins' house. Why is this happening? Because my wife and I have to head back to Manhattan early to have dessert at my mother's T-Day party, that's why. Since it's just me, my wife and our son who have to drive in, we're taking her sister's family's car (a beat up, crappy Ford Taurus), while they take my X ("they" = her sister, idiot brother-in-law, their two daughters, her father, and her fat, idiot brother). Now if only the X didn't have that damn third-row, I wouldn't be in this mess...
Pray for me. Pray for my X.
Regards,
Adam
lol, I feel ya! I'll say a prayer for your X tonight. :2: |
|
|
| ductman |
quote:
Originally posted by craniotes
Truth be told, my wife is probably easier on the X than I am (in 3000mi it's already suffered one chip, two scratches and two door dings under my watch).
No, my biggest fear is coming true tomorrow when either my wife's fat, idiot brother, or my not-quite-as-fat (but still an idiot) brothter-in-law gets to drive my X back into the city from NJ, where we're attending T-Day dinner at my wife's cousins' house. Why is this happening? Because my wife and I have to head back to Manhattan early to have dessert at my mother's T-Day party, that's why. Since it's just me, my wife and our son who have to drive in, we're taking her sister's family's car (a beat up, crappy Ford Taurus), while they take my X ("they" = her sister, idiot brother-in-law, their two daughters, her father, and her fat, idiot brother). Now if only the X didn't have that damn third-row, I wouldn't be in this mess...
Pray for me. Pray for my X.
Regards,
Adam
I would have lent you my vehicle for this issue |
|
|
| craniotes |
Thanks for the prayers, Sharp -- they must've worked because my X is sitting safe and sound in her spot in the garage. Still, I don't wish my brother-in-laws on anyone in this regard...
Regards,
Adam
PS - Next time I'll borrow your ride, ductman -- the whole family will fit, no problem! |
|
|
| Heat00 |
quote:
Originally posted by craniotes
Truth be told, my wife is probably easier on the X than I am (in 3000mi it's already suffered one chip, two scratches and two door dings under my watch).
No, my biggest fear is coming true tomorrow when either my wife's fat, idiot brother, or my not-quite-as-fat (but still an idiot) brothter-in-law gets to drive my X back into the city from NJ, where we're attending T-Day dinner at my wife's cousins' house. Why is this happening? Because my wife and I have to head back to Manhattan early to have dessert at my mother's T-Day party, that's why. Since it's just me, my wife and our son who have to drive in, we're taking her sister's family's car (a beat up, crappy Ford Taurus), while they take my X ("they" = her sister, idiot brother-in-law, their two daughters, her father, and her fat, idiot brother). Now if only the X didn't have that damn third-row, I wouldn't be in this mess...
Pray for me. Pray for my X.
Regards,
Adam
funny stuff... sorry to hear.... our fingers are crossed for you !! |
|
|
| Heat00 |
BTW, I have yet to see a 0-60 time of 7 flat.
what issue was that?
Every one I have is closer to 8 flat.. |
|
|
| craniotes |
quote:
Originally posted by Heat00
BTW, I have yet to see a 0-60 time of 7 flat.
what issue was that?
Every one I have is closer to 8 flat..
Check out caranddriver.com and look up their SUV comparison tests. I'm not sure which issue it ran in (March, I think), but it was called "Eight Tickets to Paradise", and pitted a Sport/Ent. against the X5, ML350, XC90 V8, SRX V8, LR3, GX470, and a Toureg V6. In any case, the X won (by a lot), and it posted the following times on its way to the winner's circle: 0-60 in 7.0, 5-60 in 7.6, and 0-100 in 19.5. The slowest Car and Driver has clocked a 2nd generation X to 60mph is 7.3 seconds.
IMO, these guys run the best, most objective and techical U.S.-based car mag, bar none. If it's good enough for them, it's good enough for me.
Regards,
Adam |
|
|
| Needsdecaf |
quote:
Originally posted by craniotes
Check out caranddriver.com and look up their SUV comparison tests. I'm not sure which issue it ran in (March, I think), but it was called "Eight Tickets to Paradise", and pitted a Sport/Ent. against the X5, ML350, XC90 V8, SRX V8, LR3, GX470, and a Toureg V6. In any case, the X won (by a lot), and it posted the following times on its way to the winner's circle: 0-60 in 7.0, 5-60 in 7.6, and 0-100 in 19.5. The slowest Car and Driver has clocked a 2nd generation X to 60mph is 7.3 seconds.
IMO, these guys run the best, most objective and techical U.S.-based car mag, bar none. If it's good enough for them, it's good enough for me.
Regards,
Adam
I disagree with the technically correct part. I have an issue with the fact that all their acceleration times are adjusted for altitude and barometric pressure. While this does strive to be more "technically correct", IMO, the formula is open to interpretation. I wish they made more mention of it, and posted corrected and uncorrected times.
Road and Track does NOT correct times.
C&D's formula is someplace on their website. |
|
|
| craniotes |
quote:
Originally posted by Needsdecaf
I disagree with the technically correct part. I have an issue with the fact that all their acceleration times are adjusted for altitude and barometric pressure. While this does strive to be more "technically correct", IMO, the formula is open to interpretation. I wish they made more mention of it, and posted corrected and uncorrected times.
Road and Track does NOT correct times.
C&D's formula is someplace on their website.
Clearly we use a different set of criteria to define what is technically correct and what isn't, as their "formula" is one of the reasons that I find Car and Driver to be superior to other car mags -- techically, and otherwise.
Of course, my opinion is just that -- an opinion -- which is why those who disagree are fortunate to have available for reference magazines such as the aforementioned Road & Track (my second favorite U.S.-based car mag), Motor Trend (hacks, IMO), Automobile (they utlilize manufacturers' times, as opposed to performing their own tests -- 'nuff said), and AutoWeek (too heavily skewed towards racing news for my tastes).
Regards,
Adam
PS - FWIW, Road & Track posted a 7.5 second sprint to 60mph. I can only assume that this is an uncorrected average of a two-way run. |
|
|
| Needsdecaf |
quote:
Originally posted by craniotes
Clearly we use a different set of criteria to define what is technically correct and what isn't, as their "formula" is one of the reasons that I find Car and Driver to be superior to other car mags -- techically, and otherwise.
I have no problem with the fact that they correct their times. I actually do like it...I think that C&D does strive to post the most accurate results possible. However, as I noted above.
1) Who is to say what is the "right" correction factor?
2) They should publish both pieces of information together so that it's clear.
The reason that I think #2 is important is borne out by my wife's car...a 2004 V70R. It has a 2.5L I-5 with a KKK24 turbo pushing through two intercoolers. Well, Volvo's stock intercoolers are a bad design and lose effectiveness quickly over 80 degrees. People have shown over a 20 HP loss over 80 degrees, especially when running A/C which heat soaks the intercoolers.
I cannot "correct" my 0-40 MPH run from the stoplights....when I hit the gas pulling away from the street, it is what it is. I would like to know that I'm losing that much power when it's hot / muggy out. |
|
|
| craniotes |
I hear what you're saying, but since you drive your car when it's cold, hot, muggy, or dry, which time makes the most sense for you? Had C&D tested your vehicle on a 90 degree/90% humidity day, would the numbers posted then have the most relevance for you? If so, what about the other 300 days out of the year when the conditions are more temperate?
As four seasons drivers (i.e. neither of us are smart enough to live in Hawai ;)), we have to take the good with the bad, and part of this is climate-dependent performance. I still maintain that C&D's formula represents most cars in the most realistic light, but obviously some cars will fall outside of their formula, such as your Volvo (honestly, I had no idea that R-series turbos were so sensitive to heat). In any case, this is why we have other points of reference to rely upon for our cars. I prefer Car and Driver, you prefer Road & Track. Vive la difference!
Regards,
Adam |
|
|
| Needsdecaf |
quote:
Originally posted by craniotes
I prefer Car and Driver, you prefer Road & Track. Vive la difference!
Regards,
Adam
Actually, I like Car and Driver's tests better. :D |
|
|
| craniotes |
quote:
Originally posted by Needsdecaf
Actually, I like Car and Driver's tests better. :D
At the very least, their writers to tend to affect a pretty good sense of humor, and honestly, how can one fault a full road test on the Oscar Meyer Wienermobile?
Regards,
Adam |
|
|
|
