[jj_mdx]

just finished reading the long term test by edmunds.com of MB ML320 (2002, not 2001 model), one of the competitors of the MDX... here's the summary part of the article:

- Current Odometer: 6,851 miles
Best Fuel Economy: 14.2 mpg
Worst Fuel Economy: 11.9 mpg
Average Fuel Economy (over the life of the vehicle): 12.9 mpg
Body Repair Costs: None
Maintenance Costs: None
Problems: ESP light illuminated in dash — faulty lamp switch replaced under warranty; fuel gauge malfunctioned — fuel tank sender unit replaced under warranty.

i heard that MB did some major revisions to solve the reliability problems/concerns on the 2002 ML320, looks like they still have a long way to go.... and the fuel economy (if there's any) sucks....

 

[Harry]

When I was comparison shopping for my ultimate SUV, the ML320 was one of the first off my list because of the fuel economy. I could afford to keep one fueled but refuse to. This is one of the things that gives SUVs a bad name.
My X has a current average of 21mpg and I allways get 24-25 mpg on the interstate. I love my MDX.
Thanks for the info jj_mdx
Harry

 

[jj_mdx]

My X has a current average of 21mpg and I allways get 24-25 mpg on the interstate

that's a very impressive mpg number.... mine has less than 2000 miles on it and averaged between 18-20 mpg depending on traffic... i drive a mixed city-highway routine....

 

[Harry]

MPGs

Out in the country with no traffic lights and few stop signs help keep my average high but the hills hurt. On a level interstate it is easy to get in the high 20s.
Actually, your average is quite good considering that stop and go driving kills fuel economy.

 

[vip9]

...
i heard that MB did some major revisions to solve the reliability problems/concerns on the 2002 ML320, looks like they still have a long way to go.... and the fuel economy (if there's any) sucks....

JJ, go read entries in the Knowledge base - there are quite a few problems with our beloved MDX as well. Also, read some long threads in Problems folder to see that some unlucky MDX owners had to go through much more than just a bad light switch or a fuel gauge.

Also, my TRUE city mileage in MDX is far below advertised 17 mpg. It solidly stands at 11-11.5 mpg and rarely crawls up unless I go on a highway. The best I got there was 26 mpg!!!


And no, I am not sent by Lester or ML320-Owner!

 

[jj_mdx]

yeap, i know (and have read many many times) MDX has plenty of problems, but so far the reviews have been good regarding its reliability.... i can't say the same for ML320 though...

with that being stated, one of my friends has a ML430 ('00 model) and hasn't had any major problems yet.... MB does offer a better service/warranty though, at least they give out free maintainance for 2 years (or 3, can't remember exactly)...

about the gas milage, i don't think people at edmunds.com drive in the city all the time.... i personally drove my friend's ML430 before, both on highways and in stop-and-go traffic, it barely averaged 12-13mpg.... that's an 8-cylinder though... my mdx in the same road/traffic condition so far averaged 19 mpg.... that sounds like a big difference to me...

 

[renov8r]

value...

The fact of the matter is that the VTM-4 is a big winner in fuel economy.
Coupled with the 5-speed auto trans, unequalled Honda engine effieciency , and well-shapped aero body work the MDX is likely to remain the size/mpg for a LONG time.

I think MANY owners of SUVs happily give up "truckiness" for a longer interval between fill-ups -- I know in my neck of the woods the Acura wins have come at the expense of X5, MLs, RangeRovers & some domestics.

 

[DaleB]

Just 1400 mi. on the odomoter.

Straight freeway for 2 hours averaged 22.4. Going 70 - 75 most of the way.


Worst, stop and go around town
all week, was 14.7, no freeways.

Mixed driving about 17.4.


Racing up and down hills at over 70mph for about 30 min. in 4th gear half of the time, then 45 min. of 65 mph level road; overall average: 19.1.

 

[BaldEagle]

Great MPG on Freeway

I picked up my new MDX on Friday and had a 250 mile drive on I-5 South to get home. I hit the reset button as I pulled up to the freeway on ramp and drove about 100 miles varying speeds (between 60 and 80)) per dealers instructions to break in motor. I avoided full throttle, used soft foot method (think of an unboiled egg between your foot and the gas pedal). MPG for the first 100 miles was 27.1 with average speed of 68 MPH.

Reset again for the last 150 miles. This time I put more foot into the X (not full throttle) to see how it climbed on hills, passing, etc. Average MPG for last 150 miles was 24.3 and 67 MPH. Was very impressed with the X's spunk.

Needless to say, so far gas mileage has far exceed my expectations, at least on highway driving.

 

[DaleB]

My next challenge will be driving at legal speeds on the freeway and checking my mileage...that will be a challenge!
Although would not using the cruise control give you the best instead of doing the 'egg' thing?
IT's amazing you could get 27 mpg while varying your speed between 60 and 80!

 

[wmquan]

yeap, i know (and have read many many times) MDX has plenty of problems, but so far the reviews have been good regarding its reliability.... i can't say the same for ML320 though...

with that being stated, one of my friends has a ML430 ('00 model) and hasn't had any major problems yet.... MB does offer a better service/warranty though, at least they give out free maintainance for 2 years (or 3, can't remember exactly)...

All MB's in the U.S. offer free scheduled maintenance for the duration of the warranty period (4 years/50k miles). The only catch is that the maintenance is based on the computer testing the condition of the oil, and brake pads are not included. It's a good way to offset the normally high costs of German vehicle maintenance. I refuse to buy a Volvo until they include something similar -- their maintenance can be really pricey!

Yep, I think it's more likely to get a bad ML than a bad MDX, though obviously both entities exist as proven here. Folks without problems with either vehicles love them.

I am saddened, though, that I don't think the 2002 ML320 is yet "average" by JD Power and Consumer Reports standards, based on what I've observed (JD Power has the 2002 as below average in its 2002 IQS survey). I'd had hoped that this being its fifth model year, it'd be at least average. Kind of puts all the screaming here about 2001 MDX thuds and weeping mirrors in perspective! Acura fixed those during the first model year and owners thought that Acura was too slow to respond!

I think the bad Edmunds mileage is their overenthusiastic drivers on the highway combined with nasty California traffic. The rest comes from the fact that the vehicle gained 175 pounds going into 2002 and has progressively gotten heavier over the years. Though obviously the tradeoffs are the addition of some great features, some which you simply can't get on the MDX. Pros and cons, pros and cons ...