[richardallen]

Here's a quote from the test editors from Edmunds about the MDX....."I never did warm up to the front styling. It's not because of the application of the corporate Acura look, but because the headlamps and grille are located too high on the vehicle's face, leaving a giant featureless 'chin' equipped with a gaping maw of an air inlet below. Acura tried to reduce this largess with gingerbread plastic 'skid plating' and foglights, but the overall countenance is 'grinning' with its 'eyebrows' raised. It looks slightly loony, like Jack Nicholson after he chopped through the bathroom door in The Shining. Otherwise, I'm quite pleased with the MDX's sheet metal, which some might characterize as dull, but I prefer to think of as clean. It should be noted that I saw a brand-new MDX the other day with giant 18- or 19-inch aftermarket wheels, and it looked great. It also had three door dings in the right side and didn't even have plates on it yet. Acura might want to find an elegant way to provide some moldings on the sides of the MDX."
My sentiments exactly!!!!

 

[Thanson]

Personally, the front end of the MDX is one of my favorite features -- it's kind of mean/aggressive looking. I sit in my garage and stare at the front end all the time.

But I definitely agree about the moldings -- mine are on backorder with Tim and I can't wait to get them!

 

[ablank]

Wow. That's a lot of sentiments to agree with.

Taste is relative, as everyone here knows. But actually, my biggest styling beef, especialy relative to the X5, is with the rear end. Every time I pull up behind on MDX, I can see a lot of transmission, armatures and bolts under the bumper--just not a very discreet look. But still nothing to convince me that the overall MDX styling is superior to pretty much everything in its class--and a better value, too.

- ablank

 

[GatorGreg]

Here's a quote from the test editors from Edmunds about the MDX....."Acura tried to reduce this largess with gingerbread plastic 'skid plating' and foglights, but the overall countenance is 'grinning' with its 'eyebrows' raised. It looks slightly loony, like Jack Nicholson after he chopped through the bathroom door in The Shining."

Here's Johnny! X5 needs more cargo capacity like the MDX, even my old 1st gen CR-V had more cargo room

 

[XDM]

change back look

I 800% agree with Ablank . Also looks like the tire width is too narrow since MDX is a wide car. I like the tire equiped with Mercedes Bens's M series.

 

[gto-dave]

Wow. That's a lot of sentiments to agree with.

Taste is relative, as everyone here knows. But actually, my biggest styling beef, especialy relative to the X5, is with the rear end. Every time I pull up behind on MDX, I can see a lot of transmission, armatures and bolts under the bumper--just not a very discreet look. But still nothing to convince me that the overall MDX styling is superior to pretty much everything in its class--and a better value, too.

- ablank

Firstly, i love the look of the rear undergarments. Shows the technical marvel of the X's highly detailed stampings and control links. The tranny also lets you know from the rear that we're spinning our back wheel set too. lf it really bothers you, I suggest you get a full size spare. It not only hides the complex setup of the undercarriage, but gives it a true truck look.

BTW Gator, Great catch!!

 

[Grape-Nutz]

Another quote from the Edmunds site was: "...Also, the headlamps, which look impressive at first glance, didn't do a good job of illuminating the road at night, throwing a splotchy, shadowy pattern onto the ground that does little to inspire confidence at speeds higher than 60 mph."

Sounds kind of scary for country driving. Are these just picky road testers, or has anybody noticed this?

 

[whitemdx]

I usually have the fog lights on. I don't have much of problem with the headlights at least for me. But then, I have not had much chance to take it out to the country roads where there are no street lights.

I acutally use my navigation system to assist me on driving on roads that I'm not too familiar with or the visibility is poor. It's kind of similar to those racing games where you can see where you are in repect to the racing track. I'm wondering if there are anyone else did the similar thing with their navigatin system?

 

[MGTD]

Another quote from the Edmunds site was: "...Also, the headlamps, which look impressive at first glance, didn't do a good job of illuminating the road at night, throwing a splotchy, shadowy pattern onto the ground that does little to inspire confidence at speeds higher than 60 mph."

Sounds kind of scary for country driving. Are these just picky road testers, or has anybody noticed this?

I live 10 miles from nowhere. I think the MDX lights are very good. With HB on they do a great job lighting up the road. Rarely use the Fogs.

Chris

 

[Grape-Nutz]

Right up my alley

MGTD,

El Dorado Co - this is exactly where I was thinking of when I wrote the first post. Recently spent several days up your way (see Sierra Foothills ), and had a blast driving the roads in an '01 GTI. The HBs were great, and saved me from bagging/getting bagged by a deer. When I read the Edmunds road test, I thought to myself that Hwy 49 at night would be a crummy place for lights that throw a "...splotchy, shadowy pattern onto the ground." Glad to hear it ain't so.

 

[ablank]

That's a good point, gto-dave. I was leaning toward getting a full-size spare anyway. So that would cover my private parts, too.

- ablank

Firstly, i love the look of the rear undergarments. Shows the technical marvel of the X's highly detailed stampings and control links. The tranny also lets you know from the rear that we're spinning our back wheel set too. lf it really bothers you, I suggest you get a full size spare. It not only hides the complex setup of the undercarriage, but gives it a true truck look.

 

[MarkC]

I like the looks of the undercarriage, too, but alas, I covered them up with both a rear hitch and a full size spare. Although you can't see the full size spare with the hitch installed.

Oh, and I like the look of the front end. Sets it apart from the other vanilla SUVs.

 

[MDXLuvr]

"It looks slightly loony, like Jack Nicholson after he chopped through the bathroom door in The Shining.

all i got to say is... what are the editors at edmunds smoking

 

[RedMdxMemphis]

Editors need something to say...

- MDXLuvr

Even with the fact more SUVs lack of 3rd row seat or space, those editor still has to say something like "3rd row seats are for teenagers" blah blah. I would say if you are 5'9 and above, you would not be comfortable with 3rd row seat..but again you won't be in ANY car. So my point here is that the editors need something to say about this car on the negative side, whatever it is.

On the style topic, it is personal. No doubt, the BMW X5, for example, has a very nice style and relatively more attractive but by having its look, it suffers the spaces inside.

The MDX light is brighter than my BMW sedan and is very sufficient even when with no road light.

 

[tdnone]

I like the looks of the undercarriage, too, but alas, I covered them up with both a rear hitch and a full size spare. Although you can't see the full size spare with the hitch installed.

Oh, and I like the look of the front end. Sets it apart from the other vanilla SUVs.

MarkC also speaks for me

 

[MDXLuvr]

RedMdxMemphis

I agree that part of evaluating a car is to find something to criticize, but, come on, comparing the front end of the 'X to Johnny in The Shining is ludicrous.

btw, you are correct about the Headlights; a couple of months back i was thinking of switching to Xenon Headlamps, but after driving the 'X for 200 miles at night on a trip i realized they will suffice.