Acura MDX SUV Forums banner

1 - 20 of 33 Posts
T

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
MB Snobbery

'Warning, I'm not an M-class owner, so I guess I'm "allowed" to be pretty blunt about my comments on these pictures. In any case, read below and enjoy!'

1. Acura not designed to be offroader. Anyone who reads automobile mags knows. Criticising MDX for not being offroader, sad
2. Pictures+comments on how great his MB's undercarriage is-MB designed to be offroader with low range
3. MB underbelly better be protected with ridiculou$ MB repair cost$
4. MB raising all underbelly pieces higher into frame makes truck ungainly. MB is antiquated truck frame design- MDX is modern unit body. MB knows this so next SV is unit body
5. Not MDX owner, feels necessary to snap and upload 20 pictures underneath MDX to try to prove his MB better-sad
6. MDX is overall superior to MB-wait until next MB

My 0.02
 
D

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Re: MB Snobbery

thetruth said:
'Warning, I'm not an M-class owner, so I guess I'm "allowed" to be pretty blunt about my comments on these pictures. In any case, read below and enjoy!'

1. Acura not designed to be offroader. Anyone who reads automobile mags knows. Criticising MDX for not being offroader, sad
2. Pictures+comments on how great his MB's undercarriage is-MB designed to be offroader with low range
3. MB underbelly better be protected with ridiculou$ MB repair cost$
4. MB raising all underbelly pieces higher into frame makes truck ungainly. MB is antiquated truck frame design- MDX is modern unit body. MB knows this so next SV is unit body
5. Not MDX owner, feels necessary to snap and upload 20 pictures underneath MDX to try to prove his MB better-sad
6. MDX is overall superior to MB-wait until next MB

My 0.02
1. What is sad is that you don't realise that moving things higher up prevents damage from road debris, or when driving in deep snow. I choose to make my own opinions, and base everything on what automobile magazines say. What is also sad is how misinformed you are, as shown in your above message.

2. Wrong, MB designed the M-class with off-roading in mind, just as Acura did. Read their comprehensive press release. Obviously they (MB) placed a higher emphasis on off-roadability though.

3. Wrong again. MB part prices are competitive with other luxury Japanese and European makes.

4. Truck on frame design is not antiquated. Heck, some cars being produced today still use it. It has its pluses and minuses. The ML's frame was designed specifically for the M-class only, and is car crash compatible. Acura doesn't make that claim with the MDX, although they do say that the front bumper is car compatible. Handling is not ungainly at all. Until the BMW X5 came along, the M-class moved through Consumer Reports emergency handling/lane change at one of the highest speeds. Poor handling/high centre of gravity has nothing to do with the body-on-frame design. Case in point, the M-class despite its body-on-frame design, has a lower centre of gravity than the unibody Lexus RX300.

You're wrong about MB's new SUV being unibody. There are actually two new MB SUVs coming out. One will be unibody (this will debut first), and the second will be body-on-frame. The latter will be emphasised as an off-roader. Goes to show you that it's not antiquated.

5. I took the pictures for the benefit of those comparing both vehicles. I warned everyone about my comments at the start of my first message. The album has had over 3000 hits so far, and you're the first that has flamed me about it. I guess most are just more able to appreciate the differences and the comments.

6. Oh really? Maybe in your opinion. Both have pros and cons and it's up to the individual to decide which vehicle meets his/her needs better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Interesting Photos

Drew:
Thx for the link to your photos. Really quite interesting. I have enjoyed reading your posts on Edmunds. I expected to buy either the ML320 or ML430. I come from a family that has had S class, E class and C class for over 30 years and there's nothing like 'em (the S and E in particular although the CLK430 is interesting). The ML isn't an S or E class and should be recognized for what it is; the 1st car-like SUV that moved drivers out of cars and into SUV's but not a high-line luxury car or an E or S equivalent; that's reserved for the "G-wagon". But the design is now aging a bit and those of us who need to buy now must deal with what is available now.
I went for the MDX for various reasons but believe it was a matter of timing; if the new ML replacement was out this year my decision might have been different. But comparing the 2 today the packaging on the MDX won out and it wasn't even close. I'm sure the new ML design will deal with the shortcomings that made me select the MDX. You know most of what they are.
I'm aware of your prejudice against anything without the 3-pointed star but I don't think you should be so smug as to post pictures that try to promote the ML on an MDX site. Leave the link on the ML sites; I know both vehicles and a 3-pointed star doesn't mean it's superior.
It's like anything else in this world; some aspects will be done better on the ML and others will be better done on the MDX. All that matters is that a person pick the vehicle that suits their purpose and focus on the features that matter in their lives. Towards that end, while I found your photos intersting and agree with many of your comments they really don't pertain to the way I use my MDX so I found them moot. Any you know what; others who bought the MDX also understood what they were buying. That's why your post was either ignored or received an emotional, but factually incorrect response.
Happy ML'ing to you.
 
T

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
More MB Snobbery+Mistruthful Distortions - Get a Life!!!

You act as you know facts, but you simply manipulate and distort facts to speak mistruths.

Acura does not design MDX to be true offroader-read the articles. Light offroading is not same as true offroader. So criticising undercarriage for not being true heavy-duty offroader is sad.

Not all parts need to be meter up in air to protect against snow. If so everyone would break down. Again, fact distortion.

MB parts+labor are more expensive than Acura labor+parts. Another lie from you.

You say-
'You're wrong about MB's new SUV being unibody. There are actually two new MB SUVs coming out. One
will be unibody (this will debut first), and the second will be body-on-frame. The latter will be emphasised
as an off-roader. Goes to show you that it's not antiquated. '

Again-you prove me right, despite your attempt to distort information. Even you say next MB >luxury< SUV is >unit body<. Thats because frame is antiquated-MB knows this-so will not use frame. Other, future MB SUV is-you say emphasised-special targeted off-roader that use frame. So what-its not luxury SUV like next MB. True luxury SUV-what today's MB pretends to be and you try to claim it is by comparing to MDX and RX300 and QX4-does not use antiquated frame-MB fixes with next >luxury< SUV. If frame not antiquated next MB luxury SUV does not use modern unit body but it does. Again, I am right and you admit it.

I like MB but not religious-I like S very much. Antiquated frame not MB fault because MB SUV is old model with old design. You do not need rationalise-they know it and will fix with better design. MB need not hire you for bad marketing on their part. You should try another profession.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
71 Posts
> You're wrong about MB's new SUV being unibody. There are actually
> two new MB SUVs coming out. One will be unibody (this will debut
> first), and the second will be body-on-frame. The latter will be
> emphasised as an off-roader. Goes to show you that it's not
> antiquated.


Do you know when the new MB SUVs are coming out? 2002 models or 2003??
 
D

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Re: Interesting Photos

BobP said:
Drew:
Thx for the link to your photos. Really quite interesting. I have enjoyed reading your posts on Edmunds. I expected to buy either the ML320 or ML430. I come from a family that has had S class, E class and C class for over 30 years and there's nothing like 'em (the S and E in particular although the CLK430 is interesting). The ML isn't an S or E class and should be recognized for what it is; the 1st car-like SUV that moved drivers out of cars and into SUV's but not a high-line luxury car or an E or S equivalent; that's reserved for the "G-wagon". But the design is now aging a bit and those of us who need to buy now must deal with what is available now.
I went for the MDX for various reasons but believe it was a matter of timing; if the new ML replacement was out this year my decision might have been different. But comparing the 2 today the packaging on the MDX won out and it wasn't even close. I'm sure the new ML design will deal with the shortcomings that made me select the MDX. You know most of what they are.
I'm aware of your prejudice against anything without the 3-pointed star but I don't think you should be so smug as to post pictures that try to promote the ML on an MDX site. Leave the link on the ML sites; I know both vehicles and a 3-pointed star doesn't mean it's superior.
It's like anything else in this world; some aspects will be done better on the ML and others will be better done on the MDX. All that matters is that a person pick the vehicle that suits their purpose and focus on the features that matter in their lives. Towards that end, while I found your photos intersting and agree with many of your comments they really don't pertain to the way I use my MDX so I found them moot. Any you know what; others who bought the MDX also understood what they were buying. That's why your post was either ignored or received an emotional, but factually incorrect response.
Happy ML'ing to you.
Hi Bob,

Thanks for your comments! FWIW, I didn't post the M-class pictures, nor did I even mention M-class in my first two messages...I did post the pictures off the site for a reason.

All that matters is that a person pick the vehicle that suits their purpose and focus on the features that matter in their lives. Towards that end, while I found your photos intersting and agree with many of your comments they really don't pertain to the way I use my MDX so I found them moot. Any you know what; others who bought the MDX also understood what they were buying.
Yup, agreed, hence the last sentence in my previous message.

...but not a high-line luxury car or an E or S equivalent; that's reserved for the "G-wagon
Heh heh, funny you should mention this since the Gelandewagen has been on the road for over 20 years and was originally designed for the Germany miltary. It's only in the last few years that MB has updated it considerably (starting in 1991). Its body-on-frame is considerably beefier than the M-class, and its live axles make the ride a little bumpy at times. Overall, ride quality is surpringly good though.

I'm aware of your prejudice against anything without the 3-pointed star
Actually, I still have a Chrysler, and had a Toyota just about a year ago.

Enjoy your ride!
 
D

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
tanspace said:

> You're wrong about MB's new SUV being unibody. There are actually
> two new MB SUVs coming out. One will be unibody (this will debut
> first), and the second will be body-on-frame. The latter will be
> emphasised as an off-roader. Goes to show you that it's not
> antiquated.


Do you know when the new MB SUVs are coming out? 2002 models or 2003??

The M-class will be facelifted slightly for MY2002. However, the all new model will not arrive till 2004 at least.

Hope this helps!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,218 Posts
Uh, Hey, Guys ...

Remember that the holidays were only a couple of weeks ago, depending on which holiday you celebrated? Wasn't there stuff about peace and goodwill? How about it? Everyone's entitled to an opinion.

Drew: Is the 2004 M-class replacement a definite as far as timing goes, or is it more rumor? And is 2004 calendar year or model year?
 
D

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Re: More MB Snobbery+Mistruthful Distortions - Get a Life!!!

Acura does not design MDX to be true offroader-read the articles. Light offroading is not same as true offroader. So criticising undercarriage for not being true heavy-duty offroader is sad.


<sign> The M-class wasn't designed to be a heavy duty off-roader either. I didn't criticise the MDX for not being a "heavy-dity off-roader".

Not all parts need to be meter up in air to protect against snow. If so everyone would break down. Again, fact distortion.


I didn't say that they "NEEDED" to be higher up. I said that it would be better.

[/b]MB parts+labor are more expensive than Acura labor+parts. Another lie from you.
[/b]
Not necessarily true. The AAA and CAA did a survey of prices of parts and labour for most standard repairs/maintenance and MB's prices were competitive (and sometimes lower) than other luxury Japanese and European brands.

You say-
'You're wrong about MB's new SUV being unibody. There are actually two new MB SUVs coming out. One
will be unibody (this will debut first), and the second will be body-on-frame. The latter will be emphasised
as an off-roader. Goes to show you that it's not antiquated. '

Again-you prove me right, despite your attempt to distort information. Even you say next MB >luxury< SUV is >unit body<. Thats because frame is antiquated-MB knows this-so will not use frame. Other, future MB SUV is-you say emphasised-special targeted off-roader that use frame. So what-its not luxury SUV like next MB. True luxury SUV-what today's MB pretends to be and you try to claim it is by comparing to MDX and RX300 and QX4-does not use antiquated frame-MB fixes with next >luxury< SUV. If frame not antiquated next MB luxury SUV does not use modern unit body but it does. Again, I am right and you admit it.


Hmm, maybe if you try to write something coherent I could understand you better. I'll attempt anyway. When did I say that the next MB "luxury" SUV is unibody? You just quote the text verbatim and got it wrong! I never used the word "luxury" at all. It is true that the next generation W164 M-class will be unibody, but not because unibody in general is bad. Far from it! FYI, the body-on-frame MB SUV that I mentioned is the replacement for the MB Gelandewagen. As Bob mentioned above, it is definitely a luxury SUV. The RX300 is a Camry platform and it shows with its weak payload. Even the QX4 has a pathetic payload of under 1000 pounds.

I like MB but not religious-I like S very much. Antiquated frame not MB fault because MB SUV is old model with old design. You do not need rationalise-they know it and will fix with better design. MB need not hire you for bad marketing on their part. You should try another profession.
Again, coherence is need if anyone is to understand you. If what you're saying is true (and I don't believe it is) the "old design" that you're talking about, came out one year before the current Odyssey platform did. The MDX is based on the Odyssey platform...hmm. This "old design" bested the supposedly superior unibody design (RX300) in the IIHS's 40mph crash test and remains a best pick.
 
D

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Re: Uh, Hey, Guys ...

wmquan said:
Drew: Is the 2004 M-class replacement a definite as far as timing goes, or is it more rumor? And is 2004 calendar year or model year?
Hi William,

It is unclear as to whether it is MY2004, or year 2004. My guess is the latter. I don't think MB will spent time and effort to facelift the ML for MY02, and then kill it for MY2004. I think it will probably hang around for a couple of years at least (much like the previous generation E-class did when it was facelifted for MY1994/MY1995); the new model - our current model - came out for MY1996. Even the current E-class was facelifted for MY2K, and the all new replacement will only be due for MY2003.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
build "quality"

No one has ever posted undercarriage pics of the MDX, so you guys should be thanking Drew for doing that and braving the fury of nosy neighbors as he took digipics in the middle of the night of a neighbor's MDX :)

I do find MB's build philosophy interesting. Here's a picture of the door latch on the ML:
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=137486&a=9762870&p=34002577&Sequence=0&res=high

Here's the door latch on my old Integra:
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=137486&a=9902147&p=34002584&Sequence=0&res=high

It's for little things like this that make me think I made the right decision this go 'round. Won't find out for sure for 7 yrs though...
 
T

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
Lies Lies + More Lies

'FWIW, I didn't post the M-class pictures, >>>nor did I even mention M-class in my
first two messages<<<...I did post the pictures off the site for a reason. '

Another rationalised lie. In second message you write-

'Here's the entire albums list: http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=137587'

You click on link-you go to many,many fotos of M-class-including M-class undercarriage fotos to compare to MDX undercarriage fotos. Hey give us password for your birthday fotos so we can see if you have friends or if they are just MB salesmen.

By typing link to us for 100s of M-class fotos-you mention M-class-not literally but how could one ignore? Yet you claim you do not even mention M-class in first two messages-you must be related to Bill Clinton-another rationalising lier.

If you do not want to mention M-class you do not post link to your M-class worship foto albums-but you do.

'You're wrong about MB's new SUV being unibody. There are actually two new MB SUVs coming out. One will
be unibody (this will debut first), and the second will be body-on-frame.'

Not wrong-you are wrong. I said

'MB is antiquated truck frame
design- MDX is modern unit body. MB knows this so next SV is unit body'

You yourself say the M-class replacement-will debut first-is unit body. I say >>>next<<< MB SUV is unit body. But you claim I am >>>wrong about MB's new SUV being unibody<<? You are trying to distort the facts-that even you confirm!!!!!! Yet you lie and say I am wrong. And--

'It is true that the next generation W164 M-class will be
unibody, but not because unibody in general is bad. '
'FYI, the body-on-frame MB SUV that I
mentioned is the replacement for the MB Gelandewagen. '

Correct-you twist my words. Next M-class will be unit body. M-class competes with MDX, and you post fotos comparing MDX and M-class. MB is very smart. To make best next M-class possible-needs unit body. Not current old frame-MB knows this.

SUV with frame >>MB Gelandewagon replacement<<-NOT replacement for M-class. Gelandewagon is whole different specialty vehicle that needs frame. Regular luxury SUV does not need antiquated frame-needs unit body.

'This "old design" bested the
supposedly superior unibody design (RX300) in the IIHS's 40mph crash test and remains a best pick.'

Ahah you distort then hide more facts-another form of lie like Bill Clinton does. MB tied RX300. Both GOOD overall score + 5 of 6 GOOD + 1 AVERAGE score. >>Both best picks<< but you conveniently do not mention. And witness that RX300 may be better because MB AVERAGE score is for HEAD/NECK injury-while RX300 AVERAGE score is for Structure/Safety Cage-does not sound good-but no realworld injury! Must mean that antiquated MB frame protects undercarriage better than it protects your neck! Think about it-MB vehicle with antiquated heavy frame weighs 500 more pounds than lighter, modern, unit body RX300 but RX300 ties it or does even better depending on how you read the test!

You also hide fact that BMW X5-only 200 pounds heavier not 500 like MB + RX-beat MB with PERFECT GOOD scores. BMW X5 has unit body.

I believe MB will be very disappointed about how you lie about their vehicles. Like how Volvo lied about its vehicles with the fake TV commercials.
 
T

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
Proof

HAHAHAHAHA

'No one has ever posted undercarriage pics of the MDX, so you guys should be thanking Drew for doing that and braving the fury of nosy neighbors as he took digipics in the middle of the night of a neighbor's MDX :) '

Can this be The Truth? If so-then Drew is a bigger l0ser than even I thought was possible. MDX fotos taken in middle of night-underneath neighbor MDX-without permission. All to try to prove his precious SUV better than another SUV. Ladies+gentlemen-is that sad???!??!!!

Hey l0ser-I mean Drew-when my MDX arrives-please come take pictures of my MDX undercarriage. I have shotguns in my gun locker+sleep lightly+will protect my property. HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

PS - out of office for rest of week. Will come back for more laffs+correct more distorted lies. Good nite Gracie.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,218 Posts
Hoo Boy

thetruth:

To be fair, the X5 is unibody but has precious little passenger and cargo room, despite it weighing 200 pounds more than a ladder-and-frame-based M-class. BMW packed a lot of crap in it, and I'm sure that helped its high test scores. Nevertheless, still an impressive achievement.

Have a good trip (you said you were out-of-office rest of the week). Hope it calms you down; maybe you can rent a frame-based SUV wherever you're going (I'm TEASING, okay?).

Ken:

No doubt that MB builds their vehicles like tanks, and, as long as weight and cost doesn't cause a disproportionate burden, I'd rather see beefy parts than non-beefy parts.

However, to be fair, and as I've pointed out on Edmunds, the Acura door latches may not look as sturdy, but they have not popped open during any crash test that I'm aware of.

That includes all Honda/Acura manufactured vehicles that the IIHS has tested. Meanwhile, an MB E-class's driver door popped open during its IIHS crash test. Dunno if its latch is as beefy-looking as the M-class's.

I've also seen nasty Integra-hatchback accidents where the door didn't pop open. You'd think that in the hatchback, with the longer doors, that they'd be more prone to popping open. But the latch is apparently enough.

Drew:

Hmmm MY2005 means about 7 years total for the first generation M-class. Sounds about right for MB. MY2005 also means I would consider buying one around the time the current MDX's ownership period will probably end. That is, in 2007, which could put me in line for a MY2007 discounted closeout or a MY2008. Unfortunately, I doubt if I'd go near a MY2005 and probably not a MY2006 either, based on past reliability history. We'll see.

With all due respect, I do think that unibody is the way to go for a small or mid-sized SUV, and am happy that MB's next-gen M-class will go this route. I'd leave full-sized SUV's to ladder-and-frame.

"All other things being equal," I think unibody can lead to less squeaks and rattles, lighter weight, better fuel economy, better handling, smoother ride, etc. That is not to say that a ladder-and-frame-based SUV can't have all these things; I just think unibody has some fundamental advantages. I think that some of those advantages would address some items I found objectionable when I test-drove the ML320, twice (e.g. stiff ride, jolting over bad road surfaces, still felt like a truck).

I think MB's engineering is so good that they'll make a unibody M-class as safe, and probably safer, than the current generation ladder-on-frame M-class.

I do agree with Bob that it's a matter of timing. When the ML came out it was the most advanced vehicle of its kind. Remember the Consumer Reports cover "is this the future of SUV's" with the picture of the ML? MB has done a commendable job of updating the ML, now in its 4th model year. E.g. adding ESP in 1999, Teleaid in 2001. One could only hope that Acura adds VSA to the MDX soon, and OnStar.

However, I do think that any 4th year design will begin to show its age. This despite the fact that the ML boasts many sophisticated features that much of the competition (including the MDX) does not have. I think the styling refresh slated for 2002 is long past overdue, as is an update of much of the vehicle's ergonomics and luxury systems (stereo controls, CD changer). And of course the laddder-on-frame construction won't change yet.

And, um, taking pictures under your neighbor's MDX in the dead of night is a BIT "out there." ;-)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Thx for the entertainment

As a junior member I wanted to thank everbody who has participated in this thread. It has been highly entertaining. If nothing else, Drew's pictures brought out the most passionate posts I have seen on this BB.
But folks, let's remember these are just cars/trucks, and are not our lives. I learned a long time ago that the car I drove did not change my life, that comes from the inside. In fact, the more secure you are the less important the car is.
Everybody is entitled to their opinion, even if it is wrong. That's why there are multiple manufacturers out there to provide products to fit each of our preferences.
While I find Drew's posting to be of dubious intent he is certainly entitled to do so.
I review the site when I get into work (early!)and I couldn't stop reading it this morning. Got really upset by phone calls and people stopping by my office.
Great venting! Highly entertaining! Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
pseudonyms

And posters who use pseudonyms and post ad-hominem attacks should be banned, but hey, it's not my forum. I stand by my words as myself. Dunno why others do not and choose to use cheap cloaked attacks on the net :)

As for "thetruth" (whoever you are), I was wondering about the Acura fender flares and Drew took some of those pics for me since no one on the Edmunds forum could answer the simple question of how they were attached when I considered the MDX.

William:
Yep, I know, we went over the door latches. I'm impressed by odd things, ya know. Like Drew being able to find more interesting pics than a lot of former Edmunds' participants ;-)
And yep, I'm still annoyed my Integra started after only 6 yrs. :)
 
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
About this Discussion
32 Replies
12 Participants
srpbep
Acura MDX SUV Forums
Acura MDXers Forum - a community where enthusiasts discuss engines, tires, service and everything you need to know about the MDX!
Full Forum Listing
Top