Acura MDX SUV Forums banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
185 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Besides, the spnosorship from Volvo,
I do think XC90 is a very decent SUV to win the awards due to the Safty Feature
1. Rollover resistant--Maintain the Body shape when rollover. People walk out from the door easily without eformation on the auto body...:eek:
2. Side Curtain Airbag for ALL 3row passengers..



;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
244 Posts
The Volvo XC90 is the closes to the MDX as the midsize luxury entry SUV can get.

Each one has pluses and minuses, but very close when you average each of their features they come pretty close.

Acura as expected will get tougher competition in the years to come.

The European delivery option does not hurt either.

The safety features just give it a very good edge...

http://www.motortrend.com/motor/features/112_0203_xc90_l.jpg

It would be in my shopping list... if I was buying in 2003-2004...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
136 Posts
2003MDX said:
1. Rollover resistant--Maintain the Body shape when rollover. People walk out from the door easily without eformation on the auto body...:eek:
;)

Hasn't Volvo "claimed" this before? Seems I remember they got busted propping up the roof w/4X4 posts.:eek:

I think I would have to see that to believe it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
210 Posts
Rollover Resistance from FORD?

QUOTE]1. Rollover resistant--Maintain the Body shape when rollover. People walk out from the door easily without eformation on the auto body...[/QUOTE]


mystic said:

Hasn't Volvo "claimed" this before? Seems I remember they got busted propping up the roof w/4X4 posts.:eek:

I think I would have to see that to believe it.
Since Volvo has been purchased by Ford, I would be skeptical about any claims of rollover resistance. We all know how well they did with the Explorer. :12:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,732 Posts
Re: Rollover Resistance from FORD?

dbehrens said:
QUOTE]1. Rollover resistant--Maintain the Body shape when rollover. People walk out from the door easily without eformation on the auto body...





Since Volvo has been purchased by Ford, I would be skeptical about any claims of rollover resistance. We all know how well they did with the Explorer. :12:
[/QUOTE]

While Ford has some 'say' as far as I know Volvos are not designed by Ford engineers.
Even Ford can't be that stupid to mess around with a good thing. They know Fords, they don't know Volvos.
Mazdas acquistion by Ford as a major shareholder has not hurt the reliability of their vehicles as far as I know.
Ford never claimed the Explorer would not rollover. But used the public along with their choice of inferior tires to test the waters. They failed miserably at the cost of human life. For that there is no excuse possible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
356 Posts
Residual Value

I've read several posts about the Volvo SUV, but no one has mentioned the residual value. Anyone know what the expect if you lease one for 36 months? That can be handy in evaluating how the market will look at the vehicle. If it costs $6K more similarily equipped and you get 4K less on trade, that's an expensive mobile.

At an auto show, a Volvo rep told me they expected 48/49% range.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
95 Posts
XC90 v. MDX

Lots of threads on MDX v. XC90, use Search on this site, or Edmunds. Make no mistake, however, XC90 safety features are the real deal - reinforced roof, side curtain airbags, stability control.

I am buying '03 MDX despite XC90's unquestionably better safety features, for many reasons - styling and amenity preferences, established reliability, price and value, and fuel efficiency - and am confident that the MDX also has excellent safety features.

The XC90 will establish reliability and improve performance and fuel economy by '04; that will be the bellweather year for whether the MDX can respond with comparable improvements in the MDX to remain competitive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,218 Posts
Re: XC90 v. MDX

sstclairs said:
Lots of threads on MDX v. XC90, use Search on this site, or Edmunds. Make no mistake, however, XC90 safety features are the real deal - reinforced roof, side curtain airbags, stability control.

I am buying '03 MDX despite XC90's unquestionably better safety features, for many reasons - styling and amenity preferences, established reliability, price and value, and fuel efficiency - and am confident that the MDX also has excellent safety features.

The XC90 will establish reliability and improve performance and fuel economy by '04; that will be the bellweather year for whether the MDX can respond with comparable improvements in the MDX to remain competitive.
I think Volvo has got to establish good quality for the vehicle, as well as get a 5-speed automatic into the T6. I'm starting to see complaints from folks about the 4-speed in the T6, which seems to be enough to drive folks to the turbocharged 5.

I love its safety features, but Volvo's had some real issues. One would hope that with so much attention being focused on their late SUV introduction, that they will get it right. Only time will tell.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,453 Posts
My take on this!

With all the STOOPID MORONS (for lack of being able to use stronger words) driving around, safety is a really important concern for me. (to demonstrate what I mean: If I were hit, for example, by a DRUNK driver, I'd much rather, gladly, they die, than myself). As a matter of fact that is one of my top reasons to buy an SUV in the first place (I don't fall for that "Rollover risk" BS some people quote!..Yeah, right :rolleyes: )

I'm very very highly impressed with this Volvo's level of safety (especially the BORON-REINFORCED ROOF STRUCTURE) and was very tempted to seriously consider this vehicle. However, in the end sanity prevailed :D ......Here's why -

Factors such as:
Reliability (most important)
Mediocre powertrain and performance figures (don't really care for turbos)
and
the fact that the Safety attributes of the MDX themselves are, comparitively speaking, pretty darn good
.......eliminated the XC90 as a viable choice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
VICPAI

I already posted this article last week but I am posting it again. It concerns the MDX safety feature. By the way, the residual value of the XC90 after 3 years will be 59%.


"Honda Pilot and Acura MDX Are Only Midsize SUVs To Achieve All-Around Five Star Safety in NHTSA Front and Side Impact Tests


The all-new 2003 Honda Pilot and 2002 Acura MDX are the first midsize sport utility vehicles ever to earn the Federal government's top Five Star safety rating for the driver, front passenger and rear seat passengers in both front- and side-impact crash tests, according to information released today by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

The family-oriented Pilot and luxury performance MDX join the compact 2003 Honda CR-V (tested in 2002) as the only SUVs available that achieve Five Star NHTSA front- and side-impact ratings in all crash tests.


"Achieving the highest possible all-around NHTSA test ratings for Pilot and MDX further demonstrates our commitment to safety," said Dick Colliver, American Honda executive vice president. "The Pilot and MDX are the latest products to showcase the company's world-class safety technology."

The front- and side-impact crash tests are part of NHTSA's New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) that provides consumers with safety information on the two most common injury-causing crashes.

In frontal tests, vehicles are crashed at 35 mph into a rigid, fixed barrier. The side crash is conducted with a moving, deformable barrier impacting the vehicle at 38.5 mph. Vehicles are given a rating from one to five stars, with five stars indicating the best level of crash protection.

All 2003 Honda Pilot and 2002 Acura MDX models feature advanced dual-stage, dual threshold driver and front passenger airbags which can deploy at two different rates, depending on the severity of the crash. In addition, if the occupant seat belt is not fastened, the airbags deploy at a lower collision speed to help offer more protection to the unbelted occupant. Both Pilot and MDX are also equipped with Honda's advanced side airbag system that include cutoff systems to prevent the side airbag from deploying if a child or small statured adult is leaning into the side airbag deployment path.

Both Pilot and MDX bodies were designed to deform progressively in front and side collisions. Engineering the front, side and rear sections to help absorb the energy of a collision reduces the likelihood of occupant injury. The reinforcing structures enhance collision protection and provide the added strength for cargo carrying, off road performance and towing.

Both Pilot and MDX were designed and developed primarily by Honda R&D engineers in Ohio and California. Both Pilot and MDX are built exclusively at Honda of Canada Manufacturing in Alliston, Ontario. "
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
619 Posts
There are 2 safety variables- Active and Passive Safety. Active Safety is the ability of the vehicle to get out of a dicey situation. This depends on acceleration, braking, handling, and driver's skills.

The ML320 has a very impressive spec sheet. But it is mediocore from an active safety standpoint. It is pretty good in real world situations(NHTSA tests) but considering the long list of safety features, you would think it would do better.

Volvo's typically boast about Passive safety- i.e. rollover resistance, airbags, etc. I suspect it will do quite well in NHSTA tests. The jury is still out on its active capabilities.

The MDX has gotten 5 star rating in NHTSA tests. It is known for sedan like driving style- i.e. pretty good in the accelration and handling standpoint. IMHO, the brakes are a little weak.

my 2 cents.

btw, i apologize for beating on a dead horse(ML320). It really is not fair to compare it to X or the XC90. We will see what MB offers for the 2nd gen ML.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,218 Posts
MDXLuvr said:
... Active Safety is the ability of the vehicle to get out of a dicey situation. This depends on acceleration, braking, handling, and driver's skills. ... The ML320 has a very impressive spec sheet. But it is mediocore from an active safety standpoint. It is pretty good in real world situations(NHTSA tests) but considering the long list of safety features, you would think it would do better. ...
I'm no fan of the ML and I think it has plenty of negatives, but I'm not sure if it's mediocre from an active safety standpoint. Its acceleration is definitely just okay, but the replacement (ML350) takes care of that (though of course with worse fuel economy). But both its braking and its handling are better than the MDX. It stops in shorter distances, has Brake Assist which the MDX does not, and is more precise in quick maneuevers. Its stability control system is better than the MDX's VSA and works in more situations.

Again, I'm not a big fan of the ML. I really like some parts of it, but not others.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
499 Posts
Reliability is what I'm worried about!

Take a look at Consumer Report Magazine on Vovo reliability, it is not the best. In the past they have not been able to reccomend Volvo vehicles because of reliability problem.

Yes, it is cool, but not cool enough to be in the shop a lot!:1:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,218 Posts
Agreed. I wouldn't want a first-year Volvo. There was some debate about this on Edmunds. Some Volvo fans were saying that since it's derived on an existing platform it should be okay. My point is that it's based on an existing platform that has had a lot of problems and still isn't even "average" by CR standards, and then it adds a whole bunch of complexity on top.

It's interesting that a few of the more level-headed Volvo veterans on Edmunds, who have lived through many problems with past models, are saying they will lease their XC90's because of their concerns about reliability. They don't want to be stuck with owning a potential problem child.

The same concerns about reliability hurt the ML, which has very good safety, but, entering its sixth model year, still struggles to attain even an "average" quality score as measured by either Consumer Reports or JD Power.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
499 Posts
We looked at the ML320 in 2000! Then we saw the CS rating of 113% below average reliability and went with the spanking new, at the time, 01 MDX!:1:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,218 Posts
Same here. The ML320 was a finalist in October 2000. I wasn't crazy about its styling, the quality issues bugged me, the ride was harsh, and local dealer support was iffy. That last item is bad, even some ML fans suggest not buying an MB if you don't have good dealer support.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,531 Posts
When we were looking in Nov 2000 ...

... we were told here in Houston that the new ML320 had a 1 year wait and a $5000 premium above MSRP:eek: We saw the MDX in Dec 2000 and ordered it 1/2/01. At MSRP and 3 months wait it seemed a bargin;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
499 Posts
Re: When we were looking in Nov 2000 ...

msu79gt82 said:
... we were told here in Houston that the new ML320 had a 1 year wait and a $5000 premium above MSRP:eek: We saw the MDX in Dec 2000 and ordered it 1/2/01. At MSRP and 3 months wait it seemed a bargin;)
Interesting, in Shreveport Louisiana, they were giving them away at invoice!

The dealer put it best when the sales lady said "We want to sell you this vehicle more than you want to buy it.":1:
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top