If you had to get a seven-seat vehicle, what would you get?

[wdc330i]

Aiming for the best fuel economy and driving characteristics.

[TD]

Probably an MDX.

May it never come to that.

[FC]

MB GL-Class ...if you want to seat 7 adults. If two are kids, E-wagon, or my V70R (get one while they last).

[Jeff_DML]

rav4 fits best gas mileage.

[RMR]

Acura MDX.

I drove one for the hell of it and it's not bad at all for a SUV. It handles quite nice and feels tight. If the wife and I ever move out of the city and need a 7 seater it'd be the one.

[dan]

Maxda cx-9

[wdc330i]

Probably an MDX.

May it never come to that.

This is exactly the thinking I've come, too. It's probably the best option out there right now, and I want to postpone it forever. Also, I'd like to see some improvement in emissions and gas mileage for these seven-seaters before I jump on the bandwagon. But within a year or two, we will likely regularly haul seven family members around and will bust out of our current car configuration. Yet, who wants to drive that amount of bulk when all alone? Woof.

Really, I don't even like driving something the size of our station wagon. The 3 series is just the perfect size for in-city driving. Now, on the highway, I'm happy with a little extra buffer from the madness.

[dan]

Yet, who wants to drive that amount of bulk when all alone? Woof.

clyde? :dunno:

[Plaz]

http://jelly.com/beverlyhillbillies/images/family.jpg

http://bostonist.com/attachments/boston_caroline/062807_lampoon.jpg

http://www.seriouswheels.com/pics-2005/2005-International-CXT-FA-Rocks-1024x768.jpg

[JST]

This is exactly the thinking I've come, too. It's probably the best option out there right now, and I want to postpone it forever. Also, I'd like to see some improvement in emissions and gas mileage for these seven-seaters before I jump on the bandwagon. But within a year or two, we will likely regularly haul seven family members around and will bust out of our current car configuration. Yet, who wants to drive that amount of bulk when all alone? Woof.

Really, I don't even like driving something the size of our station wagon. The 3 series is just the perfect size for in-city driving. Now, on the highway, I'm happy with a little extra buffer from the madness.

CX-9, Taurus X, or Saturn Outlook. The MDX is nice enough, but it's uglier than a toad. Besides, if I were going to drop that kind of money, I'd get an X5.

[clyde]

But within a year or two, we will likely regularly haul seven family members around

What kind of family members? Pint sized? Full sized? Dog sized? If they aren't all full sized members, how many are in baby or booster seats? How long will they be? How long do you anticipate owning the vehicle? How regular is "regular"? How long will they all be in the vehicle?

Yet, who wants to drive that amount of bulk when all alone? Woof.

I think you guys are setting yourself to not find an option. The impression I get is that you're probably looking for something at or over $40k for this role. In the other thread, you're talking about $60k for another vehicle.

Shit. Depending on the answers to the questions above, for $100k, 3 vehicles may well be the best solution. If your situation is like most, moving 7 people won't happen all that often...infrequently enough that something more downscale (for FC) could well be appropriate. Something like an older Suburban could fit the bill very well in terms of filling the need, and do it for very little cost. That would leave you with $85k+/- for two vehicles that are more fun and suitable for what you will be doing with them most of the time...and the Sub sits until its actually needed.

[TD]

CX-9, Taurus X, or Saturn Outlook. The MDX is nice enough, but it's uglier than a toad. Besides, if I were going to drop that kind of money, I'd get an X5.
There is a pretty wide price gap between an MDX and an X5. You can pull off a loaded MDX for somewhere in the mid $40Ks. You're looking at at least $55K for an X5.

[dan]

CX-9, Taurus X, or Saturn Outlook. The MDX is nice enough, but it's uglier than a toad.

http://www.tirekick.com/TK06-May/images/AcuraMDX.jpg

wow, that is awful :ack:

[lemming]

http://www.tirekick.com/TK06-May/images/AcuraMDX.jpg

wow, that is awful :ack:

and the MDX is, after all, an acura.

which means that it's based on a common Honda.

in this case, it would be the Odyssey minivan.

[JST]

and the MDX is, after all, an acura.

which means that it's based on a common Honda.

in this case, it would be the Odyssey minivan.

To me, the MDX is like both the Accord and the TL. They are all perfectly fine. In fact, they are all great values, they are all incredibly well-engineered, and they all provide features that are hard to argue with. Perhaps it is because of their seamless perfection that I find each of them about as interesting as taro root (ever had that? Yuck). They are completely without taste.

I think about these cars, and I can't ever imagine myself anxiously waiting for one that I ordered to come in (of course, since they are all either silver or beige and have no options, that isn't really a concern). Nor can I imagine someone saying "I just bought a new MDX/TL/Accord" and me responding "Wow, can I drive it?"

As far as the MDX goes, the CX-9 looks a lot better, I bet it drives just as well, and it's a bunch cheaper. It's mildly interesting. The Outlook looks 10X better, has a really nice interior, has much more interior space, and drives astonishingly well. It's pretty interesting. In fact, the thing about the Outlook that makes it compelling is that you drive one and you have to keep reminding yourself "this is a domestic GM product, designed from a clean sheet of paper by American GM engineers, and unlike every other domestic GM from the past 20 years, it doesn't feel, look or drive anything like a 1986 Pontiac 6000." That actually makes the Outlook fascinating.

[lemming]

To me, the MDX is like both the Accord and the TL. They are all perfectly fine. In fact, they are all great values, they are all incredibly well-engineered, and they all provide features that are hard to argue with. Perhaps it is because of their seamless perfection that I find each of them about as interesting as taro root (ever had that? Yuck). They are completely without taste.

I think about these cars, and I can't ever imagine myself anxiously waiting for one that I ordered to come in (of course, since they are all either silver or beige and have no options, that isn't really a concern). Nor can I imagine someone saying "I just bought a new MDX/TL/Accord" and me responding "Wow, can I drive it?"

As far as the MDX goes, the CX-9 looks a lot better, I bet it drives just as well, and it's a bunch cheaper. It's mildly interesting. The Outlook looks 10X better, has a really nice interior, has much more interior space, and drives astonishingly well. It's pretty interesting. In fact, the thing about the Outlook that makes it compelling is that you drive one and you have to keep reminding yourself "this is a domestic GM product, designed from a clean sheet of paper by American GM engineers, and unlike every other domestic GM from the past 20 years, it doesn't feel, look or drive anything like a 1986 Pontiac 6000." That actually makes the Outlook fascinating.

personally, as odious as the BMW or Porsche demographic is, i don't loathe them as much as i do the Lexus-Acura Nexus group of people. these are people who like overpaying for items simply because simpler less expensive, but mechanically identical objects are "too common".

when i hear that someone has bought a lexus or an acura, i honestly laugh out loud. and then i get asked every single time why i'm laughing --as a car guy, people want to know where the mirth comes from.

DNA of a vehicle is as important to me anything else because it tells you something about the foundation of a vehicle.

the X3 or X5? at least they're based on the standards of the world, the 3er and the 5er.

the MDX? a minivan.

the RX350? the Toyota Highlander-Camry.

the FX35/45? the 350Z car.

as a car enthusiast, who buys the minivan or the Camry?

[wdc330i]

personally, as odious as the BMW or Porsche demographic is, i don't loathe them as much as i do the Lexus-Acura Nexus group of people. these are people who like overpaying for items simply because simpler less expensive, but mechanically identical objects are "too common".

when i hear that someone has bought a lexus or an acura, i honestly laugh out loud. and then i get asked every single time why i'm laughing --as a car guy, people want to know where the mirth comes from.

DNA of a vehicle is as important to me anything else because it tells you something about the foundation of a vehicle.

the X3 or X5? at least they're based on the standards of the world, the 3er and the 5er.

the MDX? a minivan.

the RX350? the Toyota Highlander-Camry.

the FX35/45? the 350Z car.

as a car enthusiast, who buys the minivan or the Camry?

Well, the criteria that put the MDX ahead of the Odyssey for me were: AWD and, what, about 50 more hp? That, and the MDX has equalled or bested the X5 in car-mag comparisons, while costing considerably fewer dineros.

I'd rather economize on the hauler, provided it offers similar performance and safety--and spend the premium bucks on the fun car.

[wdc330i]

The Outlook looks 10X better, has a really nice interior, has much more interior space, and drives astonishingly well. It's pretty interesting. In fact, the thing about the Outlook that makes it compelling is that you drive one and you have to keep reminding yourself "this is a domestic GM product, designed from a clean sheet of paper by American GM engineers, and unlike every other domestic GM from the past 20 years, it doesn't feel, look or drive anything like a 1986 Pontiac 6000." That actually makes the Outlook fascinating.

A neighbor has one of these and says it gets just terrible gas mileage. But I imagine that's true of all these hulkers.

I have to admit I have a pro-Honda bias, having owned two in the past.

With regard to Clyde's list of questions:
We'd like any future family vehicle to accommodate two Britax-sized convertible car seats, my partner and me (medium-sized), my 80-year-old father (medium) who lives with us, my in-laws (one small, one 6'4", 240-plus lbs), who visit every couple of months. Our current son is now and will likely continue to be tall. Future child may also be. Oh, and occasionally, the two dogs will be passengers as well.

The Volvo V70R is not out of the running. But I had an S70 and my father had a 850 wagon (all related to the first vehicle) and they were not fun at all to drive. Not one bit. Great for passengers and cargo, though. But I like the idea of sticking with a low-profile vehicle. So, a wagon with a third row has its attractions. I wonder, however, about their safety relative to minivans...

[lemming]

A neighbor has one of these and says it gets just terrible gas mileage. But I imagine that's true of all these hulkers.

I have to admit I have a pro-Honda bias, having owned two in the past.

With regard to Clyde's list of questions:
We'd like any future family vehicle to accommodate two Britax-sized convertible car seats, my partner and me (medium-sized), my 80-year-old father (medium) who lives with us, my in-laws (one small, one 6'4", 240-plus lbs), who visit every couple of months. Our current son is now and will likely continue to be tall. Future child may also be. Oh, and occasionally, the two dogs will be passengers as well.

The Volvo V70R is not out of the running. But I had an S70 and my father had a 850 wagon (all related to the first vehicle) and they were not fun at all to drive. Not one bit. Great for passengers and cargo, though. But I like the idea of sticking with a low-profile vehicle. So, a wagon with a third row has its attractions. I wonder, however, about their safety relative to minivans...

okay.

i'd get one of the upcoming dual-mode hybrid Tahoes.

or a pre-owned 7 seater something until i could get a diesel Merc GL, diesel Tahoe, diesel X5.....well, you get the point.

seems to be an awful time to be buying the vehicle you're talking about because we've finally, as a backward country, come up with cleaner diesel and the car manufacturers have finally designed 50 state legal diesels. both trends are meeting up in about a year or so.

kinda sucks to be caught with a gasoline motor knowing those are coming really soon, no?

[Jeff_DML]

X5 diesel is on my radar for my wifes next car. Just hoping they put a semi efficient diesel in it instead of the high output one. I am guessing they will put the 35d in it, wonder what kind of mpg it will get in the x5. Better then a V8 diesel and a lot better then the silly V12 vwag diesel.

[clyde]

With regard to Clyde's list of questions:
We'd like any future family vehicle to accommodate two Britax-sized convertible car seats, my partner and me (medium-sized), my 80-year-old father (medium) who lives with us, my in-laws (one small, one 6'4", 240-plus lbs), who visit every couple of months. Our current son is now and will likely continue to be tall. Future child may also be. Oh, and occasionally, the two dogs will be passengers as well.

Some of the vehicles might have 3 across benches in the middle and 2 in back, or 3 in back with captain chairs in the middle. Maybe you might even run across something that's 3 and 3, giving you 8 seats total. Here's the thing...just because something can seat 7 or 8 people doesn't mean that it really can.

Without running through all the possible scenarios, I'll just suggest that you carefully consider who will sit where and what actions will need to be taken for each person to get their assigned seat. The main questions are:

Will child seats need to be removed and re-installed...or more accurately, how often? (gets to be a real annoyance quickly and sometimes it's just not practical...although once the oldest gets into a booster, it becomes much easier to change things around)

Will people with limited flexibility or mobility have to climb over/around stuff to get into or out of their seats (possibly getting stuck...ask me how I know this one)?

Will your or partner have the access to your children that you want to have?

My feeling is that 5 adults and two children is too much to ask for any single passenger vehicle short of a real van (not a minivan). Two adults and five children can be done, but not the other way.

So, a wagon with a third row has its attractions. I wonder, however, about their safety relative to minivans...

Despite all the miles I racked up riding in the backs of station wagons as a child (and on roofs as a teenager :eeps: ), I wouldn't put my kids in the back of a wagon today.

[FC]

A neighbor has one of these and says it gets just terrible gas mileage. But I imagine that's true of all these hulkers.

I have to admit I have a pro-Honda bias, having owned two in the past.

With regard to Clyde's list of questions:
We'd like any future family vehicle to accommodate two Britax-sized convertible car seats, my partner and me (medium-sized), my 80-year-old father (medium) who lives with us, my in-laws (one small, one 6'4", 240-plus lbs), who visit every couple of months. Our current son is now and will likely continue to be tall. Future child may also be. Oh, and occasionally, the two dogs will be passengers as well.

The Volvo V70R is not out of the running. But I had an S70 and my father had a 850 wagon (all related to the first vehicle) and they were not fun at all to drive. Not one bit. Great for passengers and cargo, though. But I like the idea of sticking with a low-profile vehicle. So, a wagon with a third row has its attractions. I wonder, however, about their safety relative to minivans...

First, let me tell you that the V70R is VERY, VERY different from regular Volvos (though it is still no BMW - but far better than any SUV I can think of). Regardless, from what you say, the V70R, or any other wagon won't do the trick if you are throwing dogs into the mix. All but the largest SUV's won't work either unless I missed something. And, I'm with clyde. The way back is for emergency-type situations, not long drives with extended family.

In another thread I outline why I like the GL, and in particular the diesel version. I'll add that I missed one small but great feature... You can get a GL with MB Tex (default interior trim) which is basically the greatest pleather ever made - a big plus when it comes to kids + dogs. I've not yet driven one and they are pricey (though not more than an E or 5er wagon), but from what I read, it is the best-driving SUV that can seat 7 real adults. This is not the result of miracle suspension tuning (though the adaptable suspension + ride height can't hurt), but simply because it is "compact" and "light." May be worthwhile to check out a CPO GL450. :dunno:

[John V]

Maxda cx-9

WTF is a Maxda? :dunno:

[JST]

First, let me tell you that the V70R is VERY, VERY different from regular Volvos (though it is still no BMW - but far better than any SUV I can think of). Regardless, from what you say, the V70R, or any other wagon won't do the trick if you are throwing dogs into the mix. All but the largest SUV's won't work either unless I missed something. And, I'm with clyde. The way back is for emergency-type situations, not long drives with extended family.

In another thread I outline why I like the GL, and in particular the diesel version. I'll add that I missed one small but great feature... You can get a GL with MB Tex (default interior trim) which is basically the greatest pleather ever made - a big plus when it comes to kids + dogs. I've not yet driven one and they are pricey (though not more than an E or 5er wagon), but from what I read, it is the best-driving SUV that can seat 7 real adults. This is not the result of miracle suspension tuning (though the adaptable suspension + ride height can't hurt), but simply because it is "compact" and "light." May be worthwhile to check out a CPO GL450. :dunno:


Why not an R350?

Or, my personal favorite vehicle ever, the (no longer imported) R63?

[John V]

Why not an R350?

:ack:

Or, my personal favorite vehicle ever, the (no longer imported) R63?

:ack: :ack:

[FC]

Why not an R350?

Or, my personal favorite vehicle ever, the (no longer imported) R63?

Excellent point. I completely missed that. Also available in diesel too.

My wife and I hate the exterior, and it is the longest MB made, so it is not small, but it will transport a bunch of adults in comfort.

[JST]

:ack:



:ack: :ack:

Oh, come on. You have to love the R63. It's such a goofy thing. The only thing that would be better is an R65. Not sure why they never made one of those.

[FC]

Oh, come on. You have to love the R63. It's such a goofy thing. The only thing that would be better is an R65. Not sure why they never made one of those.

:lol: That would be hysterical.

[TD]

Oh, come on. You have to love the R63. It's such a goofy thing. The only thing that would be better is an R65. Not sure why they never made one of those.
Wouldn't you get to the same place by just supercharging a Pacifica?

[John V]

Wouldn't you get to the same place by just supercharging a Pacifica?

Hm, I think we have a winner! :lol:

There is nothing cool about the R63. Even if it had a thousand horsepower, it wouldn't be cool. I'd rather just buy an Odyssey and not drive around in something that makes people think I'm a family man compensating for a tiny member. :D

[JST]

Wouldn't you get to the same place by just supercharging a Pacifica?

No. You'd have to put a Viper engine in a Pacifica. Which would be fricking awesome, especially if it were transversely mounted. And FWD only.

I'm not saying I'd ever buy one. I'm just saying that cars like the R63 give me hope that there are still people with senses of humor working at big auto companies.

[Rob]

We have comfortably put four adults and one kid in the mini van for a six hour one way extended weekend trip, no problem. We did put the kid in the way back for that trip. For shorter trips, we have had adults in the way back with no issue, but I wouldn't want to go across the country that way.

Imo, it's no big deal to move child seats around in the captain's chairs. I like doing it less with the bench seats.

It does take some agility to get in the back, no question. Plus, if you fill the car up with five adults and their luggage, your massive storage space isn't so big anymore. We are beyond (barely and only for the short term) having to carry a van full of stuff for the kid as well. That might make it more difficult. Finally, if big dogs are involved, 7 people are out.

Everyone laughs at the R class, but it's the best people mover I have ever examined (granted, with and anti-SUV bias). It's a nice car from the inside. It's not big enough for 7 (with five adults) comfortably for long periods of time though.

[wdc330i]

It really does seem like hauling 7 occasionally (two of whom do have some mobility impairment) means way too many daily sacrifices. I drove our 5 wagon the other day (it is my partner's daily driver) and thought to myself I don't even like driving something that big around town. Not to mention trying to park it in my overcrowded garage at work.

I think for now we'll keep the current fleet and when the in-laws come, if we need to, we can rent a minivan--or take two cars.

It does make sense to hold tight until better options (especially with regard to energy consumption and emissions) come along.

[FC]

It really does seem like hauling 7 occasionally (two of whom do have some mobility impairment) means way too many daily sacrifices. I drove our 5 wagon the other day (it is my partner's daily driver) and thought to myself I don't even like driving something that big around town. Not to mention trying to park it in my overcrowded garage at work.

I think for now we'll keep the current fleet and when the in-laws come, if we need to, we can rent a minivan--or take two cars.

It does make sense to hold tight until better options (especially with regard to energy consumption and emissions) come along.

We had a somewhat similar decision when we got the V70R. We wanted something with good cargo after both rows were used (because the dog takes up half the cargo). That left us with large wagons or medium sized SUV's. To us, if we could get away with a wagon, there was no reason to look at SUV's. Volvo's all sucked to drive enough that a good SUV would not have been much worse, except for the V70R (which brought it's own set of compromises: low mpg, low ride height, stiff suspension, but lots of dynamic advantages). The MB wagon was another, but too expensive new, and too unreliable (and still expensive) used. Finally the V70R was practically a steal at $38K.

We didn't need a 7-people carrier or larger vehicle then (or now) plus we would not have found something as cheap as the V70R. When the V70R is due for replacement (in ~4 years), we will be looking at what is available in the SUV range.

That said, we (I) learned a few things from that purchase. The V70R is still not really all that fun to drive (even overlooking the slushy thing). It is a large vehicle with still some Volvoness left. Also the low ride-height and suspension are growing more and more annoying around here.

Other than that, it has been great.

[wdc330i]

We had a somewhat similar decision when we got the V70R. We wanted something with good cargo after both rows were used (because the dog takes up half the cargo). That left us with large wagons or medium sized SUV's. To us, if we could get away with a wagon, there was no reason to look at SUV's. Volvo's all sucked to drive enough that a good SUV would not have been much worse, except for the V70R (which brought it's own set of compromises: low mpg, low ride height, stiff suspension, but lots of dynamic advantages). The MB wagon was another, but too expensive new, and too unreliable (and still expensive) used. Finally the V70R was practically a steal at $38K.

We didn't need a 7-people carrier or larger vehicle then (or now) plus we would not have found something as cheap as the V70R. When the V70R is due for replacement (in ~4 years), we will be looking at what is available in the SUV range.

That said, we (I) learned a few things from that purchase. The V70R is still not really all that fun to drive (even overlooking the slushy thing). It is a large vehicle with still some Volvoness left. Also the low ride-height and suspension are growing more and more annoying around here.

Other than that, it has been great.

That is an excellent deal. And really, it's a wagon you ought to think about holding onto for the long haul, so to speak. (You might be able to do something about ride height.) It's great to have a knock-about vehicle you don't really worry about. Plus, Volvos are great cars to pass on to teenage drivers. You may want to remove a cylinder or two, though, before your son gets behind the wheel!

[FC]

That is an excellent deal. And really, it's a wagon you ought to think about holding onto for the long haul, so to speak. (You might be able to do something about ride height.) It's great to have a knock-about vehicle you don't really worry about. Plus, Volvos are great cars to pass on to teenage drivers. You may want to remove a cylinder or two, though, before your son gets behind the wheel!

We did get the 7-year warranty for that reason, but this particular model seems expensive to own out of warranty - and the value tanks accordingly. Which is why we may think of selling it when there are still a couple of years of warranty left and/or when our needs change.

...You can just take off the turbos and you'd wind up with a under 200hp. As far as beater cars, I rather have a jeep, or just hang on to the 330i instead.

It's a great car, particularly for the price, but I won't miss it much when it's gone. It has no soul. Unlike the 4.5-y.o. 330i, I don't look forward to driving it.

[Alan]

E class wagon - saw one on the road yesterday ... if you can get past the looks and the price then more power to you ... other then being a Benz there are no pluses. The Audi A6 and 5'er blows it away in terms of value and they all pretty much offer the same features.

The new XC70 Volvo wagon looks decent though volvo's kinda suck in the driving dept.

GL on the other hand is an excellent vehicle ... one of the best on the road ... looks are not too great but interior room and features are :thumbup: price is :thumbdown:

MDX - nothing special... tried to love it for the price but after 2 test drives there is something missing ... can't quite place what it is

Buick Enclave - thought I'd never say this but it looks like a winner ... haven't driven it yet but features and amount of room are great !!

[lupinsea]

As far as beater cars, I rather have a jeep, or just hang on to the 330i instead.

JEEP! *cough*


Whoa, had to get that out there. . . . sorry. :eeps:






If you are only hauling 7 people every couple months it doesn't strike me as a good enough reason to get a vehicle with such massive capacity. I bet that it'd be cheaper to hang on to your current vehicles. . . even if that meant having to use both of them when the whole gang needs to go somewhere. Even if you have to pay extra $10 to park the second car. Probably cheaper than 2 months of car payments for a 3rd vehicle or more palatable than dring something you don't really want if you sell one of your current ones to get the Uberhauler.

[wdc330i]

If you are only hauling 7 people every couple months it doesn't strike me as a good enough reason to get a vehicle with such massive capacity. I bet that it'd be cheaper to hang on to your current vehicles. . . even if that meant having to use both of them when the whole gang needs to go somewhere. Even if you have to pay extra $10 to park the second car. Probably cheaper than 2 months of car payments for a 3rd vehicle or more palatable than dring something you don't really want if you sell one of your current ones to get the Uberhauler.

Yep. That's pretty much the conclusion. And speaking of green, that is a greener way to go.

[FC]

Yep. That's pretty much the conclusion. And speaking of green, that is a greener way to go.

Yup. I wouldn't get a 7 people carrier just for carrying seven people. It would just be a nice to have on a vehicle that has a lot of cargo space among many other features.

[lemming]

Yep. That's pretty much the conclusion. And speaking of green, that is a greener way to go.

i have cargo carrying needs, too.

but i'm putting them on the backburner until i can get the real configuration that i want.

diesel and diesel/hybrids are coming, so i can wait.

in life, sometimes that means taking two vehicles around Boston, which is a pricey proposition, but:dunno:.

[wdc330i]

I just can't see myself driving one of those behemoths. I hate them so much when I share the road with them.

Growing up, our family car was a VW Thing. That's it. It's what I learned to drive on. Later, my parents got a Honda Accord and I thought it was the most luxurious car!

[3LOU5]

I would get a vehicle that has handling characteristics similar to a BMW 325i, versatility and long distance comfort similar to a Honda Odyssey EX, and lastly, all-terrain capability and a towing capacity similar to a Chevrolet Silverado Z71.







Unfortunately, there are no vehicles that even comes close to satisfying all those requirements (at least, in my book....and budget), and that, my friends, is why I have all three in my stable. :lol: :lol:

[TD]

Our next door neighbors swung by their house yesterday while on a test drive of a Saturn Outlook, so we got a chance to check one out in person. While the specs and styling (inside and out) are sharp, the interior materials are AWFUL. They scream $10K Chevy Cavalier not $35K+ "world class" SUV. I simply cannot say enough bad things about the fit, finish and feel of the interior. Simply AWFUL. And these decidedly non-car people also claimed it "drove like a rental car". So...

Smells like another swing and a miss for GM.

And on another note, I drove our other neighbor's brand new MDX yesterday as well and was thoroughly underwhelmed. It's supposedly "sporty" for the class of vehicle but there was a silly amount of pitch and roll in spite of a relatively harsh ride, the transmission was constantly hunting for gears, and the use of technology seems like complete technological overkill - technology for technology's sake. I simply could not live with that vehicle. Ugh!

So, if we're going to go the 7-passenger route, it looks like we either have to hope the new X5 depreciates quickly or hope the CX-9 is as sporty as the Car and Driver review suggests it is. If not, I guess we're keeping the Saab forever.

When the Saab (worn shocks and all) feels like a tight sports car compared to the MDX, it says a lot.

[ff]

TD, I've been coming to the same conclusion about the new GM interiors. They look great at a glance. Nicely laid out, seems like nice textures, colors, materials. But you start touching the knobs and switches, and realize that they're even cheaper-feeling than what was used in previous models. It feels like the HVAC knobs will literally fall right off into your hand if you don't manipulate them carefully. No joke.

I give GM kudos for finally putting effort into the interior design and layout, but 2 thumbs down for cutting quality even further than they normally would.

[JST]

Our next door neighbors swung by their house yesterday while on a test drive of a Saturn Outlook, so we got a chance to check one out in person. While the specs and styling (inside and out) are sharp, the interior materials are AWFUL. They scream $10K Chevy Cavalier not $35K+ "world class" SUV. I simply cannot say enough bad things about the fit, finish and feel of the interior. Simply AWFUL. And these decidedly non-car people also claimed it "drove like a rental car". So...

Smells like another swing and a miss for GM.

And on another note, I drove our other neighbor's brand new MDX yesterday as well and was thoroughly underwhelmed. It's supposedly "sporty" for the class of vehicle but there was a silly amount of pitch and roll in spite of a relatively harsh ride, the transmission was constantly hunting for gears, and the use of technology seems like complete technological overkill - technology for technology's sake. I simply could not live with that vehicle. Ugh!

So, if we're going to go the 7-passenger route, it looks like we either have to hope the new X5 depreciates quickly or hope the CX-9 is as sporty as the Car and Driver review suggests it is. If not, I guess we're keeping the Saab forever.

When the Saab (worn shocks and all) feels like a tight sports car compared to the MDX, it says a lot.


Wow. I completely disagree about the Outlook, both in terms of interior materials and driving. I'm not a fan of the plastichrome that GM insists on continuing to use on certain knobs and switches, but overall I think the interior is quite good.

The CX-9 interior is also very nice, though perhaps you shouldn't take my word for it. :eeps:

[Jeff_DML]

The CX-9 interior is also very nice, though perhaps you shouldn't take my word for it. :eeps:

I thought the CX-9 interori looked nice but like FF said about GM, once you started feeling around the plastic seemed hard and cheap. Think the roof was the fuzzy cardboard like my wrx:eeps:

[TD]

Wow. I completely disagree about the Outlook, both in terms of interior materials and driving. I'm not a fan of the plastichrome that GM insists on continuing to use on certain knobs and switches, but overall I think the interior is quite good.

The CX-9 interior is also very nice, though perhaps you shouldn't take my word for it. :eeps:
Well, I went and drove the CX-9 tonight. I can't compare it's driving dynamics to the Outlook (as I didn't drive the Outlook) but the interior materials, layout and fit and finish were excellent. While it's far from the highest praise, the plastics and other materials struck me as completely on par with the E90.

Driving it, unfortunately, it felt virtually indistinguishable from the MDX. Probably a touch slower and probably a touch firmer riding. But very, very similar. Now that's great when you consider the MDX is supposedly sporty for this class of vehicle AND when you consider the CX-9 is about $15K cheaper. But I didn't for a second feel like whipping out a checkbook on the spot.

I'm really debating if I could live with something that drives like that. I mean, there's only so much you can do when the vehicle weighs 4300 lbs. But it weight 4300 lbs. Ugh!

Still, for someone resigned to this class of vehicle, the CX-9 seems like the obvious choice. It's a better looking MDX for a lot less $$. And everything else seems to not seem worth bothering with.

[nate]

I really like the LR3.

http://www.landroverusa.com/us/en/Vehicles/LR3/Overview.htm

[Josh (PA)]

[QUOTE=TD;160379] drove the cx-9 [QUOTE]

Can you compare the interior roominess of the CX-9 and MDX? Were the 3rd row seats a complete PITA, or were they useable and accessible for kids?

[TD]

I really like the LR3.

http://www.landroverusa.com/us/en/Vehicles/LR3/Overview.htm
I don't give the car mags huge credit, but when C&D does a comparison test of 8 SUVs and the LR comes in 8th, it's not a good sign.

They were pretty harsh- http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/12670/2007-land-rover-lr3-hse.html

Granted it seems to depreciate FAST and one could get a used one for a song...

For what it's worth, image-wise I prefer it as well. Too bad it apparently sucks.

[TD]

[QUOTE=TD;160379] drove the cx-9 [QUOTE]

Can you compare the interior roominess of the CX-9 and MDX? Were the 3rd row seats a complete PITA, or were they useable and accessible for kids?
The size appears identical. I haven't compared the specs themselves, but they feel the same size. And the middle row in the CX-9 slides forward and back, split 60/40, so you can slide forward and give the third row more legroom if necessary. I was able to sit in the third row comfortably and I'm ~6'1". And they were relatively easy to access.

[nate]

I don't give the car mags huge credit, but when C&D does a comparison test of 8 SUVs and the LR comes in 8th, it's not a good sign.

They were pretty harsh- http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/12670/2007-land-rover-lr3-hse.html

Granted it seems to depreciate FAST and one could get a used one for a song...

For what it's worth, image-wise I prefer it as well. Too bad it apparently sucks.

Interesting.

I agree with the closing paragraph of that review.

Still, the Land Rover’s dashing legacy — a mythical mix of off-road adventure, single-malt Scotch, and supple leather — must never be discounted. “If I could have just one of these SUVs,” declared our off-road guide, Steve Keck, “it’d be this Baby Huey right here.”

All the vehicles in that test are generally purchased because of their image. Why not get the one that backs up that off-road image with real ability? Not forgetting that it looks fantastic inside and out, especially when compared to its hideous competitors.

[dan]

because LRs break really easily and often?

[TD]

Interesting.

I agree with the closing paragraph of that review.



All the vehicles in that test are generally purchased because of their image. Why not get the one that backs up that off-road image with real ability? Not forgetting that it looks fantastic inside and out, especially when compared to its hideous competitors.
But we would be purchasing the best driving of the 7-passenger ones, adjusting for price. Image is a non-factor as, image-wise, I prefer our Saab. This would strictly be a practical move.

[TD]

Interesting.

I agree with the closing paragraph of that review.



All the vehicles in that test are generally purchased because of their image. Why not get the one that backs up that off-road image with real ability? Not forgetting that it looks fantastic inside and out, especially when compared to its hideous competitors.
Another quote from the article:

At 5772 pounds, the LR3 was by far the heaviest of this bunch, with meager skidpad grip and the poorest power-to-weight ratio. No surprise that it was the slowest to 60 mph and through the quarter-mile. Combine that with wooden steering, and the LR3 wound up being voted least fun to drive.

Oh, and what bboy said.

[nate]

Another quote from the article:



Oh, and what bboy said.

Eh, weight isn't such an important factor for an SUV.

I was not aware of the quality issues with the LR3. Since it is now in its third model year, perhaps things have improved?

[TD]

Eh, weight isn't such an important factor for an SUV.

I was not aware of the quality issues with the LR3. Since it is now in its third model year, perhaps things have improved?

Even when this one is ~1400lbs more than an MDX or CX-9?

[nate]

Even when this one is ~1400lbs more than an MDX or CX-9?

Yea.

Weight is not unimportant and the LR3 should probably be lighter. However, those others are essentially cars with a lift kit, while the LR3 is an off-road capable utility vehicle.

It is significantly larger, tows more, and can go more places.

Oh, and it isn't ugly.

[Aerials]

I like the Nissan Armada. We still may plan on getting one in the future.:)

[FC]

Yea.

Weight is not unimportant and the LR3 should probably be lighter. However, those others are essentially cars with a lift kit, while the LR3 is an off-road capable utility vehicle.

It is significantly larger, tows more, and can go more places.

Oh, and it isn't ugly.

Fuel economy is abysmal from owner feedback. Ditto reliability. That it handles like a derailed train is the final nail inthe coffin, IMO.

[JST]

Fuel economy is abysmal from owner feedback. Ditto reliability. That it handles like a derailed train is the final nail inthe coffin, IMO.

:lol:

[wdc330i]

Fuel economy is abysmal from owner feedback. Ditto reliability. That it handles like a derailed train is the final nail inthe coffin, IMO.

It's the one to buy when you're finally resigned to driving a family truck.

I think it's probably worth waiting for the X5 diesel to see how it compares to the lot.

[clyde]

bunch of stuff about turning into a lemming and rationalizing the purchase of a minivan or SUV

"Toto, i dont think we're in Kansas any more."

But I am in Kansas...and goddamn, the ground I'm standing on feels cold.

[ZBB]

TD, I've been coming to the same conclusion about the new GM interiors. They look great at a glance. Nicely laid out, seems like nice textures, colors, materials. But you start touching the knobs and switches, and realize that they're even cheaper-feeling than what was used in previous models. It feels like the HVAC knobs will literally fall right off into your hand if you don't manipulate them carefully. No joke.

I give GM kudos for finally putting effort into the interior design and layout, but 2 thumbs down for cutting quality even further than they normally would.

Go sit in the new CTS... They got it about 99% right in both look and feel. My only quibble on interior feel is that the turn signal stalk has some vestiges of old GM clunkiness (Although most of that clunkiness is gone -- but its still way behind other makers). There's also an odd plastic cover behind the shifter (auto) that looks like it could be a lever, but it doesn't move. Everything else looks and feels fantastic.

[lupinsea]

Weight is not unimportant and the LR3 should probably be lighter. However, those others are essentially cars with a lift kit, while the LR3 is an off-road capable utility vehicle.



:lol:

[Jeff_DML]

:lol:

yeah I was thinking the same thing, LR3 is a unibody fwd based crossover with a haldex diff for awd?

[lupinsea]

yeah I was thinking the same thing, LR3 is a unibody fwd based crossover with a haldex diff for awd?

I dunno, here's how I see this thing:

Real off-roadability (http://homepage.mac.com/jgreening/.Pictures/Photo%20Album%20Pictures/2007-04-02%2020.20.20%20-0700/Image-4342507BE18F11DB.jpg) vs. mall crawler. (http://www.automedia.com/NewCarBuyersGuide/photos/2006/Land%20Rover/LR3/SUV/2006_LandRover_LR3_ext_1.jpg)

:dunno:

[ZBB]

yeah I was thinking the same thing, LR3 is a unibody fwd based crossover with a haldex diff for awd?

The LR3 is a unibody... but its also on a frame (kind of unique)... It's also not fwd-based, and is not a crossover. Its much closer to old-time truck-based SUVs than unibody crossovers -- remember, the LR3 is called "Discovery" in the rest of the world.
http://www.google.com/search?q=LR3+unibody&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

Now the LR2 is a different story... That's a fwd based crossover...

[lemming]

i'm still thinking that no one has come up with a compelling reason to own a 7 seater and that a true 5 seater will do.

[clyde]

The compelling reason to get a 7 seater is that you need to move 7 people frequently enough to get one. The question here is whether there is any 7 seater available that will work for that particular group of 7.

Else, someone needs a large vehicle for whatever other purpose (cargo, towing, etc) and it happens to seat 7 as a byproduct.

[lemming]

It really does seem like hauling 7 occasionally (two of whom do have some mobility impairment) means way too many daily sacrifices. I drove our 5 wagon the other day (it is my partner's daily driver) and thought to myself I don't even like driving something that big around town. Not to mention trying to park it in my overcrowded garage at work.

I think for now we'll keep the current fleet and when the in-laws come, if we need to, we can rent a minivan--or take two cars.

It does make sense to hold tight until better options (especially with regard to energy consumption and emissions) come along.

i'm going on this, Clyde.

[Jeff_DML]

The LR3 is a unibody... but its also on a frame (kind of unique)... It's also not fwd-based, and is not a crossover. Its much closer to old-time truck-based SUVs than unibody crossovers -- remember, the LR3 is called "Discovery" in the rest of the world.
http://www.google.com/search?q=LR3+unibody&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

Now the LR2 is a different story... That's a fwd based crossover...

yeah sorry, was thinking of the LR2:?

[Sharp11]

We don't need to move seven people (just the two of us here), but my wife's deteriorating physical condition has made ingress and egress of normal cars (let alone sports cars) increasingly difficult.

The Outback has a thick sill and a low roof - two things any person can deal with without thinking about it, but if you've got certain physical issues, this is a problem - ducking and lifting one's leg over the thick sill causes great pain.:eek:

A minivan starts to look ideal since there's no sill (or I suppose it's tucked under the chassis) to climb over and better yet, the rear powered doors slide open and one can walk right in and up to the front.

My mother in-law has MS (we think there's some component of this affecting my wife and her sister now in their 40's) and I've watched my father in-law struggle with the various issues of cars over the years - trying to figure out what will work for the 4 years or so he keeps 'em vs his wife's advancing MS.

Long story short, I'm considering a Honda Odyssey EX-L, or heck, maybe even the full zoot Touring. Lots of leather, great seats, a good drive (according to C&D) and a price no BMW or even Acura can match. Most important, my wife will be able to get in and out and even drive the thing without screaming in pain.

It's a departure for us and I never considered the prospect of a minivan, but I have to admit, I'm kinda excited about it, it solves a lot of issues for us and it looks damned nice inside (and out, I think).

It's big and it's heavy (some 4500lbs) - the EX-L and Touring models have cylinder deactivation at light throttle, yet mileage seems to vary quite a bit according to the folks on the Honda forums. It's a trade-off for certain, but sometimes you have to make the best of what you have to do and although I hate the idea of hauling all that mass around for just the two of us, we don't commute and it's the best solution to a vexing problem.

Ed

[lupinsea]

For your situation, Ed, the minivans can be idea. The seats are right at butt-height which makes sliding in or out easy. Back in the early 90's my family's Lincoln Continental was totaled and we picked up a Colt Vista (made my Mitsubishi). It was a mini-minivan and actually quite fun. . . AWD, tight compact dimentions, good little 2.4L engine. It handled 2 ft jumps pretty good. :eeps:

Anyways, we gave it to my grandfater when we moved on to other vehicles and he LOVED it for the ease of entry/exit from the vehicle.

In that vein consider not just the minivans but also some small SUVs like the RAV4 (the latest generations are kind of cool looking), CR-V, um, cars like the Toyota Matrix / Pontiac Vibe, and perhaps some other cross-overs like the Murano or FX-35.

Just some suggestions that are less minivany.

[3LOU5]

We don't need to move seven people (just the two of us here), but my wife's deteriorating physical condition has made ingress and egress of normal cars (let alone sports cars) increasingly difficult.

The Outback has a thick sill and a low roof - two things any person can deal with without thinking about it, but if you've got certain physical issues, this is a problem - ducking and lifting one's leg over the thick sill causes great pain.:eek:

A minivan starts to look ideal since there's no sill (or I suppose it's tucked under the chassis) to climb over and better yet, the rear powered doors slide open and one can walk right in and up to the front.

My mother in-law has MS (we think there's some component of this affecting my wife and her sister now in their 40's) and I've watched my father in-law struggle with the various issues of cars over the years - trying to figure out what will work for the 4 years or so he keeps 'em vs his wife's advancing MS.

Long story short, I'm considering a Honda Odyssey EX-L, or heck, maybe even the full zoot Touring. Lots of leather, great seats, a good drive (according to C&D) and a price no BMW or even Acura can match. Most important, my wife will be able to get in and out and even drive the thing without screaming in pain.

It's a departure for us and I never considered the prospect of a minivan, but I have to admit, I'm kinda excited about it, it solves a lot of issues for us and it looks damned nice inside (and out, I think).

It's big and it's heavy (some 4500lbs) - the EX-L and Touring models have cylinder deactivation at light throttle, yet mileage seems to vary quite a bit according to the folks on the Honda forums. It's a trade-off for certain, but sometimes you have to make the best of what you have to do and although I hate the idea of hauling all that mass around for just the two of us, we don't commute and it's the best solution to a vexing problem.

Ed

I'm curious to see what you will have to say after taking one out for a test drive.

My parents were over for the last two weeks visiting me from FL. Took them all over the place with my Ody, and they didn't have any problems getting in and out it. :)

The current Ody IS nice inside and out, imo. I'd trade in my 8 yr old 2nd gen for a current one with leather and sunroof, but since it's paid off and is still giving me reliable service, well, what's the point?

[FC]

We don't need to move seven people (just the two of us here), but my wife's deteriorating physical condition has made ingress and egress of normal cars (let alone sports cars) increasingly difficult.

The Outback has a thick sill and a low roof - two things any person can deal with without thinking about it, but if you've got certain physical issues, this is a problem - ducking and lifting one's leg over the thick sill causes great pain.:eek:

A minivan starts to look ideal since there's no sill (or I suppose it's tucked under the chassis) to climb over and better yet, the rear powered doors slide open and one can walk right in and up to the front.

My mother in-law has MS (we think there's some component of this affecting my wife and her sister now in their 40's) and I've watched my father in-law struggle with the various issues of cars over the years - trying to figure out what will work for the 4 years or so he keeps 'em vs his wife's advancing MS.

Long story short, I'm considering a Honda Odyssey EX-L, or heck, maybe even the full zoot Touring. Lots of leather, great seats, a good drive (according to C&D) and a price no BMW or even Acura can match. Most important, my wife will be able to get in and out and even drive the thing without screaming in pain.

It's a departure for us and I never considered the prospect of a minivan, but I have to admit, I'm kinda excited about it, it solves a lot of issues for us and it looks damned nice inside (and out, I think).

It's big and it's heavy (some 4500lbs) - the EX-L and Touring models have cylinder deactivation at light throttle, yet mileage seems to vary quite a bit according to the folks on the Honda forums. It's a trade-off for certain, but sometimes you have to make the best of what you have to do and although I hate the idea of hauling all that mass around for just the two of us, we don't commute and it's the best solution to a vexing problem.

Ed

Sorry to hear about your wife, Ed. I don't think I'd buy a minivan other than the Odyssey. The reviews are so good, that many people can't be wrong.

Best of luck.

[JST]

Sorry to hear about your wife, Ed. I don't think I'd buy a minivan other than the Odyssey. The reviews are so good, that many people can't be wrong.

Best of luck.

+1 on all of that.

My anti-Honda bias aside, if I had to buy a Minivan I'd probably get an Odyssey.

My 90+ year old grandmother just bought an HHR, which she really likes because of ease of entry/exit. I would think that the Taurus X (nee Freestyle) might have some of the same benefits, but both of those cars may be too low for what you are looking for.

[clyde]

Ed, based on experience within my immediate family, I'd like to share some of the lessons learned on this issue. My mother had a major stroke 25 years ago that left her right side in pretty bad shape. She can walk unassisted (no cane, etc, although she usually uses one because it makes it easier), but her right arm is totally paralyzed.

Vehicle ingress and egress are major issues for her. Lower sills are an issue for her, but we found that there are many more that also contribute. In my mom's case (which I'm sure is different than your wife's), all of the following contibute:
Total door opening size
Maximum angle of door opening
Room available when door can only be partially opened (such as in a tight parking spot
Floor and seat heights (cars may be too low, truck based SUVs too high)
Angle, height, and thickness/shape of A-pillars and whether they have grab handles (and if so, location of grab handles)
Dash and steering wheel protusion into interior space
Space available under dash for feet to come in (how much bending and twisting must the ankles, knees, hips, and back do?)
Angle of driver's seat relative to the car's centerline (some cars that target older people have front seats that cant towards the doors from 1/2-3 degrees
Amount and shape of side bolstering
Multiple memory power seats are helpful. Set one for driving and one for ingress/egress (or even one for ingress and another for egress). All the more helpful if the steering wheel tilt and telescope are electronic and part of the memory
Location, shape, texture, and position relative to a seated person of door grab handles and opening levers
Interior shape or openess
Seat belt buckle resting location and anchor location relative to other interior bits
Shifter location (column or console)

In most cases, none of these single things is that big a deal if everything else is good, but it's the combination of them all in the specific vehicle. Again, though, that's my mom. I'm sure that it will be different for your wife. I'm just trying to illustrate that while Factor A may seem like it's the primary barrier, it's actually Factor A being significant when Factors B, C, and D are just so. In another vehicle Factor A may be the same but Factors E, F, and G are such that Factor A doesn't even register.

I'd be careful thinking about having her enter from the rear doors and climb up front. Even without a center console up front, I have a hard time imagining that it would be easier overall then getting in through the front door. There's still considerable bending and contorting to go through...and it's stretched out over a longer period of time/distance. YMMV.

If you guys decide that you want a minivan, you think that you'd be happiest with an Oddy (or anything else) and it works for her, then that's great and it solves the problem. OTOH, if the two of you are resistent to the idea of a minivan and would like to explore your options a little further, go to a used car lot that has a bit of everything (something like Carmax is ideal). Have her get in and out of as many vehicles as she's willing. Then do it again a week later...and so on until you guys feel like you've sampled enough. The two of you may find yourselves surprised by what she finds acceptable and unacceptable...and it may open your options up to something you'd both be happier with.

[Sharp11]

Thanks for all the input guys, some of the new crossovers are almost as large as minivans but have less versatility, at least that's what I'm seeing. Side by side with a minivan, I guess they're pretty slick looking though.

For example, the new EX35 by Infiniti is quite attractive, but I think it's got a smaller back seat than a 3 series. Not much of a cargo hold either.

None the less, I'll be checking it out.

Ed

[FC]

Someone has to say it... perhaps a used R-Class if you guys at all care for some of that upscale benz stuff (if you fall on the right side of teh aesthetics argument, of course).

[lemming]

two mode hybrid Yukon.

[lip277]

two mode hybrid Yukon.


:+1