# I drove the 2010 Acura MDX recently...



## Emission (Dec 19, 2001)

Here's my review.

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/08/10/2010-acura-mdx-review-road-test/

If you are a big fan of the X5, you won't like the MDX (night and day in execution and driving manners).

- Mike


----------



## cwinter (Feb 3, 2009)

Emission said:


> I drove the 2010 Acura MDX recently...


I am sorry, Mike.


----------



## Emission (Dec 19, 2001)

cwinter said:


> I am sorry, Mike.


Yeah, but I'm driving a *2011 BMW F10 550i *in about two hours. :thumbup:

(The review won't be up for a few weeks due to scheduling issues.)

- Mike


----------



## cwinter (Feb 3, 2009)

I enjoyed driving the F10 535i at the ultimate driving experience. I am sure the 550i will be fun, particuarly if it is equipped with ZSP.

I am interested what your impressions will be since the opinions, both in the press and on the 'Fest, seem to be divided.

I personally had no complaints about the steering feel, but we didn't drive the cars in regular traffic. I thought the rear-seat was unimpressive for the segment. The car looks large but didn't seem to drive as large as it looks, if that makes any sense. When they told us afterwards that the F10 was the heaviest of the vehicles there (MB E350, Lexus GS350) I was surprised.


----------



## eazy (Aug 20, 2002)

Emission said:


> Here's my review.
> 
> http://www.autoblog.com/2010/08/10/2010-acura-mdx-review-road-test/
> 
> ...


you are right that the MDX is the best car in the acura lineup.


----------



## Emission (Dec 19, 2001)

cwinter said:


> I enjoyed driving the F10 535i at the ultimate driving experience. I am sure the 550i will be fun, particuarly if it is equipped with ZSP.
> 
> I am interested what your impressions will be since the opinions, both in the press and on the 'Fest, seem to be divided.
> 
> I personally had no complaints about the steering feel, but we didn't drive the cars in regular traffic. I thought the rear-seat was unimpressive for the segment. The car looks large but didn't seem to drive as large as it looks, if that makes any sense. When they told us afterwards that the F10 was the heaviest of the vehicles there (MB E350, Lexus GS350) I was surprised.


I put about 100 miles on an F10 550i 6MT with the ZHP today.

The steering is light and isolated, but so is everything else about the car. I like the power, but I felt lag (much more than I ever felt with the N54) and that kinda bothered me. I never had a chance to toss it around a corner... more tomorrow.

I drove a 2011 Alpina B7 tonight. Damn, that car can pull at highway speeds! :yikes:

- Mike


----------



## brkf (May 26, 2003)

Baffling that someone would pay 50k for an Acura SUV. Really seems hard to believe.


----------



## Emission (Dec 19, 2001)

blueguydotcom said:


> Baffling that someone would pay 50k for an Acura SUV. Really seems hard to believe.


Truth is, it is a good value feature-to-feature when compared to an X5. However, driving dynamics put the X5 way out in front. But, if you are someone who doesn't give a hoot about driving "pleasure" or "excitement," the MDX is perfect for you.

- Mike


----------



## cwinter (Feb 3, 2009)

Emission said:


> Truth is, it is a good value feature-to-feature when compared to an X5. However, driving dynamics put the X5 way out in front. But, if you are someone who doesn't give a hoot about driving "pleasure" or "excitement," the MDX is perfect for you.
> 
> - Mike


You also have to be able to walk up to it without throwing up, a feat that would be quite hard for me after spending $50k on it.

Acura styling is quite baffling to me as of late...I used to like the look of them a lot, nowadays, I cringe when I see them on the road. I guess someone must like it...


----------



## x5mr (Sep 8, 2006)

Emission said:


> Truth is, it is a good value feature-to-feature when compared to an X5. However, driving dynamics put the X5 way out in front. But, if you are someone who doesn't give a hoot about driving "pleasure" or "excitement," the MDX is perfect for you.
> 
> - Mike


I agree. Also, most people aren't paying $50K for the Acura but rather low to mid-40's. And if you ARE paying $50K, you're getting a FULLY loaded vehicle and to get a comparably equiped X5 you'd need to check virtually every box which would push you close to if not north of $70K. So while the drving dynamics between the Acura and BMW arent' even close, for some people, that's not as important AND for some people a $20K difference in price is actually a meaningful chunk of change.

You also have to remember it's an SUV and for a lot of people (myself included) the performance driving dynamics of their weekend kid hauler and hwy cruiser for trips to disney are not quite as important. I went from a 2004 X5 4.4 with the sports package to a 2007 GL450 and I dont' think I could ever go back to the X5. There's no comparison between the way the two handle performance wise, but when I want to drive a great handling car, I hop in my 335i. The GL450 is roomy, comfortable and it doesn't jar the fillings lose from my passengers when I go over speed bumps like my X5 did.

If I could only have one car it would have to be an SUV and I would choose an X5. But if I'm going to have more than one car, I prefer a little more room and comfort in my SUV and leave the driving dynamics to my sport sedan.


----------



## vexed (Dec 22, 2001)

x5mr said:


> You also have to remember it's an SUV and for a lot of people (myself included) the performance driving dynamics of their weekend kid hauler and hwy cruiser for trips to disney are not quite as important. I went from a 2004 X5 4.4 with the sports package to a 2007 GL450 and I dont' think I could ever go back to the X5. There's no comparison between the way the two handle performance wise, but when I want to drive a great handling car, I hop in my 335i. The GL450 is roomy, comfortable and it doesn't jar the fillings lose from my passengers when I go over speed bumps like my X5 did.
> 
> If I could only have one car it would have to be an SUV and I would choose an X5. But if I'm going to have more than one car, I prefer a little more room and comfort in my SUV and leave the driving dynamics to my sport sedan.


Very valid points. We never selected a SUV based on 0-60 or lap times on the Ring. We looked at usable space and practicality.


----------



## Emission (Dec 19, 2001)

x5mr said:


> I agree. Also, most people aren't paying $50K for the Acura but rather low to mid-40's. And if you ARE paying $50K, you're getting a FULLY loaded vehicle and to get a comparably equiped X5 you'd need to check virtually every box which would push you close to if not north of $70K. So while the drving dynamics between the Acura and BMW arent' even close, for some people, that's not as important AND for some people a $20K difference in price is actually a meaningful chunk of change.
> 
> You also have to remember it's an SUV and for a lot of people (myself included) the performance driving dynamics of their weekend kid hauler and hwy cruiser for trips to disney are not quite as important. I went from a 2004 X5 4.4 with the sports package to a 2007 GL450 and I dont' think I could ever go back to the X5. There's no comparison between the way the two handle performance wise, but when I want to drive a great handling car, I hop in my 335i. The GL450 is roomy, comfortable and it doesn't jar the fillings lose from my passengers when I go over speed bumps like my X5 did.
> 
> *If I could only have one car it would have to be an SUV and I would choose an X5.* But if I'm going to have more than one car, I prefer a little more room and comfort in my SUV and leave the driving dynamics to my sport sedan.


Yeah, check out my sig. :thumbup:

- Mike


----------



## ND40oz (Oct 6, 2009)

Emission said:


> Truth is, it is a good value feature-to-feature when compared to an X5. However, driving dynamics put the X5 way out in front. But, if you are someone who doesn't give a hoot about driving "pleasure" or "excitement," the MDX is perfect for you.
> 
> - Mike


It's a shame they softened it up with the mid model year refresh, dropping the Sport package for the Advanced and then changing the dampening settings. When I bought my 2007 it was a better drivers SUV then the 2007 X5, plus I didn't have to spring for a the V8 to have decent acceleration like I would have had to done with an 07 X5. If I were shopping now, the LCI X5 with the Sport Activity package would get my money.


----------



## thebmw (Oct 19, 2006)

Emission said:


> Truth is, it is a good value feature-to-feature when compared to an X5. However, driving dynamics put the X5 way out in front. But, if you are *someone who doesn't give a hoot about driving "pleasure" or "excitement,"* the MDX is perfect for you.
> 
> - Mike


Haven't you summarized virtually every Honda, et. al. and Toyota, et. al. owner?


----------



## Emission (Dec 19, 2001)

thebmw said:


> Haven't you summarized virtually every Honda, et. al. and Toyota, et. al. owner?


Many of us were Honda/Acura owners, so I feel that is a bit of a generalization that is off the mark.

- Mike


----------



## Alpine300ZHP (Jan 31, 2007)

Emission.....I am currently cross shopping the x5 sport with the Cadillac SRX Turbo Performance model. I just got one yesterday for a day long "lifestyle test drive" and put over 200 miles on it in one day. I have to say that I am pretty impressed with this Caddy (which is sitting in the driveway next to the 135) especially since I never considered an American make car in the past. I am curious to know if you have had a chance to test this car and how do you like it compared to the x5, MDX. GL, ect. I have eliminated the GL because it is too big for my taste and the x5's price and ride are a concern for me. The Caddy at 50k comes fully loaded where a comparably equipped x5 is about 67-68k with the same equipment.


----------



## thebmw (Oct 19, 2006)

Emission said:


> Many of us were Honda/Acura owners, so I feel that is a bit of a generalization that is off the mark.
> 
> - Mike


I know...and it wasn't meant to be offensive. Everyone I know, friends and family, have had Hondas and Toyotas at some point (myself and parents and siblings excluded).

What I meant is that I have yet to drive any of those cars that feel like they have any personality or soul. Hence, they give no sense of excitement or driving pleasure. Hence, I have never bought one. I feel more driving excitement in American cars that those cars.

So let me rephrase my question "Haven't you summarized virtually every Honda, et. al. and Toyota, et. al. owner?". Does any owner the respective Toyota or Honda that they have bought buy it for driving pleasure or excitement? I, respectfully, don't think so.


----------



## ND40oz (Oct 6, 2009)

thebmw said:


> I know...and it wasn't meant to be offensive. Everyone I know, friends and family, have had Hondas and Toyotas at some point (myself and parents and siblings excluded).
> 
> What I meant is that I have yet to drive any of those cars that feel like they have any personality or soul. Hence, they give no sense of excitement or driving pleasure. Hence, I have never bought one. I feel more driving excitement in American cars that those cars.
> 
> So let me rephrase my question "Haven't you summarized virtually every Honda, et. al. and Toyota, et. al. owner?". Does any owner the respective Toyota or Honda that they have bought buy it for driving pleasure or excitement? I, respectfully, don't think so.


I'd have to say an ITR, NSX or S2000 owner probably wouldn't agree with that statement.

Personally I think the SH-AWD RDX and MDX are more fun drive then their X3 and X5 counterparts although I haven't driven the recent LCI X5. The biggest problem with the RDX is gas mileage and the MDX just needs more power at this point. I'm not a big fan of the open rear diff when BMW has the technology in their lineup, they just choose not to implement it. It's pretty sad that BMW can't put a rear limited slip on any non-M vehicle with the exception of the X6. DPC should be standard (or at the very least an option) on every xDrive vehicle if they want to stick with the ultimate driving machine moniker.


----------



## thebmw (Oct 19, 2006)

ND40oz said:


> I'd have to say an ITR, NSX or S2000 owner probably wouldn't agree with that statement.


Agree, but those are limited production vehicles, as is the LFA.



ND40oz said:


> Personally I think the SH-AWD RDX and MDX are more fun drive then their X3 and X5 counterparts although I haven't driven the recent LCI X5. The biggest problem with the RDX is gas mileage and the MDX just needs more power at this point. I'm not a big fan of the open rear diff when BMW has the technology in their lineup, they just choose not to implement it. It's pretty sad that BMW can't put a rear limited slip on any non-M vehicle with the exception of the X6. DPC should be standard (or at the very least an option) on every xDrive vehicle if they want to stick with the ultimate driving machine moniker.


Lack of LSD is truly sad, but clearly a cost cutting measure, I believe. Interesting that you think the MDX is more fun to drive than the X5. Definitely different than Mike's impression.


----------



## ND40oz (Oct 6, 2009)

thebmw said:


> Agree, but those are limited production vehicles, as is the LFA.


Yeah, the ITR and NSX were not the most accessible vehicles during their production run, but the GSR and S2K are out there in pretty good numbers and they're still fun to take through the twisties.



thebmw said:


> Lack of LSD is truly sad, but clearly a cost cutting measure, I believe. Interesting that you think the MDX is more fun to drive than the X5. Definitely different than Mike's impression.


I also have a 2007 MDX which is tuned a bit more aggressively then the MMY refresh 2010. I think they softened it up to appeal to a larger crowd. I know I've had some complaints from rear seat passengers that thought the ride was a bit stiff since I keep it in sport mode most of the time. But from the drivers seat, it's great. To me, they took it in the wrong the direction with the 2010, it definitely needed another cog in the trans, but they should have also added more power, it actually lost 5 ft/lbs of torque in the name of fuel efficiency. I also don't care for the new corporate beak.


----------



## swajames (Jan 16, 2005)

I test drove a 2010 MDX with the Advance package when my wife was looking to buy a new car earlier this year and for me it gave up nothing to the X5 in terms of ride and handling. The active suspension in the Acura is as effective as the active system in the X5. The Acura is significantly better value for money, to comparably equip an X5 results in a very significant price delta between the two, and I found little return to justify the the extra investment in the X5. Acura's technology is also, for me, as good if not better than BMW's.


----------



## ProRail (May 31, 2006)

Emission said:


> Truth is, it is a good value feature-to-feature when compared to an X5. However, driving dynamics put the X5 way out in front. But, if you are someone who doesn't give a hoot about driving "pleasure" or "excitement," the MDX is perfect for you.
> 
> - Mike


Yeah, but does that justify putting it on Bimmerfest? Okay, it does give us a warm fuzzy feeling about our cars.


----------



## LX-biker (Mar 25, 2008)

Alpine300ZHP said:


> Emission.....I am currently cross shopping the x5 sport with the Cadillac SRX Turbo Performance model. I just got one yesterday for a day long "lifestyle test drive" and put over 200 miles on it in one day. I have to say that I am pretty impressed with this Caddy (which is sitting in the driveway next to the 135) especially since I never considered an American make car in the past. I am curious to know if you have had a chance to test this car and how do you like it compared to the x5, MDX. GL, ect. I have eliminated the GL because it is too big for my taste and the x5's price and ride are a concern for me. The Caddy at 50k comes fully loaded where a comparably equipped x5 is about 67-68k with the same equipment.


Small tip: some caddy's consume more oil tha gas.


----------



## Emission (Dec 19, 2001)

Alpine300ZHP said:


> Emission.....I am currently cross shopping the x5 sport with the Cadillac SRX Turbo Performance model. I just got one yesterday for a day long "lifestyle test drive" and put over 200 miles on it in one day. I have to say that I am pretty impressed with this Caddy (which is sitting in the driveway next to the 135) especially since I never considered an American make car in the past. I am curious to know if you have had a chance to test this car and how do you like it compared to the x5, MDX. GL, ect. I have eliminated the GL because it is too big for my taste and the x5's price and ride are a concern for me. The Caddy at 50k comes fully loaded where a comparably equipped x5 is about 67-68k with the same equipment.


Sorry I missed your question...

I've never driven the Caddy, but I hear very good things from other journalists. I need to scoot my arse down to a dealer and take a spin!

- Mike


----------



## thebmw (Oct 19, 2006)

Mike,
When are you planning on test driving the new Grand Cherokee. I'm interested to hear what you have to say. I personally think it cannot be ignored now when people are cross shopping any SUV (or even the crossovers or SAVs).
Thanks.


----------



## Emission (Dec 19, 2001)

thebmw said:


> Mike,
> When are you planning on test driving the new Grand Cherokee. I'm interested to hear what you have to say. I personally think it cannot be ignored now when people are cross shopping any SUV (or even the crossovers or SAVs).
> Thanks.


Unless I drive one at the dealer, I likely won't get a shot behind the wheel in any "official" capacity (and I am not really making phone calls for the opportunity). My niche is the with the European and Japanese SUVs. That said, the three new domestics are all very nice. With new unibody platforms, they should ride and drive very well. Consider the Jeep the most rugged and capable of the three... but its (expected) dismal reliability and resale value cannot be ignored.

Come to think of it, I am attending a big media event on Sept 14. Jeep may just happen to bring one. I'll keep you posted.

- Mike


----------



## hpowders (Jun 3, 2005)

swajames said:


> I test drove *a 2010 MDX **with the Advance package* when my wife was looking to buy a new car earlier this year and for me it *gave up nothing to the* *X5 in terms of ride and handling*. The active suspension in the Acura is as effective as the active system in the X5. The Acura is significantly better value for money, to comparably equip an X5 results in a very significant price delta between the two, and I found little return to justify the the extra investment in the X5. Acura's technology is also, for me, as good if not better than BMW's.


I agree and the with the MDX you won't be on a first name basis with the SA as you will be with the X5.

You don't buy a fairly large SUV expecting it to perform like a sport sedan.

They used to call the "Advance" package the "Sport" package, but who were they kidding?


----------



## Emission (Dec 19, 2001)

hpowders said:


> I agree and the with the MDX you won't be on a first name basis with the SA as you will be with the X5.
> 
> You don't buy a fairly large SUV expecting it to perform like a sport sedan.
> 
> They used to call the "Advance" package the "Sport" package, but who were they kidding?


The MDX and X5 are very different when it comes down to driving dynamics. The MDX is a front-wheel drive platform (shared with the Honda Odyssey!). It has a unique AWD system, but its minivan roots always become evident at the limit. It will not "outhandle" an X5 subjectively or objectively, especially on its stock all-season tires. The MDX is not "fun" to drive, while I look forward to taking a spin in my X5 (I drive ours like a sports car). Plus, the X5 can tow much greater loads (a dealbreaker for me).

My last X5 was 100 percent reliable. It never went to the dealer. My current model isn't as flawless, but I take driving enjoyment over reliabilty anyday.

- Mike


----------



## hpowders (Jun 3, 2005)

Emission said:


> The MDX and X5 are very different when it comes down to driving dynamics. The MDX is a front-wheel drive platform (shared with the Honda Odyssey!). It has a unique AWD system, but its minivan roots always become evident at the limit. It will not "outhandle" an X5 subjectively or objectively, especially on its stock all-season tires. The MDX is not "fun" to drive, while I look forward to taking a spin in my X5 (I drive ours like a sports car). Plus, the X5 can tow much greater loads (a dealbreaker for me).
> 
> My last X5 was 100 percent reliable. It never went to the dealer. My current model isn't as flawless, but I take driving enjoyment over reliabilty anyday.
> 
> - Mike


I drove 'em both. Yes, of course the X5 was a bit sharper in handling, with better steering, but try taking turns at a decent speed in that beast. Whoa, Nellie!

I also have to admit, when you are paying $50k for the MDX "Advance", getting ugly fake wood doesn't cut it (pun intended).

Looking up and down the Acura line, I bet the MDX is their best vehicle.

My wife liked the X5, usually the kiss of death, and swiftly got the vehicle crossed off my list.

I want to drive something the wife considers poison ivy. Okay, I'm selfish.

The wife was rather lukewarm on the 135i DCT. I think I struck gold.


----------



## Emission (Dec 19, 2001)

hpowders said:


> I drove 'em both. Yes, the X5 was a bit sharper in handling, but try taking turns at a decent speed in that beast. Whoa, Nellie!
> 
> I also have to admit, when you are paying $50k for the MDX "Advance", getting ugly fake wood doesn't cut it (pun intended).


It's not a 3 Series. 

The MDX is a much better value... but it depends what you value.  For 95% of the residents in the U.S., the MDX is the smart choice.

- Mike


----------



## hpowders (Jun 3, 2005)

Emission said:


> It's not a 3 Series.
> 
> The MDX is a much better value... but it depends what you value.  For 95% of the residents in the U.S., the MDX is the smart choice.
> 
> - Mike


And that is the problem for anybody used to driving BMW cars. They will never be satisfied driving a BMW SUV afterward-a stronger argument in favor of sexual abstinence, I have never heard.


----------



## hpowders (Jun 3, 2005)

When the wife visits her daughter, she gets to drive an X5 for a week. She keeps telling me she likes it. She also told me she almost ran over a little girl who was behind the vehicle and that she didn't see her.


----------



## Emission (Dec 19, 2001)

hpowders said:


> When the wife visits her daughter, she gets to drive an X5 for a week. She keeps telling me she likes it. She also told me she almost ran over a little girl who was behind the vehicle and that she didn't see her.


I believe both statements. IMHO, I feel that all SUV/Minivans should be required by law to have back-up sensors (just the basic beeping things).

- Mike


----------



## hpowders (Jun 3, 2005)

Emission said:


> I believe both statements. IMHO, I feel that all SUV/Minivans should be required by law to have back-up sensors (just the basic beeping things).
> 
> - Mike


The wife is driving a 2008 VW Rabbit (Golf)-small enough to drive easily, good visibility, plenty practical for her compulsive shopping expeditions. She doesn't need an X5.


----------



## hpowders (Jun 3, 2005)

When I test drove the MDX, I was alarmed to see a Civic pass me from the left and then directly in front of me. I never saw him on my side. I only saw him when he was almost in front of me. At that point, I realized an SUV wasn't for me.


----------



## Emission (Dec 19, 2001)

hpowders said:


> The wife is driving a 2008 VW Rabbit (Golf)-small enough to drive easily, good visibility, plenty practical for her compulsive shopping expeditions. She doesn't need an X5.


Nobody needs an X5, or a Golf for that matter. We can all get by with a Toyota Yaris... and safety wouldn't be an issue if everyone was driving one.

Cars are an emotional purchase. That said, my wife and I both wanted an X5.

- Mike


----------



## autoJeff (Oct 1, 2009)

Emission said:


> Nobody needs an X5, or a Golf for that matter. We can all get by with a Toyota Yaris... and safety wouldn't be an issue if everyone was driving one.
> 
> Cars are an emotional purchase. That said, my wife and I both wanted an X5.
> 
> - Mike


I disagree, for my definition of "need", which means ability to take the family including dog on a long road trip.

Once upon a time I had a BMW 540 wagon. It was my first BMW. I was emotional when we decided to replace it with a 2003 MDX. The dog grew up to be 115 lbs and a child was on the way. Even with a roof rack we no longer fit in the wagon.

Funny that you mention a golf. I had a 2001 golf sedan at the time and the dog fit perfectly well in the back of that car without folding down the seats. But he was miserable in the 540 wagon, even with the seats folded down, because floor to ceiling was not tall enough for him to sit up. Plus the stroller didn't fit in the back unless it was placed diagonally across the floor. That meant dog and stroller could not be in the car at the same time, let alone suit cases. The 2003 MDX has had no major problems outside of warranty and we've always gotten 22-24 MPG on the highway, which coincidentally is close to what the 540 got on the highway.


----------



## dencoop (Aug 17, 2005)

Guys,

I had 2007 E70 X5 3.0si and loved it....This January I purchased a Brand New 2010 Acura MDX because of all the value..I got the Navi the rear entertainment the new 6-speed tranny...a 3rd row seat....

When I test drove it I could tell that it handled really good, the closest thing to my X5 (not including the Cayenne as at the time I thought I needed a 3rd row)

...and the Value !!! Wow I would be saving about 12g's over the X5....

Well Guess what...I sold it 6 months later and am picking up my Brand New 2011 E70 X5 at the PCD this Friday...

The point is that if your picky like me then you will see that the BMW X5 is a much better SAV then the MDX.

Just some of The things that I started to pick at....

1. The Plastic Wood - initially it did not bother me, but after a while it just looked so cheap.
2. The Navigation System (even though everyone complaines about iDrive) I felt was inferior to the BMWs (I got used to the 3D maps in my E93 and the graphics seemed much nicer in the BMW)
3. The overall feel of the car - the steering was much lighter and just did not feel like I had as much control over it vs. the X5.
4. The engine - even though it had a 3.7 300hp 270tq it honestly felt slower then my old 3.0 260hp 225tq...maybe its in the power delivery but the German horses just felt stronger...

In any case to each his/her own....but in my openion...The X5 is way, way above the MDX

BTW- I had no issues with my X5, but with the MDX my Memory Seats stopped working and had a door creek...something I def. did not expect from a Honda Product.

I do have to say that the MDX seats were Super Comfy...and one last item the gas milage Sucked big time...I was getting anywhere from 10.9 -12.5 miles per gallong in the city


----------



## MB330 (Oct 18, 2005)

Have a nice trip, man! :thumbup:
Pretty sure willsee you post and video on your youtube channel.


----------



## hpowders (Jun 3, 2005)

I had a new MDX behind me today. I have to say-it is the first vehicle I ever saw that looked ugly in white. Also, that awful looking front made me want to puke. Left that 300 hp tub of lard in a hurry with a gental touch on my merciful accelerator.


----------

