SwedeSpeed - Volvo Performance Forum banner
1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Anyone know how the 7-Passenger XC90 compares in size to an Acura MDX. I am interested in cargo room (both behind the 3rd row - which is usually pretty limited) as well as with the 3rd and 2nd seat rows folded down. I am looking carefully into a 7-passenger SUV purchase and the MDX and XC90 seem like pure competitors in this field. <BR>Thanks.<P>Michael
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
39,289 Posts
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by meinstei:<BR><B>Anyone know how the 7-Passenger XC90 compares in size to an Acura MDX. I am interested in cargo room (both behind the 3rd row - which is usually pretty limited) as well as with the 3rd and 2nd seat rows folded down. I am looking carefully into a 7-passenger SUV purchase and the MDX and XC90 seem like pure competitors in this field. <BR>Thanks.<P>Michael</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Michael,<P>the MDX seems like the natural competitor to the XC90 but that is mainly from interior size and the capability to offer the 7-passenger configuration.<P>With all seats up, the MDX offers 14.8 cu.ft. of space whereas the XC90 is at 11.1<P>With the 3rd row folded, the MDX offers 49.6 cu.ft. of dpace whereas the XC90 is at 43.3<P>With the 2nd and 3rd rows folded, the MDX offers 82 cu.ft. of space whereas the XC90 is at <B>85.1</B><P><B><I>But the XC90 has many and TREMENDOUS safety and utility advantages over the MDX. Ready? Here we go:</I></B><P> 1. With 17" or 18" alloys, the XC90 has <B>maximum ground clearance</B> of 8.9" whereas the MDX is at 8.0<P> 2. The MDX has <B>fake wood</B> whereas the XC90 has genuine walnut<P> 3. It is extremely hard to <B>access the 3rd row</B> in the MDX (try it; only from the passenger side) whereas you can access the XC90's 3rd row from either side and very easily<P> 4. If the MDX is equipped with the Navigation system, all <B>controls (heating, A/C, radio, etc.)</B> are integrated within the touch screen, something that can be very hard while you are driving. That IS a moronic idea...Very "safe"<P> 5. The MDX offers neither a <B>Roll Stability Control nor a Dynamic Stability Traction Control</B>. Both are standard features in the XC90<P> 6. There is no <B>head protection</B> offered in the MDX. The XC90 provides head protection all the way back to the 3rd row<P> 7. No <B>whiplash protection</B> is available in the MDX. As you know, the XC90 has that feature integrated<P> 8. The MDX's <B>2nd row fold</B> in a 60/40 split configuration. That of the XC90, fold in a 40/20/40 fashion which provides more versatility<P> 9. The MDX does not offer an <B>integrated child booster seat</B>. The XC90 not only ofers one but it also slides forward toward the front row seating for better accessibility!<P>10. The MDX offers <B>pretensioners</B> in only the front seats. The XC90 has pretensioners for all SEVEN seat belts!<P>11. The MDX's <B>tailgate</B> is one piece; pretty big piece that could hit the garage door and/or could be heavy in bringing down. The XC90's tailgate is split 70/30 whic makes it not only more versatile but safer to open/close.<P>12. The MDX's <B>platform</B> is based on that of a minivan (Odyssey). The XC90 is off the P2 platform which is longer and also contributes to a better ride. Plus, IMO, the MDX dos look like a minivan, especially from the rear and the rear quarter...<P>Do you want me to keep going? Ask your salesperson; (s)he should know! <IMG SRC="http://www.swedespeed.com/ubb/wink.gif"><P>Yannis<P>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,706 Posts
Check out the link below also, it has an interesting size comparison:<BR> <A HREF="http://www.xc90.com/xc90/no_intro.asp?destination=size" TARGET=_blank>http://www.xc90.com/xc90/no_intro.asp?destination=size</A> <P>-Drew<p>[This message has been edited by InDy (edited 09-16-2002).]
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,433 Posts
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by InDy:<BR><B>Check out the link below also, it has an interesting size comparison:<BR> <A HREF="http://www.xc90.com/xc90/no_intro.asp?destination=size" TARGET=_blank>http://www.xc90.com/xc90/no_intro.asp?destination=size</A> <P>-Drew<P>[This message has been edited by InDy (edited 09-16-2002).]</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><BR>You can really see how forward the front wheel is on that XC90 in comparison to the others. That must spell out some sweet leg room up front!<BR><P>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
184 Posts
There are many differences between the MDX and the XC90 but the biggest one is price. Here in Vancouver an MDX without Nav is somewhere around $48,000 with everything but the aforementioned Nav. The 2.5T, which is grossly underpowered compared to the MDX, starts at $55,000 with quite a few options not in the price. If you go for the T6 then your pushing $60,000. All prices in Canadian dollars.<P>And, if the MDX does get the rumoured engine upgrade to 280hp then it becomes that much more attractive. (EDIT: Its 260hp and its will be available in MY2003 along with a new 5 speed automatic, new AWD system and stability control standard.)<P>I personally still like the XC90 but its tough to beat the price of the MDX.<P>Pat<P>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
116 Posts
2003 Acura MDX Change Summary

The 2003 MDX receives a variety of substantial powertrain, styling, comfort and convenience updates. The new 260 horsepower engine and all-new transmission provide outstanding power in a state-of-the-art V-6 package. In addition, the MDX receives Vehicle Stability Assist (VSA) to help enhance control during acceleration, cornering and accident avoidance maneuvers. <p>Enhancements for 2003 include: <p><br>Next generation engine increases horsepower from 240 to 260 <br>All-new compact 5-speed automatic transmission <br>Drive-by-wire throttle <br>Vehicle Stability Assist (VSA) <br>Revised suspension settings <br>35 percent increase in dynamic torsional body rigidity for a smoother ride <br>Refined steering system for enhanced feel and reduced kickback <br>Available Acura DVD Entertainment System with headphones and remote control <br>Improvements to the optional Acura Navigation System including: <br>o Voice recognition <br>o Enhanced graphics. <br>o Rearview camera <br>o Expanded US data base coverage <br>Dual-stage, dual-threshold front airbags <br>Additional front airbag sensors and new system control logic <br>New alloy wheel design <br>Auto-up driver's side window with auto-reverse <br>Rain sensing windshield wipers (Touring Package) <br>Auto on/off headlights <br>New exterior colors: <br>o Midnight Blue Pearl <br>o Sage Brush Pearl <br>o Sandstone Metallic <br>New interior color-Quartz <br>Rear splash guards<BR><BR>
[Modified by crikey, 6:04 AM 9-19-2002]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
116 Posts
2003 XC90 features not in 2003 MDX

Side-curtain airbags to the third row<br>HID Xenon light availability<br>Traction Control<br>Rollover Stability Control<br>18" rims/wheels<br>Seatbelt pretensioners in all 7 seating positions<br>LATCH in 2nd row, middle seat<br>Integrated booster seat that moves forward<br>Dolby Pro Logic II Sound System with 13 speakers<br>Some stuff in the Climate Package and Security Package<br>Whiplash protection<p>Am I missing anything else?<p><br>Hopefully, the added features in the Volvo XC90 T6 will justify its higher price. Reliability still in the favor of the Acura, though. But the new tranny in the MDX is a question mark. Hopefully, it is a change for the better so that the tranny problems in the CL/TL do not manifest in the MDX. Still a very hard decision...for me, anyway. The only other thing to consider is price and if the XC90 will be available via X-Plan.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
39,289 Posts
Acura is trying to catch up because they know the XC90 is trouble...

Most of the "new " features they are enhacing the MDX with are present in the XC90. I do not want to boast because I am involved with Volvos but the XC90 will be a force to be reckoned with, in the premium SUV segment. Provided that its reliability will be up to the levels expected for such vehicle (and I don't see why not as since MY2001 all Volvos have been tremendously reliable as they used to be pre-MY1998), the XC90 has a lot to offer, a lot more than the average premium SUV out there. Lastly, the MDX is doing very well right now because it is practically running unopposed, especially in the 7-passenger crowd. I do not like SUVs but I do recognize that the XC90 is promising and will give the MDX a true run for its money.<p>Yannis
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
116 Posts
2003 MDX Navigation System

I do think that the MDX Navi is pretty good:<p>ACURA NAVIGATION SYSTEM WITH VOICE RECOGNITION<br>The 2003 MDX features the third generation DVD-based,satellite-linked Acura Navigation System with Voice Recognition as anoption on the model with Touring Package. This system has beenenhanced over the previous generation with a wide variety of newfeatures. These enhancements include:<p>Voice recognition<br>Rearview camera<br>Faster route calculation and search speed (up to three timesfaster than the previous generation)<br>A more comprehensive destination guide with 7 million pointsof interest (previously 3.7 million).<br>Enhanced graphics<br>New, enhanced split screen mode for displaying additionalroute information<br>Day/night visualization modes with user-selectable screenbackground appearance<br>Enhanced menus and improved surface street mapping<br>Turn by turn voice guidance in either male or femalevoice
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
71 Posts
Re: 2003 XC90 features not in 2003 MDX (crikey)

I'm sure that Volvo safety has been debated at great lengths in other areas on this board and others, but let me add something here. Several years ago my wife was t-boned and spent months learning how to walk and talk again, due to a brain injury. Had she been driving a car with more safety, we might have been able to avoid her serious brain injury. I am willing to pay ANY price for a safe car... the difference of $10,000 or whatever pales in comparison to $100,000+ hospital bills-- and money aside I would pay $10,000 more for a car ANY DAY to remove the physical and emotional (personality and speech deficits) scars that she will carry for the rest of her life. I'm not saying that people can't have serious injuries in a Volvo, but for me I'm willing to pay for the added insurance.<p>Just something to think about.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,179 Posts
Re: 2003 XC90 features not in 2003 MDX (Veilig)

Veilig,<p>Thank you for your comments about Volvo safety. Your words hit close to home with me. I began selling Volvos a few months after my sister escaped a serious five car accident and replaced her totalled car with a Volvo. I helped her get the Volvo and have been helping others get Volvos since then. <p>Take care...<p>William
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Re: 2003 XC90 features not in 2003 MDX (William)

I took at look at the XC90 at a preview night at my Volvo Dealer and it is defintely nicer then I expected. Also significantly bigger looking then in the photos. Interior room is definitely in the same league as the MDX and I would say a nicer package overall. I don't question the extra safety features available in the XC90, my issue is one of money (yes, yes, I know you can't put a value on your safety, but I still need to put my kids through college). A fully loaded Acura MDX with the touring package will run me about $38K. A fully loaded Volvo XC90 T6 will run me about $45K (adding climate package, metallic paint, versatility package, sercurity package & premium sound). Yes, there are things in each package that aren't in the other, but for this is a reasonably close comparison. This is a difference of $7,000, which is not chump change. The only way I could close the gap would be to get the low-pressure turbo engine on the XC90 and then option it up more. However, I have some doubts that you can power something as big as an XC90 with 200 HP. I won't know until I can actually test drive the XC90 with the two different engines (November??). Has anyone driven the XC90 with the two different engines and can give me any thoughts on how they compare. <br>Thanks.<br>Michael
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
39,289 Posts
Re: 2003 XC90 features not in 2003 MDX (meinstei)

Then, compare the MDX to the XC90 2.5T. IT's a very nice and torquey engine. Sacrifice a bit of power for more utility, ease of operation, better style (not a raised minivan) and much more safety. It does not take a genius to figure out who is the winner here.<p>Yannis
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
184 Posts
Re: 2003 XC90 features not in 2003 MDX (GrecianVolvo)

Yannis,<p>Even with a 2.5T optioned up the pricing is still quite a bit off and even more so here in Canada where the MDX is really cheap compared to the US. You can get a fully loaded MDX for $31,000 US up here in Canada using an exchange of 1.55. An optioned up XC90 2.5T up here goes for $38,000 USD using the same exchange. That's $7000 USD difference.<p>Yeah, I agree of the two, straight up, the XC90 is better but $7000 USD goes a long way.<p>Pat
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
39,289 Posts
Re: 2003 XC90 features not in 2003 MDX (Iceman)

Well, I am not sure about Canada, but for USD38,000 you can get a <B> <I>very well equipped</I> </B> XC90 2.5T.<p>Even if the T6 version is more $$$ than the MDX (we don't know how much the revised MDX is going to cost), the XC90 has so many more positives than the MDX. I am not really sold on the MDX. And a large part of its success is its novelty and the fact that it did not have too much competition, if any (if you consider the P.O.S. ML-320 competition...HORRIBLE truck), in the premium SUV with 7-passenger capacity. I guarantee you that if the BMW X5 could accommodate 7 passengers, there would not be a waiting list for the MDX...<p>If Volvo plays it smart with the marketing of the XC90, the dynamics of the premium SUV "battlefield" will change dramatically.<p>Yannis
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
184 Posts
Re: 2003 XC90 features not in 2003 MDX (GrecianVolvo)

Hey, part of marketing is positioning a product at the right price n'est pas?<p>I know that Acura could still sell a hell of a lot of MDX's even if they charged more but that's not their niche. Their niche is a quality car with a lot of standard features for a good price. The ML's are crap as you pointed out and the X5 is not in the same market space.<p>As well, I don't think BMW would ever put out an X5 with 7 passenger seating. Remember, they won't even call it an SUV but instead call it an SAV because they do not promote the Utility of the vehicle but rather the sportiness or BMW'ess if you will. Maybe when an X7 comes out.<p>But, a comparison between an X5 and MDX still brings into account the price difference. A X5 3.0 costs at least $38,000 up here and usually more and the 3.0 isn't exactly a barn burner.<p>Don't get me wrong, I still lust after the XC90 its just harder to comparing the price differential between it and the MDX.<p>Pat
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top