Long-Term Road Tests

I'll beg to differ on the last comment. I have an Odyssey and the handling on it was a primary reason for that choice. No, it's not some sports sedan but to have something that's even mildly entertaining in a vehicle that I need due to family size is worth my while.
 
I cross shopped it against the Sienna and prefer the Odyssey by a wide margin.
 
I was very surprised later on when I tried a Hyundai Entourage. It is a pretty entertaining van as well.
 
The Enclave look s nice enough to me but not worth the asking price to me. You may feel differently.

You are missing the point- people don't but Odysseys because of its steering feel or handling ability, they buy it because it's the Honda minivan, period. Only the press finds these supposed superior driving dynamics and claims they are the reason for the Honda's success. If I were buying a minivan, it'd be the Sienna as it has more features and rides more comfortably and quietly not to mention it looks better. And no, handling does not matter in a minivan if you ask me. If it were, would anybody be buying Caravans, Siennas or Sedonas?
  
To justify this claim, there are NO sporty minivans for the Odyssey to compete against because that's not the goal of the segment. Conversly, there ARE sporty crossovers that the Lambdas need to compete with so handling becomes part of the criteria during evaluation. Crossovers are supposed to be multi-talented vehicles that combine attributes of many types of vehicles to give you the best of each type while eliminating the worst. Car like handling/agility, seating capacity for 7, ground clearance of an SUV and cargo capacity of a minivan. Let me ask you this: what compromises must the Odyssey make? Before you start running off with these claims of my bias, keep in mind that I will justify every point I make unlike automotive magazines.

So if the Odyssey handles better, then suddenly handling doesn't matter because people carriers never go to the track? Funny that when the claim was made that the Lambda's handled better than a minivan, handling was important. Right. And you guys say that Edmunds is biased...

LOL, everyone knows whats really important in minivans is how they handle at the track. Even if the Odyssey handles better (a big "if") the fact of the matter is most people find crossovers like the Lambdas to be more stylish and they offer features not found on the Honda.

sabastian- are you not aware of Edmund's love affair with the Odyssey? According to them, no other minivan compares to the Honda on any level so even if I were to buy the fact that the Odyssey handles like a BMW, that says nothing for the rest of the minivans on the market. How does this statement sit with you: the lambdas handle better than every minivan except the track ready Odyssey.

Chavis, your claim that Lambdas "handle better than a minivan" is false according to that test. I'm not saying that the Enclave/Acadia/Outlook aren't great cars, but the article clearly states that the Acadia "nearly matches" the minivan in the handling department (ie, It's not quite as good.). Obviously the Acadia (featured in the test) is much more adept when the going gets rough, so it does have an advantage in some situations. Like I said before, each one of these cars is made for a different buyer, and that's fine.

Sabastian-
 
Already read that. What's your point?

"HA, the faux wood in the MDX doesn't look so obviously like garbage. "
 
the MDX has some of the most faux wood in the market. It doesn't fool anyone- at least not anyone with good vision. Acura has fake wood in all their products save the RL. At least the Lucerne and Enclave offer real mahogany on their steering wheels.
 
As Chavis said, you will find minimal sharing between Enclave and cheaper GM vehicles except other Lambdas.

"The handle better than minivan..."
 
You may want to check out this comparo...
 
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=125009

"The Enclave shares all the wrong parts with the cheaper GM's, and it shows, look at the CX-9 and you wouldn't even guess that the steering wheel is from the 3, et"
 
Maybe because the CX-9 DOES NOT have the same steering wheel from the 3. How can you defend your product when you don't know what it features? Please tell me what the Enclave shares with cheaper GM products. I want a list. I have been in a CX-9 many times while getting my car serviced. It is nice, but it does not feel as special or luxurious as the Enclave. The materials don't seem to be an improvement over my 3.
 
Here's a list of Enclave features not found on CX-9:
Laminated windows and steel
Remote Start
Dual Panel Sunroof
3rd row HVAC
genuine wood steering wheel trim
standard HIDs with optional articulation
heated washer fluid
power tilt and telescopic wheel
power folding side view mirrors
autodimming driver's side mirror
real time tire pressuring monitoring with PSI readouts (CX-9 has one dummy light leaving you to figure which of the four is low)
Comprehensive driver information center with customizable features
Standard autodimming inside mirror & homelink- Mazda requires this as an expensive dealer accessory, I should know because they added $225 to my car for the same option
 
The CX-9 features over Enclave:
Blind sport monitoring and keyless access. That's IT.
 
Enclave has a smoother more comfortable ride, more space, more flexibility, more features, optional captains chairs, looks better, and has a higher quality interior.
 
The CX-9 is a fine SUV, but it's essentially just a poor man's X5. The Lambdas are in a class of their own and are not emulating any other vehicle on the road. When you remember than many 7 passenger CUVs are intended to be minivan replacements, the Lambdas are in a class all their own. The handle better than minivan and have almost as much room with the only adult sized fully useable 3rd row in the class.

HA, the faux wood in the MDX doesn't look so obviously like garbage.
 
The Enclave shares all the wrong parts with the cheaper GM's, and it shows, look at the CX-9 and you wouldn't even guess that the steering wheel is from the 3, etc.
 
1 Second IS VERY noticeable, what are you smoking?
 
Soo what if they we're impressed with the styling, it's still subjective and it always will be.
 
What do you want in the third row, 4 drop down LCD screens from the roof, 15 HVAC vents(in the roof of course! anywhere else and they're totally worthless!), 40 cupholders, 41 storage bins, 2 microwaves?? Lets be reasonable here, the people riding back there don't need much, and I'm so sure you're waiting to hear the stories of people suffocating in the CX-9's back row because Mazda didn't put vents in the roof. :rolleyes:
 
Vents in the roof hardly justify a $5,000 dollar price difference/less equipment.
The CX-9 has many more pluses over the Enclave, price, driving experience (read: NOT just handling) keyless start/stop, etc. overall packaging/useability/appeal.
 
Who should you believe? Yourself, even if your view is filled with ignorance/no reasoning.

chavis - The AWD Enclave put down a 9.0 second trip to 60 in C&D tests. The MDX did it in 7.3 seconds. Okay, so it's actually a 1.7 second difference.
 
1487 - The MDX and Enclave obviously cater to different consumers. Folks looking for something sporty probably won't be headed to a Buick (or Lexus) dealer soon. Like I said in previous post, a car that compares a little more closely to the MDX is the SRX.

"The only way the Enclave looks moderately good is when it is in a dark color with the CXL's optional 19-inch wheels.
The way this Enclave is, it's pretty dang ugly."
 
according to you. Most people like the Enclave's styling. The front end of the MDX is ugly in every color. Unfortunately Acura is applying this terrible front end to all its vehicles.
 
"1487, statements like "It looks better," and "I don't like the MDX's interior or exterior" aren't really what most would deem as an objective evaluation. Styling is almost a purely subjective matter. "
 
Here's what's not subjective: most of the automotive press has been impressed with the Enclave's styling. The opinions on the MDX's styling are split. Here's some more objectivity for you: the Enclave has a usable third row AND you can carry cargo when the 3rd row is in use. Not so for the MDX. The Enclave is heavier but gets better mileage. The Enclave is about 1 second slower to 60 vs the more powerful Acura and that is hardly noticable to most people.
 
"Oh and as far as subjective opinions go, The Enclaves interior, looks cheap and it borrows HEAVILY from the parts bin, even the door locks look cheap and they're borrowed from lesser GM models, don't even get me started on the abundance of nasty obviously faux wood."
 
LEts see a proven GM hater like yourself says the Enclave's interior is cheap when every review disagrees. Whom should I believe? I have been in the vehicle and the ambiance is much classier than that of the cheaper CX-9 which is how it should be. Parts sharing is common. Where have you been? Are you suggesting the CX-9 doesnt share components with cheaper Mazdas? As for fake wood, your beloved MDX has plenty. Quit with the double standards and just admit you dont like anything GM makes and will prefer Mazdas regardless of the facts. Make it easy on all of us and stop trying to justify this nonsense.
 
for the record, The Enclave's gauges, armrests, analog clock, vents and other interor components are not from the parts bin. If you look at the lamdas closely you will see that the center stacks are different on all three models. The radio is the same, but everything else in the center is different. Even the PRNDL indicators are differenct. Very little from the Enclave short of the head unit is shared with lower end GM products. I am not offended if a Buick shares a door lock or power seat switch with a cheaper car but perhaps you are.

"The MDX may be smaller, but it is sports car compared to the Buick. Obviously most crossover buyers won't care about the fact that 60 comes up two seconds quicker in the Acura, but it does."
 
It does NOT. Please show me where the MDX where the MDX has posted a 0-60 time of 6-6.2 secs? You cannot because it has never been clocked that fast~ usually in the 7.3 sec range.
 
CX7lover- the CX-9 has ONE advantage over the GM Lambdas, handling. If you want a stiff ride and sports car handling, then get the CX-9. If want utitility, space, features, comfort and style, it pales in comparison. If I want a sporty ride, I will not be getting ANY type of SUV. That whole notion still escapes me.
 
PS- the CX-9 has a penalty box third row seat. You don't even get a/c vents back there- just those tiny registers on the rear of the front console. Lambdas have roof mounted vents for 2nd and 3rd row passengers mini-van style. There's a reason the CX-9 cost less.
 
Double standards are prevelant in the world of auto opinions. The RX for years has been termed the "benchmark" and it rides on clouds with no roll control or dampening to speak of. GM turns out bigger more capable models that handle better and provides tons more utility this this supposed benchmark and all of a sudden the criteria has shifted to sporty handling? Gimme a freaking break

MY fact checking is lacking, please! I said comparably EQUIPPED.
 
That means an MDX without the sport package, because the Enclave is a big ole softy, comparing it to the MDX means it needs no sport package, the MDX still handles way better without it.
 
If you want to compared LOADED, to LOADED (even if the ENCLAVE is lacking many of the features that the MDX comes with LOADED for LOADED) it's 2 grand, wow.
 
Base for Base you get way more in the MDX anyway.
 
Then bring in the CX-9, smart key, BLIS, bluetooth, great handling, awesome AISIN six speed, all for 40K? Enclave what?
 
Oh and as far as subjective opinions go, The Enclaves interior, looks cheap and it borrows HEAVILY from the parts bin, even the door locks look cheap and they're borrowed from lesser GM models, don't even get me started on the abundance of nasty obviously faux wood.

The MDX may be smaller, but it is sports car compared to the Buick. Obviously most crossover buyers won't care about the fact that 60 comes up two seconds quicker in the Acura, but it does. For comparison's sake, I would probably place the Acura more in line with the sportier SRX.
 
1487, statements like "It looks better," and "I don't like the MDX's interior or exterior" aren't really what most would deem as an objective evaluation. Styling is almost a purely subjective matter. Take the Scion xB for example: My girlfriend loves the boxiness of it, but I think it looks awful. I'm not saying I'm a fan of the MDX's look, but style isn't really something that you can measure on a skid pad.

The only way the Enclave looks moderately good is when it is in a dark color with the CXL's optional 19-inch wheels.
The way this Enclave is, it's pretty dang ugly.

"loaded MDX comes out to 48,000.
I would much rather have the MDX. "
 
I wouldn't. Why would you rather have a lifted Accord that looks ugly?
 
The Enclave was built from the ground-up to be a crossover, and doesn't share its platform with a car. Plus, it looks it much better inside and out than the MDX. The extra space and towing capacity is a bonus.

also, the base price on an Enclave is about $33k as opposed to $41k for the smaller MDX.

"I would much rather have the MDX. "
 
Its an Acura, I'm not surprised. The Acura's 3rd row is a joke. The space behind the 3rd row is a joke. The Acura has been criticized for having a stiff ride. The Acura gets worse mileage and I believe it takes premium fuel. I dont like the MDX's interior or exterior. I would take the Buick.