Explorer VS MDX., again.
Question:
Most people use their SUVs as part truck and part station wagon. The question is should someone buy a station wagon and use it part time as a truck and enjoy better handling and ride or should they buy a truck to use part time as a station wagon. The harder you use a vehicle the more you need a truck but if you are a soccer mom a minivan/SUV is more than enough to haul the kids around. This still leaves us with the fact that there are two types of SUVs, Truck and car based vehicles. Just because they both are called SUVs doesn’t mean they are comparable at the same level. Put heavy payload in each an see which fairs better. Try towing or off-roading, truck base SUVs have the advantage. On road car based SUVs ride like a car BIG SURPRISE. As far as failing to realize how SUVs are used in the real world I took a quick survey on my block 2 use them for work, 1 hauls a boat and 2 for kid hauling. All are truck based SUVs. Maybe it is people who need a mini van that buy the car based SUVs and carp about the short comings of the Explorer. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->What you fail to realize is what most people use an suv for….they >don’t use it to haul work equipment or to climb sand dunes….They use >it to haul around the kids and their soccer equipment….Until you grasp >that concept any debate on the merits of both vehicles is futile…. >Rich > If I want a car I’ll buy a Lincoln LS. If I want something to haul my >work equipment around I’ll keep my Explorer. Can’t say the thing is >perfect but after a few warranty repairs it is as dependable as my >last Ranger ( I put 225,000 miles on it before I traded it in ). My >truck is my paycheck if it breaks down I can’t work. I drive with >hundreds of pounds of gear in the back and a station wagon SUV would >have its rear springs sagging in no time. A car is a car and should be >compared the same. The Acura is probably a great CAR but would never >hold up in place of a truck. >>For what most people use an SUV for, the MDX is more than >>sufficient. Most don’t even take an SUV off pavement, thus >>comparison is quite appropriate. >>On the other hand, if you want to tow 5000 lbs then you are right, >>don’t buy the Acura… The most I have towed with my explorer is 2500lbs >>and don’t envision towing much more than that… >>After owning an Explorer for about 40,000 KM, I can confidently >>say I will never buy one again…They are junk compared to the >>Acura and Infinity models…..try driving them and you will agree… >>Rich >>> Everyone including the popular car magazines keep comparing station >>>wagons to trucks. This not a fair comparison. The Explorer is a truck >>>and rides and handles like one. The station wagons are cars plain and >>>simple. Sure they ride better and handle better but they are CARS not >>>a truck. Wow what a revelation. Compare the Explorer to the new GM >>>Trailblazers and the like but not cars based "SUVs". The MDXs and the >>>other station wagon SUVs should be compared to Camrys, and other car >>>platforms they are built on. You think a MDX rides and handles better >>>than Camry? I doubt it but it is a much fairer comparison. >>> I can’t remember how many head to head tests I’ve read in the last >>>year touting these unfair comparisons. An SUV should be truck based >>>and compared to other trucks, the car based "SUVs" should be >>>classified as station wagons and compared to everyday cars. >>> KEEP ON TRUCKIN!! >>>>Well guys, we’ve beaten this one to death. I think most of us will >>>>agree, at least from the previous posts, that the Explorer is greatly >>>>improved, but still is lacking in key areas: >>>>1) Chinsy looking interior – & we all know what everyone thinks of >>>>those pull handles (even though I don’t think they’re a big deal at >all, >>>>and will probably be very handy getting in & out. >>>>2) Quality Control – We already have 2 recalls on a new vehicle that >>>>was specifically delayed to not have any. Like most of you said – >Don’t >>>>buy v1.0 of anything! >>>>Still, its a real nice vehicle, and if its priced significantly lower >>>>than the MDX (vs EB or limited models,) its definately worth a strong >>>>consideration. Unfortunatly, I don’t think it is, at least at those >trim >>>>levels. >>>>MDX offers proven reliability, better warranty, better mileage & ULEV, >>>>nicer interior & exterior (IMHO,) available GPS (if u really need >it???) >>>>MDx doesn’t offer: >>>>Pop-Out rear window, Low Gear, Ladder Frame, adjustable pedals w/ >memory, >>>>rollover protection (like Explorer has,) built in trailer hitch, >>>>reversing sonar tones (at least available on mountaineer?) >>>>Its a toss-up. What are you new owners paying for a loaded >>>>Explorer/Mountaineer, and what did you compare it to? The MDX?
Response:
| in fact, they’ve taken a step backwards. | Ford has put incremental profit ahead of refinement and customer satisfaction | The seats in the 02 aren’t anywhere near as comfortable | They’ve taken the cassette deck out of the sound system | The electrochromatic rearview mirror is only available on the EB and LTD. | They put the temp and compass in a goofy place (and shrunk it) | The seat controls are hard to get to. | they screwed up the steering wheel adjustment | changed the way the second seat heater/ac works. | That handle on the passenger side is irritating | The dashboard does look cheap as hell | There isn’t anywhere near the amount of headroom | Lumbar support is inadequate | You have to buy the EB or LTD to get the high-level sound system | 2nd/3rd row seats do not fold flat | Cannot get cargo shade if you have 3rd seat option | I would forever be worried about the rear glass breaking. I know they fixed it, but years down the road it may loosen and one could be greatly inconvenienced if out in the middle of nowhere or on vacation. Very well stated, Harlan. I agree with you 100%!! I’ve added a few more shortcomings to your list. On their web site, Ford brags about having "listened" to its customers (even via newsgroups!) when they were designing the ’02s. Reading the above list, there is just no way that was possible. Some of these shortcomings defy comprehension. I would sure like to interview some of the "designers" responsible for the quirks and flaws listed above, I’d love to hear what they have to say (other than "uh, cost reduction…")… Ford should have at least been smart enough to "hide" some of the cheapness. It’s so blatant, it’s almost as if a large group of designers got together and moronically "sabotaged" the interior! What’s even more amazing is that Ford could have avoided a ton of this design negativity if they had just done some common senses marketing and engineering. The low-end XLS model would be acceptable with some of the cheapness but this should have disappeared moreso as one stepped up to the XLT and especially the LTD. The LTD should have been class-A all the way with more features and a classier and more expensive looking design than is now offered. Did they really think they could get away with this? The competition is going to step all over Ford if they don’t wake up real quick… > Try grasping this concept… The Ford Explorer is the BEST selling SUV > in the country. It didn’t get there by failing to fulfill the wants of > potential customers.
But I guarantee you Ford will lose a lot of ground with the ’02s… jm
Response:
Best selling yes – ‘doesn’t mean its the best. Maybe the competition is just to scary to consider. Of American made, Ford probably (imo) stands over GM products. Maybe thats just the way most Americans feel. Maybe they’re buying this truck, BECAUSE its the best selling, and this just keeps the circle going. It seems like if more people read these news groups, where there have been a lot of intelligent, well articulated posts, Ford might not be #1 for long. Reading what I’ve been reading, and looking at all this new competition, both foreign and domestic, and w/ Fords recall record, and PR problems – I WOULD sell my stock! m
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Try grasping this concept… The Ford Explorer is the BEST selling SUV > in the country. It didn’t get there by failing to fulfil the wants of > potential customers. >What you fail to realize is what most people use an suv for….they >don’t use it to haul work equipment or to climb sand dunes….They use >it to haul around the kids and their soccer equipment….Until you grasp >that concept any debate on the merits of both vehicles is futile…. >Rich >> If I want a car I’ll buy a Lincoln LS. If I want something to haul my >>work equipment around I’ll keep my Explorer. Can’t say the thing is >>perfect but after a few warranty repairs it is as dependable as my >>last Ranger ( I put 225,000 miles on it before I traded it in ). My >>truck is my paycheck if it breaks down I can’t work. I drive with >>hundreds of pounds of gear in the back and a station wagon SUV would >>have its rear springs sagging in no time. A car is a car and should be >>compared the same. The Acura is probably a great CAR but would never >>hold up in place of a truck. >>>For what most people use an SUV for, the MDX is more than >>>sufficient. Most don’t even take an SUV off pavement, thus >>>comparison is quite appropriate. >>>On the other hand, if you want to tow 5000 lbs then you are right, >>>don’t buy the Acura… The most I have towed with my explorer is 2500lbs >>>and don’t envision towing much more than that… >>>After owning an Explorer for about 40,000 KM, I can confidently >>>say I will never buy one again…They are junk compared to the >>>Acura and Infinity models…..try driving them and you will agree… >>>Rich >>>> Everyone including the popular car magazines keep comparing station >>>>wagons to trucks. This not a fair comparison. The Explorer is a truck >>>>and rides and handles like one. The station wagons are cars plain and >>>>simple. Sure they ride better and handle better but they are CARS not >>>>a truck. Wow what a revelation. Compare the Explorer to the new GM >>>>Trailblazers and the like but not cars based "SUVs". The MDXs and the >>>>other station wagon SUVs should be compared to Camrys, and other car >>>>platforms they are built on. You think a MDX rides and handles better >>>>than Camry? I doubt it but it is a much fairer comparison. >>>> I can’t remember how many head to head tests I’ve read in the last >>>>year touting these unfair comparisons. An SUV should be truck based >>>>and compared to other trucks, the car based "SUVs" should be >>>>classified as station wagons and compared to everyday cars. >>>> KEEP ON TRUCKIN!! >>>>>Well guys, we’ve beaten this one to death. I think most of us will >>>>>agree, at least from the previous posts, that the Explorer is greatly >>>>>improved, but still is lacking in key areas: >>>>>1) Chinsy looking interior – & we all know what everyone thinks of >>>>>those pull handles (even though I don’t think they’re a big deal at >all, >>>>>and will probably be very handy getting in & out. >>>>>2) Quality Control – We already have 2 recalls on a new vehicle that >>>>>was specifically delayed to not have any. Like most of you said – >Don’t >>>>>buy v1.0 of anything! >>>>>Still, its a real nice vehicle, and if its priced significantly lower >>>>>than the MDX (vs EB or limited models,) its definately worth a strong >>>>>consideration. Unfortunatly, I don’t think it is, at least at those >trim >>>>>levels. >>>>>MDX offers proven reliability, better warranty, better mileage & ULEV, >>>>>nicer interior & exterior (IMHO,) available GPS (if u really need >it???) >>>>>MDx doesn’t offer: >>>>>Pop-Out rear window, Low Gear, Ladder Frame, adjustable pedals w/ >memory, >>>>>rollover protection (like Explorer has,) built in trailer hitch, >>>>>reversing sonar tones (at least available on mountaineer?) >>>>>Its a toss-up. What are you new owners paying for a loaded >>>>>Explorer/Mountaineer, and what did you compare it to? The MDX?
Response:
Question – do you guys (girls included- sorry!) actually take a brand-new $35,000 vehicle "off-road?" I just can’t believe it. I’ve seen the many "truck" magazines out there, and virtually everything I see in them are beat-to-hell modified wranglers, etc. As far as the Grand Cherokee – father in law has a 97 or 98 v8 limited – spent $3600 in various repairs, all at one time. It was leaking like a siv – if there was a place for fluid – it leaked. His also had the spare tire IN the rear of the vehicle! Talk about design failures! I think the passenger handle in the Explorer that everyone bitched at holds nothing to this! I’m sure the new GCs are nice – whats are they going for, in high-end trim? They don’t offer 3rd row seating, and they’re much smaller than the explorer 02 right? m
Response:
MDX has a 4 year warranty – Ford has 3. There is meaning to this. Companies don’t offer better warranties on vehicles if they don’t have confidence in them. Vehicles like these are expensive to repair. When the explorer warranty is out in 36months, I’d be shi$$ing in my pants. I’d feel pretty good in the acura, and would still feel comfortable w/ it even after the warranty is out. As far as using a car as a wagon, as opposed to a truck as a minivan, some of you are forgetting that you virtually always get 4wd w/ the truck, and now you can easily seat 7 w/ these 3rd row seats. The only 4wd vehicles you’re going to get are the subies, and volvoes. They won’t seat 7, and I don’t care for either manufacturer. m
Response:
I’m curious – how does the MDX offer proven reliability if this is the first year it came out?
Response:
> The Jeep GC was also very very nice but > I’m not sure I’d be willing to risk the QC problems it might have.
The Jeep GC has come a long way quality-wise is the past couple years. The 2000 and more notably the 2001 models are much improved and have excellent reliability ratings. Some of the new JDP SUV ratings in fact put it in 2nd place, above the Explorer and many other models. The way Ford is going they will be at the top of the unreliability list where Chrysler used to be….the Jeep GC is the second best selling SUV, well ahead of Toyota, Lexus, Acura and everyone else except Explorer (of which they are fast catching up…) jm
Response:
> That was a nice review, however, I was a little bit surprised that none of > your criteria was regarding the offroad and loading capabilities, I think if > you are buying a truck, that should be the most important thing on your > list. For all the convenience items you have listed, luxury cars can serve > you much better.
All of the vehicles I looked at fit my criteria for what I needed. I don’t do any offroading but I do haul equipment from time to time for work and the cargo space on an SUV vs a "luxury car" is of course much larger and more convenient. It doesn’t snow around here too often but when it does the 4wd is a lifesaver. The Jeep seems to have the best of both worlds. If I ever decide to get into offroading (sounds like a blast) I am ready with one of the best vehicles out there. Meanwhile I am enjoying a nice comfortable and quiet ride with wonderful luxury items and great comfort. jm
Response:
> What you fail to realize is what most people use an suv for….they > don’t use it to haul work equipment or to climb sand dunes….They use > it to haul around the kids and their soccer equipment….Until you grasp > that concept any debate on the merits of both vehicles is futile…. > Rich
Where I live, soccer equipment and everything that goes along with it, gets put in minivans. Since I live in an area that has a beach that you can drive on, most of the SUV’s around here are really SUV’s, they go in mud, sand, hunting and fishing.
Response:
I drove the MDX today and, for the average soccer mom and dad, they got everything right that Ford got wrong. And even though it can be bot for $3-4K less than a loaded Explorer, the true cost for 2-4 years will be much less as it won’t depreciate nearly as much (unless Honda quality changed). Someone said that Toyota is working on something similar. Ford is in big trouble.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> What you fail to realize is what most people use an suv for….they > don’t use it to haul work equipment or to climb sand dunes….They use > it to haul around the kids and their soccer equipment….Until you grasp > that concept any debate on the merits of both vehicles is futile…. > Rich > Where I live, soccer equipment and everything that goes along with it, gets put in > minivans. Since I live in an area that has a beach that you can drive on, most of > the SUV’s around here are really SUV’s, they go in mud, sand, hunting and fishing.
Response:
Absolutely correct, AZ, but they haven’t improved the "little" things on the vehicle; in fact, they’ve taken a step backwards. The seats in the 02 aren’t anywhere near as comfortable as they are in my 97. They’ve taken the cassette deck out of the sound system, and on long trips I like to listen to books on tape as well as CD music. (Chrysler left the cassette deck in and provided a four disk changer.) The electrochromatic rearview mirror is only available on the EB and LTD. They put the temp and compass in a goofy place. The seat controls are hard to get to. According to some, they screwed up the steering wheel adjustment (which doesn’t really mean squat to me). They apparently changed the way the second seat heater/ac works. That handle on the passenger side is irritating, but I can live with it. The dashboard does look cheap as hell (and I sell plastics to them). There isn’t anywhere near the amount of headroom (at least for the driver) that there was in the 97. Lumbar support is inadequate (Ford isn’t alone here). The point is, AZ, they aren’t going to continue to be the leader with "innovations" like these. Now, Bob can jump in here all he wants and suggest we not buy one if we don’t like it. That’s exactly what’s going to happen, I’m afraid. Its a shame, too, because I flat love my 97, and Ford is making it very difficult for me to justify an 02. By the way, unless you sell to Ford, you can’t imagine the amount of cost reduction pressure they put on their suppliers. I mean multiyear contracts that reduce the price of parts by 5% per year over a five year period. And if you don’t agree to it, you don’t get the job. Those quality suppliers who elect to pass the business by are replaced by suppliers of questionable or unproven quality. Those are the parts that go in your vehicle. The 02 Explorer is an improved vehicle in some major respects ….. ride and size to name two that I can think of. But relatively speaking it now has more shortcomings than it did in 97. I can’t comment on models between 97 and 02. Its not a piece of junk, but Ford has put incremental profit ahead of refinement and customer satisfaction, and that’s going to kill the golden goose. Harlan – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Try grasping this concept… The Ford Explorer is the BEST selling SUV > in the country. It didn’t get there by failing to fulfil the wants of > potential customers. >What you fail to realize is what most people use an suv for….they >don’t use it to haul work equipment or to climb sand dunes….They use >it to haul around the kids and their soccer equipment….Until you grasp >that concept any debate on the merits of both vehicles is futile…. >Rich >> If I want a car I’ll buy a Lincoln LS. If I want something to haul my >>work equipment around I’ll keep my Explorer. Can’t say the thing is >>perfect but after a few warranty repairs it is as dependable as my >>last Ranger ( I put 225,000 miles on it before I traded it in ). My >>truck is my paycheck if it breaks down I can’t work. I drive with >>hundreds of pounds of gear in the back and a station wagon SUV would >>have its rear springs sagging in no time. A car is a car and should be >>compared the same. The Acura is probably a great CAR but would never >>hold up in place of a truck. >>>For what most people use an SUV for, the MDX is more than >>>sufficient. Most don’t even take an SUV off pavement, thus >>>comparison is quite appropriate. >>>On the other hand, if you want to tow 5000 lbs then you are right, >>>don’t buy the Acura… The most I have towed with my explorer is 2500lbs >>>and don’t envision towing much more than that… >>>After owning an Explorer for about 40,000 KM, I can confidently >>>say I will never buy one again…They are junk compared to the >>>Acura and Infinity models…..try driving them and you will agree… >>>Rich >>>> Everyone including the popular car magazines keep comparing station >>>>wagons to trucks. This not a fair comparison. The Explorer is a truck >>>>and rides and handles like one. The station wagons are cars plain and >>>>simple. Sure they ride better and handle better but they are CARS not >>>>a truck. Wow what a revelation. Compare the Explorer to the new GM >>>>Trailblazers and the like but not cars based "SUVs". The MDXs and the >>>>other station wagon SUVs should be compared to Camrys, and other car >>>>platforms they are built on. You think a MDX rides and handles better >>>>than Camry? I doubt it but it is a much fairer comparison. >>>> I can’t remember how many head to head tests I’ve read in the last >>>>year touting these unfair comparisons. An SUV should be truck based >>>>and compared to other trucks, the car based "SUVs" should be >>>>classified as station wagons and compared to everyday cars. >>>> KEEP ON TRUCKIN!! >>>>>Well guys, we’ve beaten this one to death. I think most of us will >>>>>agree, at least from the previous posts, that the Explorer is greatly >>>>>improved, but still is lacking in key areas: >>>>>1) Chinsy looking interior – & we all know what everyone thinks of >>>>>those pull handles (even though I don’t think they’re a big deal at >all, >>>>>and will probably be very handy getting in & out. >>>>>2) Quality Control – We already have 2 recalls on a new vehicle that >>>>>was specifically delayed to not have any. Like most of you said – >Don’t >>>>>buy v1.0 of anything! >>>>>Still, its a real nice vehicle, and if its priced significantly lower >>>>>than the MDX (vs EB or limited models,) its definately worth a strong >>>>>consideration. Unfortunatly, I don’t think it is, at least at those >trim >>>>>levels. >>>>>MDX offers proven reliability, better warranty, better mileage & ULEV, >>>>>nicer interior & exterior (IMHO,) available GPS (if u really need >it???) >>>>>MDx doesn’t offer: >>>>>Pop-Out rear window, Low Gear, Ladder Frame, adjustable pedals w/ >memory, >>>>>rollover protection (like Explorer has,) built in trailer hitch, >>>>>reversing sonar tones (at least available on mountaineer?) >>>>>Its a toss-up. What are you new owners paying for a loaded >>>>>Explorer/Mountaineer, and what did you compare it to? The MDX?
Response:
That was a nice review, however, I was a little bit surprised that none of your criteria was regarding the offroad and loading capabilities, I think if you are buying a truck, that should be the most important thing on your list. For all the convenience items you have listed, luxury cars can serve you much better.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> | What did you buy? Why? What options did you get? How much $$? > My last two vehicles have been Ford Explorers, a 1997 LTD and an ‘01 Sport. > Both I loved and were nearly flawless in reliability. Last fall the > impending introduction of the "all new Explorer" got me thinking about going > back to a 4-door. The 2 dr was great and fun to drive, but inconvenient for > hauling passengers, always having to hassle moving the seats. As well, the > new redesign of the Explorer seem to offer some exciting features, most of > all a much-improved ride which I missed in the rougher handling Sport. I saw > the first one at a car show last October and pretty much liked it, although > I thought it looked a little too bloated. The Sport being shorter was easier > to maneuver and park. For the months that followed I read everything I could > about the Explorer and was looking forward to when I could buy one. Not > wanting to make a commitment and order one, I started visiting lots as they > were coming out. I still wasn’t 100% sure that I wanted one but caught that > "new car fever". I narrowed my selection down to the LTD as it had some > features like the dual air and premium stereo that I "had to have." They > were last to reach the dealers, as the lower end models were pretty much > released first. I test drove several and liked them for the most part. I was > within a few hours of buying one as a dealer had finally located one with > almost of the options I wanted. But then hesitated as also at the time Ford > had still not made available the telescoping wheel, adjustable pedals, and > home link system. I figured if I was going this far ($38,000 MSRP) I might > as well wait for those options… > Then I heard news of the 3 new GM models. Being a happy Chevy owner in the > past I wanted to check them out, and so I did. There were things I liked on > all three models (Trailblazer, Bravada, Envoy) but there was always > something major I did not like. I had wished I could combine the three to > make a "perfect" SUV! I still liked the lower load floor and larger back ope > ning of the Explorer, but did not like the "cheapness" of its interior. I > also did not like the tiny driver information display that had been moved to > a corner of the instrument panel. For $38 grand I did not want or expect to > get the interior design of a $10k car. I hated the Explorer’s > hard-to-operate tilt steer lever, something I would use 10 or 20 times a > day. The electronic A/C controls were harder to operate than on competing > models. The gas filler is on the passenger side, another inconvenience. The > bottom line was that although I really liked the ‘02 Explorers, there were > too many little disadvantages that really added up, and many of them were > irritating and just plain stupid. I just couldn’t understand how designers > could do things like make power seat buttons hard to reach and operate, and > design back seats that do not fold flat. This, along with other flaws, told > me that although a lot of thought and consideration was put into this > redesign, a lot of thought was also NOT put into it. Ford should have had > designers smart enough to not make the cheapness and cost cutting so > glaringly obvious. > Pretty much ruling out the Explorer, I focused on the GM trio. I thought the > Bravada looked the best inside and out and was leaning towards that. Looking > for one with the Bose sound system, I headed out of town to search some more > dealer lots. One Olds dealer was also a Jeep dealer, and a Grand Cherokee > Ltd. caught my eye on the way in. I decided to take a look and ended up test > driving one. I loved it. Great looks, great ride, great features, and a lot > of very well thought out features. Unlike the Explorer, the Jeep was > designed by folks who actually sit in and drive their cars, very evident by > the layout and placement of controls and features. And all of the options > were available (no "late availability crap" or recalls). The LTD model had a > sticker of just over $39k. It included 4wd, a powerful and very fast 4.7L > V8, dual air conditioning (also very powerful), moonroof, power and heated > seats, large driver info display, home-link, a great storage place for a > cell phone with 12v plug nearby, much more comfortable seats than the other > models, Infinity Gold premium sound, and a very smooth and quiet ride. Fit > and finish are perfect from one end to the other. It really is one of the > nicest vehicles I have ever owned. > I know, there is a lot of negative press about the reliability of Jeeps, but > after perusing tons of newsgroups the past 6 months I didn’t find a single > model by any manufacturer that did not have quirks, problems and ticked-off > owners. Even the highly rated MDX had a major flaw with excessive front > windshield wind noise (still don’t know if that was resolved or how many > were affected). I think the quality of a lot of SUVs has recently taken a > decline as manufacturers strive to cut costs as deep as possible. I know > Acura’s and some other models are very well-built and reliable but they too > have their disadvantages. Toyota’s have had engine problems, and so on. So > it all boils down really to individual tastes, which is why I would suggest > anyone in the market for an SUV to really study the features as well as > advantages and disadvantages of all models within their price range and see > which models "score" the most points. I’m very happy with the Jeep GCL, as > others are happy with what they have chosen. Some will get lemons and have > problems, others will luck out and get very reliable vehicles. > Finally, I don’t heavily weigh the "depreciation" factor between the models. > All cars these days suffer from excessive depreciation, and don’t let anyone > tell you otherwise. The Acura and Honda dealers love to push the issue that > their cars depreciate far less. But come time for a trade-in most dealers > will screw you as much as they can. The latest game is that they now "need" > to offer under wholesale book as they want to quickly auction it off or not > have to mess with it. They are flooded with used cars and most would really > not rather bother with trades. The MDX may have a slightly better > depreciation level but then you will pay about $5,000 more for a model with > the same sticker as an Explorer as they do not discount much from MSRP. That > means the next day after you buy an MDX it is worth $10,000 less than what > you paid. An Explorer bought under invoice would be worth just $5,000 less > than what you paid after one day. It doesn’t matter which car you buy, a few > years from now it will be worth just a fraction of what you paid for it. > You’ll reluctantly accept whatever that is and drive off in another new car > to start the cycle all over again. Will I buy another Explorer in the > future? Very possible if Ford can turn things around and improve on the > quirks and cheapness factors… > Joe
Response:
And what you fail to realize is that there are more people who do use an SUV offroad more than you think. They also use it to haul boats and trailers in all kinds of weather (including snow) and for fishing and hunting trips where the vehicle is loaded pretty heavily. In short, its an all-purpose vehicle that can be used in many ways. I don’t know where so many people get the idea that its a soccer mom’s vehicle almost exclusively. Where I live people own them for their versatility. So comparing the vehicles in terms of power, load capacity, trailering ability, comfort, and makes a lot of sense. Harlan – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > What you fail to realize is what most people use an suv for….they > don’t use it to haul work equipment or to climb sand dunes….They use > it to haul around the kids and their soccer equipment….Until you grasp > that concept any debate on the merits of both vehicles is futile…. > Rich > If I want a car I’ll buy a Lincoln LS. If I want something to haul my >work equipment around I’ll keep my Explorer. Can’t say the thing is >perfect but after a few warranty repairs it is as dependable as my >last Ranger ( I put 225,000 miles on it before I traded it in ). My >truck is my paycheck if it breaks down I can’t work. I drive with >hundreds of pounds of gear in the back and a station wagon SUV would >have its rear springs sagging in no time. A car is a car and should be >compared the same. The Acura is probably a great CAR but would never >hold up in place of a truck. >>For what most people use an SUV for, the MDX is more than >>sufficient. Most don’t even take an SUV off pavement, thus >>comparison is quite appropriate. >>On the other hand, if you want to tow 5000 lbs then you are right, >>don’t buy the Acura… The most I have towed with my explorer is 2500lbs >>and don’t envision towing much more than that… >>After owning an Explorer for about 40,000 KM, I can confidently >>say I will never buy one again…They are junk compared to the >>Acura and Infinity models…..try driving them and you will agree… >>Rich >>> Everyone including the popular car magazines keep comparing station >>>wagons to trucks. This not a fair comparison. The Explorer is a truck >>>and rides and handles like one. The station wagons are cars plain and >>>simple. Sure they ride better and handle better but they are CARS not >>>a truck. Wow what a revelation. Compare the Explorer to the new GM >>>Trailblazers and the like but not cars based "SUVs". The MDXs and the >>>other station wagon SUVs should be compared to Camrys, and other car >>>platforms they are built on. You think a MDX rides and handles better >>>than Camry? I doubt it but it is a much fairer comparison. >>> I can’t remember how many head to head tests I’ve read in the last >>>year touting these unfair comparisons. An SUV should be truck based >>>and compared to other trucks, the car based "SUVs" should be >>>classified as station wagons and compared to everyday cars. >>> KEEP ON TRUCKIN!! >>>>Well guys, we’ve beaten this one to death. I think most of us will >>>>agree, at least from the previous posts, that the Explorer is greatly >>>>improved, but still is lacking in key areas: >>>>1) Chinsy looking interior – & we all know what everyone thinks of >>>>those pull handles (even though I don’t think they’re a big deal at > all, >>>>and will probably be very handy getting in & out. >>>>2) Quality Control – We already have 2 recalls on a new vehicle that >>>>was specifically delayed to not have any. Like most of you said – > Don’t >>>>buy v1.0 of anything! >>>>Still, its a real nice vehicle, and if its priced significantly lower >>>>than the MDX (vs EB or limited models,) its definately worth a strong >>>>consideration. Unfortunatly, I don’t think it is, at least at those > trim >>>>levels. >>>>MDX offers proven reliability, better warranty, better mileage & ULEV, >>>>nicer interior & exterior (IMHO,) available GPS (if u really need > it???) >>>>MDx doesn’t offer: >>>>Pop-Out rear window, Low Gear, Ladder Frame, adjustable pedals w/ > memory, >>>>rollover protection (like Explorer has,) built in trailer hitch, >>>>reversing sonar tones (at least available on mountaineer?) >>>>Its a toss-up. What are you new owners paying for a loaded >>>>Explorer/Mountaineer, and what did you compare it to? The MDX?
Response:
Thanks for a well reasoned and comprehensive review. Keep us posted on your Jeep experience. —– dan
Response:
What you fail to realize is what most people use an suv for….they don’t use it to haul work equipment or to climb sand dunes….They use it to haul around the kids and their soccer equipment….Until you grasp that concept any debate on the merits of both vehicles is futile…. Rich – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> If I want a car I’ll buy a Lincoln LS. If I want something to haul my >work equipment around I’ll keep my Explorer. Can’t say the thing is >perfect but after a few warranty repairs it is as dependable as my >last Ranger ( I put 225,000 miles on it before I traded it in ). My >truck is my paycheck if it breaks down I can’t work. I drive with >hundreds of pounds of gear in the back and a station wagon SUV would >have its rear springs sagging in no time. A car is a car and should be >compared the same. The Acura is probably a great CAR but would never >hold up in place of a truck. >For what most people use an SUV for, the MDX is more than >sufficient. Most don’t even take an SUV off pavement, thus >comparison is quite appropriate. >On the other hand, if you want to tow 5000 lbs then you are right, >don’t buy the Acura… The most I have towed with my explorer is 2500lbs >and don’t envision towing much more than that… >After owning an Explorer for about 40,000 KM, I can confidently >say I will never buy one again…They are junk compared to the >Acura and Infinity models…..try driving them and you will agree… >Rich >> Everyone including the popular car magazines keep comparing station >>wagons to trucks. This not a fair comparison. The Explorer is a truck >>and rides and handles like one. The station wagons are cars plain and >>simple. Sure they ride better and handle better but they are CARS not >>a truck. Wow what a revelation. Compare the Explorer to the new GM >>Trailblazers and the like but not cars based "SUVs". The MDXs and the >>other station wagon SUVs should be compared to Camrys, and other car >>platforms they are built on. You think a MDX rides and handles better >>than Camry? I doubt it but it is a much fairer comparison. >> I can’t remember how many head to head tests I’ve read in the last >>year touting these unfair comparisons. An SUV should be truck based >>and compared to other trucks, the car based "SUVs" should be >>classified as station wagons and compared to everyday cars. >> KEEP ON TRUCKIN!! >>>Well guys, we’ve beaten this one to death. I think most of us will >>>agree, at least from the previous posts, that the Explorer is greatly >>>improved, but still is lacking in key areas: >>>1) Chinsy looking interior – & we all know what everyone thinks of >>>those pull handles (even though I don’t think they’re a big deal at all, >>>and will probably be very handy getting in & out. >>>2) Quality Control – We already have 2 recalls on a new vehicle that >>>was specifically delayed to not have any. Like most of you said – Don’t >>>buy v1.0 of anything! >>>Still, its a real nice vehicle, and if its priced significantly lower >>>than the MDX (vs EB or limited models,) its definately worth a strong >>>consideration. Unfortunatly, I don’t think it is, at least at those trim >>>levels. >>>MDX offers proven reliability, better warranty, better mileage & ULEV, >>>nicer interior & exterior (IMHO,) available GPS (if u really need it???) >>>MDx doesn’t offer: >>>Pop-Out rear window, Low Gear, Ladder Frame, adjustable pedals w/ memory, >>>rollover protection (like Explorer has,) built in trailer hitch, >>>reversing sonar tones (at least available on mountaineer?) >>>Its a toss-up. What are you new owners paying for a loaded >>>Explorer/Mountaineer, and what did you compare it to? The MDX?
Response:
| What did you buy? Why? What options did you get? How much $$? My last two vehicles have been Ford Explorers, a 1997 LTD and an ‘01 Sport. Both I loved and were nearly flawless in reliability. Last fall the impending introduction of the "all new Explorer" got me thinking about going back to a 4-door. The 2 dr was great and fun to drive, but inconvenient for hauling passengers, always having to hassle moving the seats. As well, the new redesign of the Explorer seem to offer some exciting features, most of all a much-improved ride which I missed in the rougher handling Sport. I saw the first one at a car show last October and pretty much liked it, although I thought it looked a little too bloated. The Sport being shorter was easier to maneuver and park. For the months that followed I read everything I could about the Explorer and was looking forward to when I could buy one. Not wanting to make a commitment and order one, I started visiting lots as they were coming out. I still wasn’t 100% sure that I wanted one but caught that "new car fever". I narrowed my selection down to the LTD as it had some features like the dual air and premium stereo that I "had to have." They were last to reach the dealers, as the lower end models were pretty much released first. I test drove several and liked them for the most part. I was within a few hours of buying one as a dealer had finally located one with almost of the options I wanted. But then hesitated as also at the time Ford had still not made available the telescoping wheel, adjustable pedals, and home link system. I figured if I was going this far ($38,000 MSRP) I might as well wait for those options… Then I heard news of the 3 new GM models. Being a happy Chevy owner in the past I wanted to check them out, and so I did. There were things I liked on all three models (Trailblazer, Bravada, Envoy) but there was always something major I did not like. I had wished I could combine the three to make a "perfect" SUV! I still liked the lower load floor and larger back ope ning of the Explorer, but did not like the "cheapness" of its interior. I also did not like the tiny driver information display that had been moved to a corner of the instrument panel. For $38 grand I did not want or expect to get the interior design of a $10k car. I hated the Explorer’s hard-to-operate tilt steer lever, something I would use 10 or 20 times a day. The electronic A/C controls were harder to operate than on competing models. The gas filler is on the passenger side, another inconvenience. The bottom line was that although I really liked the ‘02 Explorers, there were too many little disadvantages that really added up, and many of them were irritating and just plain stupid. I just couldn’t understand how designers could do things like make power seat buttons hard to reach and operate, and design back seats that do not fold flat. This, along with other flaws, told me that although a lot of thought and consideration was put into this redesign, a lot of thought was also NOT put into it. Ford should have had designers smart enough to not make the cheapness and cost cutting so glaringly obvious. Pretty much ruling out the Explorer, I focused on the GM trio. I thought the Bravada looked the best inside and out and was leaning towards that. Looking for one with the Bose sound system, I headed out of town to search some more dealer lots. One Olds dealer was also a Jeep dealer, and a Grand Cherokee Ltd. caught my eye on the way in. I decided to take a look and ended up test driving one. I loved it. Great looks, great ride, great features, and a lot of very well thought out features. Unlike the Explorer, the Jeep was designed by folks who actually sit in and drive their cars, very evident by the layout and placement of controls and features. And all of the options were available (no "late availability crap" or recalls). The LTD model had a sticker of just over $39k. It included 4wd, a powerful and very fast 4.7L V8, dual air conditioning (also very powerful), moonroof, power and heated seats, large driver info display, home-link, a great storage place for a cell phone with 12v plug nearby, much more comfortable seats than the other models, Infinity Gold premium sound, and a very smooth and quiet ride. Fit and finish are perfect from one end to the other. It really is one of the nicest vehicles I have ever owned. I know, there is a lot of negative press about the reliability of Jeeps, but after perusing tons of newsgroups the past 6 months I didn’t find a single model by any manufacturer that did not have quirks, problems and ticked-off owners. Even the highly rated MDX had a major flaw with excessive front windshield wind noise (still don’t know if that was resolved or how many were affected). I think the quality of a lot of SUVs has recently taken a decline as manufacturers strive to cut costs as deep as possible. I know Acura’s and some other models are very well-built and reliable but they too have their disadvantages. Toyota’s have had engine problems, and so on. So it all boils down really to individual tastes, which is why I would suggest anyone in the market for an SUV to really study the features as well as advantages and disadvantages of all models within their price range and see which models "score" the most points. I’m very happy with the Jeep GCL, as others are happy with what they have chosen. Some will get lemons and have problems, others will luck out and get very reliable vehicles. Finally, I don’t heavily weigh the "depreciation" factor between the models. All cars these days suffer from excessive depreciation, and don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. The Acura and Honda dealers love to push the issue that their cars depreciate far less. But come time for a trade-in most dealers will screw you as much as they can. The latest game is that they now "need" to offer under wholesale book as they want to quickly auction it off or not have to mess with it. They are flooded with used cars and most would really not rather bother with trades. The MDX may have a slightly better depreciation level but then you will pay about $5,000 more for a model with the same sticker as an Explorer as they do not discount much from MSRP. That means the next day after you buy an MDX it is worth $10,000 less than what you paid. An Explorer bought under invoice would be worth just $5,000 less than what you paid after one day. It doesn’t matter which car you buy, a few years from now it will be worth just a fraction of what you paid for it. You’ll reluctantly accept whatever that is and drive off in another new car to start the cycle all over again. Will I buy another Explorer in the future? Very possible if Ford can turn things around and improve on the quirks and cheapness factors… Joe
Response:
So Joe, What did you buy? Why? What options did you get? How much $$? —– dan
Response:
If I want a car I’ll buy a Lincoln LS. If I want something to haul my work equipment around I’ll keep my Explorer. Can’t say the thing is perfect but after a few warranty repairs it is as dependable as my last Ranger ( I put 225,000 miles on it before I traded it in ). My truck is my paycheck if it breaks down I can’t work. I drive with hundreds of pounds of gear in the back and a station wagon SUV would have its rear springs sagging in no time. A car is a car and should be compared the same. The Acura is probably a great CAR but would never hold up in place of a truck. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->For what most people use an SUV for, the MDX is more than >sufficient. Most don’t even take an SUV off pavement, thus >comparison is quite appropriate. >On the other hand, if you want to tow 5000 lbs then you are right, >don’t buy the Acura… The most I have towed with my explorer is 2500lbs >and don’t envision towing much more than that… >After owning an Explorer for about 40,000 KM, I can confidently >say I will never buy one again…They are junk compared to the >Acura and Infinity models…..try driving them and you will agree… >Rich > Everyone including the popular car magazines keep comparing station >wagons to trucks. This not a fair comparison. The Explorer is a truck >and rides and handles like one. The station wagons are cars plain and >simple. Sure they ride better and handle better but they are CARS not >a truck. Wow what a revelation. Compare the Explorer to the new GM >Trailblazers and the like but not cars based "SUVs". The MDXs and the >other station wagon SUVs should be compared to Camrys, and other car >platforms they are built on. You think a MDX rides and handles better >than Camry? I doubt it but it is a much fairer comparison. > I can’t remember how many head to head tests I’ve read in the last >year touting these unfair comparisons. An SUV should be truck based >and compared to other trucks, the car based "SUVs" should be >classified as station wagons and compared to everyday cars. > KEEP ON TRUCKIN!! >>Well guys, we’ve beaten this one to death. I think most of us will >>agree, at least from the previous posts, that the Explorer is greatly >>improved, but still is lacking in key areas: >>1) Chinsy looking interior – & we all know what everyone thinks of >>those pull handles (even though I don’t think they’re a big deal at all, >>and will probably be very handy getting in & out. >>2) Quality Control – We already have 2 recalls on a new vehicle that >>was specifically delayed to not have any. Like most of you said – Don’t >>buy v1.0 of anything! >>Still, its a real nice vehicle, and if its priced significantly lower >>than the MDX (vs EB or limited models,) its definately worth a strong >>consideration. Unfortunatly, I don’t think it is, at least at those trim >>levels. >>MDX offers proven reliability, better warranty, better mileage & ULEV, >>nicer interior & exterior (IMHO,) available GPS (if u really need it???) >>MDx doesn’t offer: >>Pop-Out rear window, Low Gear, Ladder Frame, adjustable pedals w/ memory, >>rollover protection (like Explorer has,) built in trailer hitch, >>reversing sonar tones (at least available on mountaineer?) >>Its a toss-up. What are you new owners paying for a loaded >>Explorer/Mountaineer, and what did you compare it to? The MDX?
Response:
For what most people use an SUV for, the MDX is more than sufficient. Most don’t even take an SUV off pavement, thus comparison is quite appropriate. On the other hand, if you want to tow 5000 lbs then you are right, don’t buy the Acura… The most I have towed with my explorer is 2500lbs and don’t envision towing much more than that… After owning an Explorer for about 40,000 KM, I can confidently say I will never buy one again…They are junk compared to the Acura and Infinity models…..try driving them and you will agree… Rich – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Everyone including the popular car magazines keep comparing station >wagons to trucks. This not a fair comparison. The Explorer is a truck >and rides and handles like one. The station wagons are cars plain and >simple. Sure they ride better and handle better but they are CARS not >a truck. Wow what a revelation. Compare the Explorer to the new GM >Trailblazers and the like but not cars based "SUVs". The MDXs and the >other station wagon SUVs should be compared to Camrys, and other car >platforms they are built on. You think a MDX rides and handles better >than Camry? I doubt it but it is a much fairer comparison. > I can’t remember how many head to head tests I’ve read in the last >year touting these unfair comparisons. An SUV should be truck based >and compared to other trucks, the car based "SUVs" should be >classified as station wagons and compared to everyday cars. > KEEP ON TRUCKIN!! >Well guys, we’ve beaten this one to death. I think most of us will >agree, at least from the previous posts, that the Explorer is greatly >improved, but still is lacking in key areas: >1) Chinsy looking interior – & we all know what everyone thinks of >those pull handles (even though I don’t think they’re a big deal at all, >and will probably be very handy getting in & out. >2) Quality Control – We already have 2 recalls on a new vehicle that >was specifically delayed to not have any. Like most of you said – Don’t >buy v1.0 of anything! >Still, its a real nice vehicle, and if its priced significantly lower >than the MDX (vs EB or limited models,) its definately worth a strong >consideration. Unfortunatly, I don’t think it is, at least at those trim >levels. >MDX offers proven reliability, better warranty, better mileage & ULEV, >nicer interior & exterior (IMHO,) available GPS (if u really need it???) >MDx doesn’t offer: >Pop-Out rear window, Low Gear, Ladder Frame, adjustable pedals w/ memory, >rollover protection (like Explorer has,) built in trailer hitch, >reversing sonar tones (at least available on mountaineer?) >Its a toss-up. What are you new owners paying for a loaded >Explorer/Mountaineer, and what did you compare it to? The MDX?
Response:
A good job by HONDA, because we do need some more 4WD minivans.
beaten this one to death. I think most of us will agree, – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> at least from the previous posts, that the Explorer is greatly improved, but > still is lacking in key areas: > 1) Chinsy looking interior – & we all know what everyone thinks of those > pull handles (even though I don’t think they’re a big deal at all, and will > probably be very handy getting in & out. > 2) Quality Control – We already have 2 recalls on a new vehicle that was > specifically delayed to not have any. Like most of you said – Don’t buy > v1.0 of anything! > Still, its a real nice vehicle, and if its priced significantly lower than > the MDX (vs EB or limited models,) its definately worth a strong > consideration. Unfortunatly, I don’t think it is, at least at those trim > levels. > MDX offers proven reliability, better warranty, better mileage & ULEV, nicer > interior & exterior (IMHO,) available GPS (if u really need it???) > MDx doesn’t offer: > Pop-Out rear window, Low Gear, Ladder Frame, adjustable pedals w/ memory, > rollover protection (like Explorer has,) built in trailer hitch, reversing > sonar tones (at least available on mountaineer?) > Its a toss-up. What are you new owners paying for a loaded > Explorer/Mountaineer, and what did you compare it to? The MDX?
Response:
Bullwinkle hit the nail on the head. My new 2002 Explorer is a heavy duty vehicle, capable of SAFELY towing my 2900 lb. tent trailer, plus loads of camping gear and a few adults. Those car-based SUV’s are not. If I wanted a luxury car ride, I would’ve purchased a Lexus sedan. For those of you knocking the 2002 Explorer, I have a question; how many miles have you driven one? And what, exactly, were you towing? Dave
Response:
Explorer vs Trailblazer vs Bravada vs Envoy vs MDX vs Toyota vs Jeep GC etc. It’s amazing the number of opinions out there in comparing all of the current SUV’s. It’s seems that every model has lots of advantages as well as disadvantages. There are quality issues, annoyances and other quirks across the board. If you read through all of the newsgroups of the different SUV’s you’ll find that people have all had problems with their vehicles. From fit and finish to transmissions to recalls to excessive wind noise to seats that don’t fold flat and on and on. No one of course can agree which vehicle is "perfect", as none really are. A buyer needs to research them all and perhaps eliminate them one by one. Two test drives each at the minimum. Drive them all once and go back and drive them again after a couple weeks. In between read all of the brochures and/or research online. The newsgroups of course have very valuable input and info and a wide array of opinions. For myself, I made a list of all the models, along with columns for advantages and disadvantages. I also noted things like engine power, mileage, tire size, fit/finish, price and so on, and highlighted the "must have" options. I did this for quite a few months. It was amazing that along the way at different times I came "this" close to buying 3 different brands, and finally settled on a 4th. In some cases, it was just one option not on a particular vehicle on the lot at the moment that delayed my buying decision. Yet in other cases I changed my mind after reviewing my notes and some further thinking, and was glad I took my time. What stood out the most when examining the different SUV’s were some of the "annoyances" or design quirks. It continues to astonish me how designers and manufacturers of these modern era "state of the art" vehicles let things like this happen or "slip" by: 1. 2nd row/3rd row seats that do not fold flat (gasp, engineering 101?) 2. Power seat controls that are difficult to locate and/or operate (one reviewer said he needed to exit vehicle to operate them!!) 3. Excessive wind noise (don’t they have "wind tunnels"?) 4. Uncomfortable front seats, limited or minimal head/foot room (Office Depot has more comfortable chairs for $99) 5. Hard to operate/complicated tilt steering lever ("move leg, pull and release lever, move and hold wheel exact, push lever back, move leg back") 6. Options that are not yet available, or available and then stopped/delayed, etc. (mostly Explorer here) 7. Inability to accurately (or even come close) to telling a customer when their special-ordered vehicle will be available 8. Continuing to manufacture vehicles long after a defect is discovered (Ford and the shattering rear windows for example) 9. Blatant and obvious examples of cost-cutting and cheapness (notably Ford, GM) 10. Etc. On the plus side there are a ton of creative and innovative features on the new models, it’s too bad that in some cases one bad design item can "ruin" a vehicle or make it undesireable. Hopefully some of the manufacturers and designers will spend a little more time on their vehicles. It seems that many companies have rushed their ‘02 models to market well ahead of "schedule". If Ford and Chevy had waited until the traditional September period to introduce their new models maybe they would have had a lot more time to make sure that they were "ready". More importantly, they most likely would have avoided a ton of negative publicity and buyer dissatisfaction. jm
| Well guys, we’ve beaten this one to death. I think most of us will agree, | at least from the previous posts, that the Explorer is greatly improved, but | still is lacking in key areas: | | 1) Chinsy looking interior – & we all know what everyone thinks of those | pull handles (even though I don’t think they’re a big deal at all, and will | probably be very handy getting in & out. | | 2) Quality Control – We already have 2 recalls on a new vehicle that was | specifically delayed to not have any. Like most of you said – Don’t buy | v1.0 of anything! | | Still, its a real nice vehicle, and if its priced significantly lower than | the MDX (vs EB or limited models,) its definately worth a strong | consideration. Unfortunatly, I don’t think it is, at least at those trim | levels. | | MDX offers proven reliability, better warranty, better mileage & ULEV, nicer | interior & exterior (IMHO,) available GPS (if u really need it???) | | MDx doesn’t offer: | Pop-Out rear window, Low Gear, Ladder Frame, adjustable pedals w/ memory, | rollover protection (like Explorer has,) built in trailer hitch, reversing | sonar tones (at least available on mountaineer?) | | Its a toss-up. What are you new owners paying for a loaded | Explorer/Mountaineer, and what did you compare it to? The MDX? | |
Response:
The truth is that Ford DID plan to introduce the new vehicle in the traditional fall season…as a 2001 vehicle in the fall of 2000. It wasn’t ready. So your comment about "waiting" for the fall is an invalid argument, although it turned out that there were issues ANYWAY even by delaying from fall 2000 to spring 2001.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Explorer vs Trailblazer vs Bravada vs Envoy vs MDX vs Toyota vs Jeep GC etc. > It’s amazing the number of opinions out there in comparing all of the > current SUV’s. It’s seems that every model has lots of advantages as well as > disadvantages. There are quality issues, annoyances and other quirks across > the board. If you read through all of the newsgroups of the different SUV’s > you’ll find that people have all had problems with their vehicles. From fit > and finish to transmissions to recalls to excessive wind noise to seats that > don’t fold flat and on and on. No one of course can agree which vehicle is > "perfect", as none really are. A buyer needs to research them all and > perhaps eliminate them one by one. Two test drives each at the minimum. > Drive them all once and go back and drive them again after a couple weeks. > In between read all of the brochures and/or research online. The newsgroups > of course have very valuable input and info and a wide array of opinions. > For myself, I made a list of all the models, along with columns for > advantages and disadvantages. I also noted things like engine power, > mileage, tire size, fit/finish, price and so on, and highlighted the "must > have" options. I did this for quite a few months. It was amazing that along > the way at different times I came "this" close to buying 3 different brands, > and finally settled on a 4th. In some cases, it was just one option not on a > particular vehicle on the lot at the moment that delayed my buying decision. > Yet in other cases I changed my mind after reviewing my notes and some > further thinking, and was glad I took my time. > What stood out the most when examining the different SUV’s were some of the > "annoyances" or design quirks. It continues to astonish me how designers and > manufacturers of these modern era "state of the art" vehicles let things > like this happen or "slip" by: > 1. 2nd row/3rd row seats that do not fold flat (gasp, engineering 101?) > 2. Power seat controls that are difficult to locate and/or operate (one > reviewer said he needed to exit vehicle to operate them!!) > 3. Excessive wind noise (don’t they have "wind tunnels"?) > 4. Uncomfortable front seats, limited or minimal head/foot room (Office > Depot has more comfortable chairs for $99) > 5. Hard to operate/complicated tilt steering lever ("move leg, pull and > release lever, move and hold wheel exact, push lever back, move leg back") > 6. Options that are not yet available, or available and then > stopped/delayed, etc. (mostly Explorer here) > 7. Inability to accurately (or even come close) to telling a customer when > their special-ordered vehicle will be available > 8. Continuing to manufacture vehicles long after a defect is discovered > (Ford and the shattering rear windows for example) > 9. Blatant and obvious examples of cost-cutting and cheapness (notably Ford, > GM) > 10. Etc. > On the plus side there are a ton of creative and innovative features on the > new models, it’s too bad that in some cases one bad design item can "ruin" a > vehicle or make it undesireable. Hopefully some of the manufacturers and > designers will spend a little more time on their vehicles. It seems that > many companies have rushed their ‘02 models to market well ahead of > "schedule". If Ford and Chevy had waited until the traditional September > period to introduce their new models maybe they would have had a lot more > time to make sure that they were "ready". More importantly, they most likely > would have avoided a ton of negative publicity and buyer dissatisfaction. > jm > | Well guys, we’ve beaten this one to death. I think most of us will agree, > | at least from the previous posts, that the Explorer is greatly improved, > but > | still is lacking in key areas: > | > | 1) Chinsy looking interior – & we all know what everyone thinks of > those > | pull handles (even though I don’t think they’re a big deal at all, and > will > | probably be very handy getting in & out. > | > | 2) Quality Control – We already have 2 recalls on a new vehicle that > was > | specifically delayed to not have any. Like most of you said – Don’t buy > | v1.0 of anything! > | > | Still, its a real nice vehicle, and if its priced significantly lower than > | the MDX (vs EB or limited models,) its definately worth a strong > | consideration. Unfortunatly, I don’t think it is, at least at those trim > | levels. > | > | MDX offers proven reliability, better warranty, better mileage & ULEV, > nicer > | interior & exterior (IMHO,) available GPS (if u really need it???) > | > | MDx doesn’t offer: > | Pop-Out rear window, Low Gear, Ladder Frame, adjustable pedals w/ memory, > | rollover protection (like Explorer has,) built in trailer hitch, reversing > | sonar tones (at least available on mountaineer?) > | > | Its a toss-up. What are you new owners paying for a loaded > | Explorer/Mountaineer, and what did you compare it to? The MDX? > | > |
Response:
Well guys, we’ve beaten this one to death. I think most of us will agree, at least from the previous posts, that the Explorer is greatly improved, but still is lacking in key areas: 1) Chinsy looking interior – & we all know what everyone thinks of those pull handles (even though I don’t think they’re a big deal at all, and will probably be very handy getting in & out. 2) Quality Control – We already have 2 recalls on a new vehicle that was specifically delayed to not have any. Like most of you said – Don’t buy v1.0 of anything! Still, its a real nice vehicle, and if its priced significantly lower than the MDX (vs EB or limited models,) its definately worth a strong consideration. Unfortunatly, I don’t think it is, at least at those trim levels. MDX offers proven reliability, better warranty, better mileage & ULEV, nicer interior & exterior (IMHO,) available GPS (if u really need it???) MDx doesn’t offer: Pop-Out rear window, Low Gear, Ladder Frame, adjustable pedals w/ memory, rollover protection (like Explorer has,) built in trailer hitch, reversing sonar tones (at least available on mountaineer?) Its a toss-up. What are you new owners paying for a loaded Explorer/Mountaineer, and what did you compare it to? The MDX?
Response:
Everyone including the popular car magazines keep comparing station wagons to trucks. This not a fair comparison. The Explorer is a truck and rides and handles like one. The station wagons are cars plain and simple. Sure they ride better and handle better but they are CARS not a truck. Wow what a revelation. Compare the Explorer to the new GM Trailblazers and the like but not cars based "SUVs". The MDXs and the other station wagon SUVs should be compared to Camrys, and other car platforms they are built on. You think a MDX rides and handles better than Camry? I doubt it but it is a much fairer comparison. I can’t remember how many head to head tests I’ve read in the last year touting these unfair comparisons. An SUV should be truck based and compared to other trucks, the car based "SUVs" should be classified as station wagons and compared to everyday cars. KEEP ON TRUCKIN!! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – >Well guys, we’ve beaten this one to death. I think most of us will agree, >at least from the previous posts, that the Explorer is greatly improved, but >still is lacking in key areas: >1) Chinsy looking interior – & we all know what everyone thinks of those >pull handles (even though I don’t think they’re a big deal at all, and will >probably be very handy getting in & out. >2) Quality Control – We already have 2 recalls on a new vehicle that was >specifically delayed to not have any. Like most of you said – Don’t buy >v1.0 of anything! >Still, its a real nice vehicle, and if its priced significantly lower than >the MDX (vs EB or limited models,) its definately worth a strong >consideration. Unfortunatly, I don’t think it is, at least at those trim >levels. >MDX offers proven reliability, better warranty, better mileage & ULEV, nicer >interior & exterior (IMHO,) available GPS (if u really need it???) >MDx doesn’t offer: >Pop-Out rear window, Low Gear, Ladder Frame, adjustable pedals w/ memory, >rollover protection (like Explorer has,) built in trailer hitch, reversing >sonar tones (at least available on mountaineer?) >Its a toss-up. What are you new owners paying for a loaded >Explorer/Mountaineer, and what did you compare it to? The MDX?
