[paul3230]

Amen! That hurt the Tundra bad....really bad.

 

[GM-Joe]

I don't like MotorTrend, used to but they are very biased towards handling and imports. I figured out with them that the first place of their comparison always goes to the smallest, lightest, and quickest competitor. Thus they seem to be only concerned with performance, such as Road and Track and Car and Driver. If I were to by one of those minivans, because that is what they are, firstly I consider the domestic, because I support national products. Secondly, I would choose the vehicle that fits my needs, such as comfort, ride, or family needs in the case of these. And lastly, I would consider the economics; but I would care less about 0-60 in any of these or even ride stiffness, would rather something soft, bump free to carry my passengers in comfort instead of zipping around town as if I were in a Solstice!

 

[1G6]

I won't allow the auto rags in my house anymore. They have no use for proper cars, so I have no use for them.

It's not a pro-Asia bias that ruins them, it's a bias in favor of cars that aren't comfortable. It's an ass-backwards means of evaluation, IMO.

 

[prototype66]

Re: June '07 Motor Trend: MDX vs. CX-9 vs. Acadia

Back when I was growing up they used to be pro-Detroit. .

NICE.

 

[jbiggs]

so as usual they change the criterea to whatever so that any american company comes in last.... typical motor trend

 

[genjy]

so as usual they change the criterea to whatever so that any american company comes in last.... typical motor trend

No, they are usually pretty consistent.

Cars with a good balance of everything but with a slight lean towards the sporty side usually win.


For example, in the DEC 2005 issue of Motor Trend there is a comparo of four family sedans:

The ranking is:

#1 Honda Accord
#2 Ford Fusion
#3 Sonata
#4 Camry

They are all pretty balanced cars, but the sportier cars came out on top.

 

[goblue]

No, they are usually pretty consistent.

Cars with a good balance of everything but with a slight lean towards the sporty side usually win.


For example, in the DEC 2005 issue of Motor Trend there is a comparo of four family sedans:

The ranking is:

#1 Honda Accord
#2 Ford Fusion
#3 Sonata
#4 Camry

They are all pretty balanced cars, but the sportier cars came out on top.

Yep - they aren't biased towards a manufacturer - per se, they are biased towards a certain type of car. For Car and Driver for instance, it tends to align with Honda's design philosophy.

The Acadia isn't a sports car, or a sporty SUV, its a large alternative to a minivan that offers equal fuel econ, better handling, and no sliding doors. Sounds like what most people want in this class.

Unfortunately, its not what MotorTrend's reviewers want. Thats fine, enthusiasts rarely want what the public at large values. But lets see - the MDX is in another price bracket, and the CX9 is smaller, so if you wanted a 35-40K vehicle that offered minivan utility without the sliding doors - and put a premium on space over handling, the Acadia is the winner.

The issue with this review is the segments don't have enough offerings yet, so we get a 3 vehicle review of crossovers, one of which won't be cross shopped for most buyers.

Here's the problem however, the reviewers that are supposedly focused on the average buyer carry a bias (Consumer Reports is the biggest offender) and that hurts.

 

[fan]

So in a people haulers comparison, in the first place comes the most fun to drive not the roomiest of them. And since other reviewers praised the handling of the Lambdas, looks like MDX is just 'a little' more fun to drive.
So, when one is more fun to drive and the other is roomier, by the same margin in both cases, you pick the more fun to drive no matter that you compare minivans or sports cars. This doesn't seem adequate.

 

[RWD60]

there's bias, and then there's just different priorities. MT and C&D both prioritize fun driving. which is great for coupes, ok for sedans, but i will admit kinda off for 7-seat crossovers. but given that priority, having a GMC (or any normal GM car besides a Caddy) lose to an Acura and a Mazda (both known for being fun to drive brands) makes sense.

 

[Strapping.Young.Lad]

Re: June '07 Motor Trend: MDX vs. CX-9 vs. Acadia

I always thought MT had the best and fairest comparisons. They were always nicely balanced out and were great to read. However, unless the MDX was priced right on with the Acadia and the CX-9, I believe it's in a whole different league. The MDX is a premium 5-seater SUV, while the Acadia and the CX-9 is a 7-seater CUV. The MDX would have quite a bit of advantage over the others like SH-AWD and the other nifty luxury amenities. The Veracruz should have been the third car for comparison.

Edit- Just noticed it was the CX-9 which came first and the MDX is equipped with 7 seats. Anyways, that still doesn't defeat the purpose of my view. The MDX is in a whole different league.

I agree. Acura is a Luxury Brand.

 

[ghughes]

i have driven a lot of cars and have an easier time distinguishing between a great wine and a good wine, than a fun-to-drive minivan vs not- I re-he-allly think the whole msrment is BS. Since when is Acura, with their tinny, tiny engines and fwd so "fun-to-drive"? Its all in the journalists? heads.

 

[b4z]

I think that if the SRX was inclded in the test the results would have been quite different.
And I also believe that the SRX would have come out ahead of the Acadia, which GM doesn't want since it is coming to the end of it's life, and GM has just invested tons of money in the Acadia.

 

[EllwynX]

Re: June '07 Motor Trend: MDX vs. CX-9 vs. Acadia

The Acadia has the best ride and the most room, but came in last because it doesn't handle sort of like a sports car? Complete BS!

I agree. Stating it's the roomiest and had the smoothest ride, yet putting it in 3rd place because it's handling isn't 'sporty' enough is ridiculous.

Handling isn't high on the priority list for people buying these things. Roominess and smooth ride are. By their own descriptions, Acadia should have been #1.

 

[bone]

I think this review is fair. The Acadia is too heavy,therefore,the handling is compromized. If it weighed 500 lbs less, I'm sure it would have won the comparison.

 

[smk4565]

I sat in all 3 of these last night. The MDX is ugly, and I don't think it is that great, the SRX I like better. The Acadia wasn't impressive at all and it was $43,000, total ripoff. The Outlook is nicer actually, I forgot to check the price though. The Mazda CX-9 was shockingly good, the interior reminds me of a Volvo in ways, but much better. I usually dislike Japanese car interiors, but I liked the CX-9, it was surprisingly nice. Plus the CX-9 and the MDX are a more manageable size and likely easier to drive, the Acadia is really large.

 

[smk4565]

The Lambda family is too big, they should have made them more CX-9 or MDX sized. You could still get a kiddy 3rd row seat in, and they could shed 500 pounds, make in handle better, accelerate faster, use less gas, and replace the Trailblazer and Envoy which are terribly dated. The interior of the Acadia reminds me a lot of the Yukon, it is the same big box with 4 captains chairs and a bench in back. To me, the Yukon, Suburban, Escalade, Tahoe, Enclave, Outlook and Acadia are all in the same segment. Then in the mid SUV segment they have a near 7 year old trailblazer, and that dated Equinox below that.

 

[Cabana Boy]

This is just silly. All a comparo tells me is that those who evaluated them, did so based on the weighted value of THEIR criteria. The Acadia is a fine vehicle, and slightly larger than the other 2. Just because those who evaluated them all with the obvious priority of sportiness, and give a slight nod to the first two - does not mean the Acadia is a loser. Some prefer larger, smoother driving dynamics over firmer, twitchy dynamics. Let the public decide. They appear to all be fine vehicles. The rest is fluff to keep the journalists busy.

 

[superstreet]

well well its motor trend

 

[desmo9]

Motor Trend rather suddenly ditched its objectivity about two years ago, and I haven't picked up a copy since. M&T used to be the antithesis of Car & Driver's bias.

The BEST example, and last straw for me, was in early 2006, during new-model rollout. They drove a VW GTI with the 2.0T FSI, redline at 6K ... and said it's one of the best 4-bangers ever. Then they drove a Civic SI and were wowed by the 9K or so redline. Barely able to contain their enthusiasm, they said something like ... "try 9K in your Cobalt or Focus and you'll be picking up pieces" ... and this right after admitting that the VW/Audi mill, despite the 6K rev limit, was the superior powertrain.

Only Cobalt and Focus were used sacrificially ... there was no mention of Sentra, Corolla, etc. and their similar-to-domestics rev-limits. Like I said, that was the last straw for me. Never picked it up again. It's complete trash.

 

[GMsElite]

smk4565, the Lambdas aren't too big. Everyone loves the useable 3rd row seating. There are other things GM could to the Lambdas and bring weight down besides shrinking them.