Comfortable and dependable commuter, weekend excursions on snow/mud/gravel

What your looking for probably doesn't really exist, unfortunately. The Touareg used to look better, but I don't think older ones are very reliable (typical for VW). The Audi Q7 would be nice (and I think it looks the best out of all of these), but reliability probably isn't its strong suit. I can't really think of anything that has AWD, reliability, and off-roadability.

What are your thoughts on these cars?



Ford Explorer

Acura MDX

Dodge Durango

Lexus RX or GX


I just want to get a feeling of your feelings. :P

The X3 is probably the largest in the compact bunch.

I liked the GLK a lot better with the diesel than with the gas engine. You'll find a review linked in the "more about." The diesel engine suits its character very well. Definitely not as sporty as the BMW, though.

The Q5's diesel is smoother and stronger, since it's a six, but it's also considerably more expensive.

The 2013 ML was offered in the U.S. with a full offroading package. No doubt very, very few were imported with one, though. And this package wasn't offered here with the diesel.

I didn't suggest the 2014 MDX earlier because of the third-row seat, and because it seems a bit glitchy at the moment. Handles better than previous years and its competitors, though.

I'm surprised no one's mentioned the Evoque yet. Yes, it's on the small side, but I think it wins the Most Visually Striking SUV award hands-down. Furthermore, as a Land Rover it should obviously be fully capable of light off-roading even in its most basic form. I don't think you can find a new one for under $40K, but I would think a lightly used one would be obtainable in that range. Also, while Land Rovers aren't known for their reliability (and with good reason), any Evoque would still be under the original factory warranty. That said, may be too compact for your tastes.

I'm also surprised no one's mentioned the Grand Cherokee. No, it doesn't have the reliability of a Japanese vehicle, but the current generation is the smaller sister of the already-mentioned Dodge Durango (which btw is a seven-seater and bordering on full-size). Both share a chassis at least partially derived from a Benz GL, from way back when DaimlerChrysler still existed, and in terms of interior and exterior quality, both are light years better than their predecessors (and IMO easily the best of any American SUVs). You should be able to find a loaded-to-the-hilt Overland model, which has by far the nicest interior design of the bunch, for under $40K if you look at 2012-2013 models.

Finally, there's the FJ Cruiser, the cult car that Toyota has consistently sold in reasonably large numbers for six or seven years now -- with literally ZERO advertising or substantive changes to the vehicle. It's a Toyota, so obviously it meets any reliability standard; it's certainly striking in looks, albeit not in the same way as an Evoque or X5; and of all the models listed thus far, it will unquestionably retain the highest resale value. On the down side, it's a two-door (the only one on the market IIRC, except for the two-door Evoque variant) and somewhat compact on the inside, though I believe it has more interior space as a whole than, say, an X3 (and definitely more than an Evoque).

But the MDX's seats fold flat, so wouldn't that be ok?

It seems to be a really nice car.

The 2014 Grand Cherokee got a new eight-speed automatic for 2014. Earlier years don't perform as well. The 2014 has been having many issues due to the new infotainment system (that is electrically connected to just about everything not powertrain). They'll eventually sort this out--but don't seem to have yet. We link to an active Jeep forum that's likely bursting at the seams with the details.

The other reason I didn't suggest the Jeep earlier is that it feels large and heavy--but then so does the X5. And $40,000 doesn't buy a lot of a new 2014.

Sounds like it's time to go drive a few. I'm looking forward to reading what you like and dislike about each.

Additional comments:

1. Just FYI, the MDX's third row folds flat (as does its second row, giving you 90 cubic feet of storage total). No one's mentioned it yet, but the RDX is comparable size-wise to an X3, but at significantly lower cost; you could buy a fully loaded 2014 model for under your $40K budget. It's pretty sporty as far as SUVs go; my mom has one (don't let that dissuade you - she always buys sporty cars), albeit oneof the last-gen models which had a turbocharged four instead of the current six-cylinder, and it handles and accelerates remarkably well.
2. Regarding reliability: have you looked at this site's rankings? The X3 is pretty consistently mediocre in terms of reliability. Unfortunately Michael doesn't have any Q5 ratings up, for some odd reason (considering it's Audi's best-selling model), but the Q7 appears to have the singleworstreliability history of any SUV, which doesn't bode well for the Q5. Benz SUVs also have generally middling-to-poor reliability ratings, with the exception of the 2013 M-class (which may be an aberration - and btw Michael it should be listed as ML-class, not M-class). Meanwhile, the Evoque has one of the best SUV rankings of all, with the caveat of it having a small sample size (although its predecessor, the LR2/Freelander, also appears to be an exception to the general rule about Land Rover reliability).

Not sure how you missed them, but we have reliability ratings for every year of the Q5:

http://www.truedelta.com/Audi-Q5/reliability-874

Consistently in the yellow! This isn't necessarily bad, depending on one's tolerance for one repair every couple of years.

The 2014 RDX is also yellow because of a common problem with drivetrain vibrations. Replacing the driveshaft seems to fix this.

I wouldn't put too much weight on that Evoque stat, very small sample size.

Two last comments:

1. I know for a fact that the Japanese luxury-car dealers *heavily* put the screws to customers to ensure they get across-the-board five-star ratings. Since they know their chief perceived "value-add" against German competition is reliability, the automakers pay them sizable bonuses for being, say, the regional dealer with the highest customer satisfaction rating. Though I don't know if this is universal, I do know both Infiniti and Acura do it. (Lexus doesn't need to, since its cars are already the most reliable by a long shot.)
2. Infiniti's trajectory as a brand lately has been going nowhere but down. For reasons that elude most rational observers, they renamed every car in their line-up as the Q something (the FX is now called the QX70 btw). Also, its best-selling model, the G37, was redesigned and christened as the Q50, and I don't think I've read a single positive review about it yet. The FX/QX70 is quite dated, as far as car platforms goes, and has barely changed since its 2009-model-year intro. While you may not care about "brand cachet," I assume you care about resale value; I suspect the above reasons will result in the FX/QX70 having significantly lower values in the future. (On the upside, Infiniti dealers areverywilling to negotiate every aspect of price. I have a friend who managed to lease a G37 a couple of years ago for far less than even what Infiniti was offering then as a country-wide deal.)

Car reliability surveys and dealer sales and service satisfaction surveys are two totally different things. Dealers rely on the big bonuses paid for high scores on the latter. They get nothing for high scores on the former. So the latter--conducted by the manufacturer--and the ones they press car owners for perfect ratings on.

We conducted a special survey on this a few years ago (still needs to be properly formatted since the last site redesign):

http://www.truedelta.com/pieces/survey_survey.php

Sorry, didn't initially see the post that post was responding to.

What site did you read the dealer reviews on? The largest one lets dealers who pay a sizable monthly fee screen reviews before they are posted. The dealers are then able to contact the person posting the review to "make it right."

"Why they rebadged every car in their brand to one of their least popular models I have no idea, but my perspective is that Infiniti is where Audi was several years ago, and they are at that stage where they're trying to establish their image as Audi did."

I'm guessing it has at least something to do with the fact that the Q was Infiniti's original flagship, designed to go head-to-head with the Lexus LS. The curious part is that they entirely discontinued it at *least* a decade ago. Also, Nissan in generation seems to be on some long, strange trip into mediocrity, with nary a single model (Nissan or Infiniti) that comes even close to leading its segment in terms of critical opinion. OTOH that hasn't stopped them from selling an absurd number of Altimas, but they're a long way from the days in the '90s when the Maxima was *the* sports sedan to buy (if you couldn't afford a BMW, that is) and the 300ZX Twin Turbo stirred the hearts of many a lad, myself included.

"It's all a gamble - get a European car, hope it doesn't break after warranty's up and take advantage of the resale value? Or if something breaks, you lose the resale value advantage? Or get a more reliable car, save on repair costs, but if Infiniti doesn't gain foothold like Audi did, lose resale value?"

I go with option #4: skip the gamble altogether and buy a new German car (or even a CPO one) with the six-year, 100K-mile extended warranty, and then sell it a little after the four-year mark (with enough time left on the warranty to keep your resale value intact).