Acura MDX Review

William C Montgomery
by William C Montgomery
acura mdx review

Brace yourself gentle readers. The sophomore model Acura MDX is neither appreciably larger nor significantly heavier than the outgoing 2006 model. Yes, it’s true. In this era of automotive bloat, when the vast majority of major manufacturers cater to fashion and safety requirements with steadily-increasing automotive obesity, Acura’s engineers have attained the near impossible: improvement without additional mass. So is it a small step sideways for Acura, or a giant leap forwards for the MDX?

The rivet counters amongst you will maintain that the redesigned MDX is 2” longer and .5” wider than the outgoing model. True; but it’s also nearly 3” shorter (without sacrificing ground clearance) and only 46 pounds portlier (a 1% increase). My unscientific conclusion on this weighty matter: the MDX’ mass has been reapportioned but not materially increased. Anyway, standing pat makes perfect sense.

Unlike other midsized SUV’s, the MDX never pretended to be anything other than a tall street rod. In 2007 garb, Acura’s puddle plugger takes another stylistic step away from its [theoretical] off-road roots. The designers ditched the wheel wells’ Jeepish trapezoids for something more rounded and refined. Following this fall’s trend in CUV couture, Acura blackened the C-pillars and widened the D-pillars at the top, creating an aerodynamic downward sweeping arc of sidelights.

The MDX’ new streetwise face closes the outgoing model’s gaping open-mouth bumper, and pushes the fog lights lower and wider. Two dimpled metal chevrons frame the Acura logo. Up close, they appear surprisingly like ornamental cheese graters. From a distance, they make the MDX front end look like the head of a giant Remington MicroScreen electric shaver – ready to trim unsightly hair from America’s highways.

In typical Acura fashion, the MDX’ dashboard is infested with gizmology; from a 10-speaker Dolby music system that plays every post-tape audio source extant, to a sat nav system that tells you how to avoid traffic to get to your Bluetoothed reservation at a Zagat-approved restaurant. Unfortunately, swoopy swaths of pseudo wood flank the center dash’s geewhizzery. At least, I think it’s simulated wood grain; the dark, grayish, black-banded pattern that looks like the floor of a garage after brake cleaner has been sprayed on dirty disks.

The MDX’ eight-way power adjustable heated memory front seats and reclining rear chairs are elegant, comfortable and at least as supportive as an AA meeting. The Acura’s middle row is equally accommodating, offering plenty of knee room for two. The MDX’ two-plus-two arrangement relegates spare brats and unlucky (reviled?) adults to the way back. Accessing this kiddie-only cavern requires all the flexibility of youth, and most of the contortion skills of a Cirque de Soleil performer. Any buyer depending on the MDX’ third row note: when your third child hits eight, it’s time to move on.

Pistonheads will no doubt be tantalized by the MDX’ 3.7-liter V6’ three hundred horses (enough equines to feed a French village for six months). Needless to say, Honda (for it is they) have fettled the Hell out the MDX’ mill, tweaking it with VTEC, a dual stage intake manifold and high flow exhaust system, magnesium cylinder head covers, drive-by-wire throttle, etc. The result is a smooth spinning powerplant whose peak power and 275 ft-lbs. of torque arrive at 6000 and 5000 rpm respectively.

But the normally aspirated engine’s impressive output and refinement are hamstrung by the SUV’s bulk. Despite the aforementioned weight control measures, the MDX tips the scales at more than 2.5 tons. Both performance and efficiency suffer. The SUV fails to plant you in your seat when you put the hammer down; zizzing from rest to 60mph in 7.5 seconds. The EPA’s ever-optimistic prognosticators foretell 17/22mpg.

The MDX’ handling almost makes up for its pusillanimous ponderousness. To that end, Acura honed the new MDX’ handling on the Nürburgring. It was worth the trip. The MDX offers both exceptional poise on surfaced roads and velvety smoothness over life’s bumpy imperfections. When push comes to shove, the MDX’ really rather Super Handling All-Wheel Drive pushes the weighty beast through corners by rotating the outside rear wheel faster than the other three. An optional Sport Package enhances control with stiffer front and rear sway bars and an Active Damper System that battens down or softens the ride according to driving conditions.

Bottom line: the MDX takes corners astoundingly well for a hulking SUV. Leaving us with a relatively slow, relatively graceful luxury car on stilts. While Acura is to be commended for adding more of everything to the MDX– luxury, performance, handling and safety– without bulking-up, someone needs to remind me again why extra ride height and SUV style is worth sacrificing a good 25% in average fuel economy over say, an Acura TL. Oh right, the third row. Perhaps Acura isn’t the only one who should try not to add weight to its existing family, or accept the Odyssey ahead.

Join the conversation
2 of 99 comments
  • Cayman Cayman on Apr 26, 2007

    So many comments, so few about the MDX. Personally, i think Acura missed the opportunity to provide a class-leading car. Like most Honda products, it can claim 2nd place in all categories. That's perfect for some folks, but I'd rather have the vehicle that excels in my preferred measures, and to heck with the non-essential bits. So, wagon it is (Passat, in our case). The MDX and the rest of the cross-ute/whatever you want to call it this year class just don't have the room, performance, or fuel economy to justify their existance. I'll do very well without the tall seating position, thanks.

  • Bucky370 Bucky370 on Dec 10, 2007

    As we were looking for a new vehicle, we were looking at both minivans and suv's. This was going to be temp vehicle for my wife with our first child, so we chose to get the suv now, and in about a year get the minivan. Than I get the new SUV. Until than, it's hers. Needless we drove about 20 different suv's. BMW x5, Lexus 400, Mazda CX-9, Toyota Highlander, Honda Pilot etc etc etc. Lexus was too goudy and seemed very small, BMW although really awesome, I don't trust the electronics with BMW (as we've had nothing but problems with our car) Mazda was nice, but a bit cheap and was only about 5k less. Pilot was our first thought, nice, but the redesign in 2008 bothers me. I was not seriously considering the MDX as the price was a concern. But after looking and seeing what these other suv's are going for, we were going to spend mid to upper 30's no matter what. It came down to the Highlander at 37 to 39k or the MDX around 40. The MDX was just too smooth!!! When comparing to other SUV's, the MDX price was probably in the higher range, but in my opinion you can't beat the quality. Looks wise, their all going this direction, and I am one of them that love the looks. I prefer the 2005ish look more, but still very happy with this one. First this vehicle is a very smooth comfortable ride. We have never owned a bigger vehicle and I understand now why people love the view. I can see so much more of the road. I understand that this isn't for everyone, but this was what we chose. Gas mileage is not the best, but again, it's what we chose. The gas mileage is very comparable to other's in the same category. For those comparing to a station wagon or cars, your comparing apples and oranges. If you go to the store for milk and come home with OJ, the wife may not be happy as you can't cook a cake with OJ. So Please don't make that comparison. We've now owned for about 1 month, and we love it. We believe we made the right choice.

  • ToolGuy Here is an interesting graphic, if you're into that sort of thing.
  • ToolGuy Nice website you got there (even the glitches have glitches)
  • Namesakeone Actually, per the IIHS ratings, "Acceptable" is second best, not second worst. The ratings are "Good," "Acceptable," "Marginal" and "Poor."
  • Inside Looking Out "And safety was enhanced generally via new reversing lamps and turn signals fitted as standard equipment."Did not get it, turn signals were optional in 1954?
  • Lorenzo As long as Grenadier is just a name, and it doesn't actually grenade like Chrysler UltraDrive transmissions. Still, how big is the market for grossly overpriced vehicles? A name like INEOS doesn't have the snobbobile cachet yet. The bulk of the auto market is people who need a reliable, economical car to get to work, and they're not going to pay these prices.