http://www.thecarconnection.com/car-compare-results/acura_mdx_2016-vs-bmw_x5-series_2015
Compare 2016 Acura MDX vs 2015 BMW X5
http://www.thecarconnection.com/car-compare-results/acura_mdx_2016-vs-bmw_x5-series_2015
|
2016 Acura MDXChange
|
2015 BMW X5Change
|
+ Add a Car |
|---|
|
2016 Acura MDXChange
|
2015 BMW X5Change
|
+ Add a Car | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Style | FWD 4-Door
Switch Style
|
RWD 4-Door sDrive35i
Switch Style
|
|
| Pricing | |||
| Invoice Price | |||
| Manufacturer Suggested Retail Price | |||
| Monthly Payment Estimate | |||
| Dealer Price Quotes | Get Your Price | Get Your Price | |
| The Car Connection's Take | |||
| TCC Rating |
8.6
TCC RATING
|
8.4
TCC RATING
|
|
| TCC's Bottom Line | The 2016 Acura MDX remains one of the best luxury three-row SUVs, but the benefits of its new nine-speed automatic are unclear. | The 2015 BMW X5 is a handsome, capable, tech-filled vehicle for the shopper who wants a luxury SUV. | |
| TCC Likes |
|
|
|
| TCC Dislikes |
|
|
|
| Fuel Economy | |||
| Fuel Economy - City | 19 mpg | 19 mpg | |
| Fuel Economy - Highway | 27 mpg | 27 mpg | |
| Vehicle | |||
| EPA Classification | Small Sport Utility Vehicles 2WD | Standard Sport Utility Vehicles 2WD | |
| Interior Dimensions | |||
| Front Leg Room (in) | 41.5 | 40.4 | |
| Passenger Volume (ft³) | 132.3 | - | |
| Third Head Room (in) | 35.6 | - | |
| Front Hip Room (in) | 59 | - | |
| Third Shoulder Room (in) | 54.7 | - | |
| Second Leg Room (in) | 36.5 | 36.6 | |
| Front Head Room (in) | 38.1 | 40.5 | |
| Passenger Capacity | 7 | 5 | |
| Second Hip Room (in) | 57.8 | - | |
| Front Shoulder Room (in) | 61.1 | 60.5 | |
| Third Leg Room (in) | 27.4 | - | |
| Second Head Room (in) | 38.3 | 38.8 | |
| Third Hip Room (in) | 40.6 | - | |
| Second Shoulder Room (in) | 59.1 | 58.3 | |
| Exterior Dimensions | |||
| Min Ground Clearance (in) | 5.6 | - | |
| Length, Overall (in) | 193.6 | 191.1 | |
| Height, Overall (in) | 67.6 | 68.5 | |
| Track Width, Rear (in) | 66.3 | 65 | |
| Wheelbase (in) | 111 | 115.5 | |
| Width, Max w/o mirrors (in) | 77.2 | 76.1 | |
| Track Width, Front (in) | 66.3 | 64.7 | |
| Cargo Area Dimensions | |||
| Cargo Volume to Seat 2 (ft³) | 38.4 | 22.9 | |
| Cargo Volume to Seat 1 (ft³) | 68.4 | 66 | |
| Cargo Volume to Seat 3 (ft³) | 15 | 22.9 | |
| Brakes | |||
| Rear Brake Rotor Diam x Thickness (in) | 13 | 12.6 | |
| Rear Drum Diam x Width (in) | NA | NA | |
| Disc - Front (Yes or ) | Yes | Yes | |
| Front Brake Rotor Diam x Thickness (in) | 12.6 | 13.7 | |
| Drum - Rear (Yes or ) | NA | NA | |
| Brake ABS System | 4-Wheel | 4-Wheel | |
| Disc - Rear (Yes or ) | Yes | Yes | |
| Fuel Tank | |||
| Fuel Tank Capacity, Approx (gal) | 19.5 | 22.4 | |
| Steering | |||
| Turning Diameter - Curb to Curb (ft) | 38.7 | 41.7 | |
| Steering Type | Rack-Pinion | Rack-Pinion | |
| Tires | |||
| Front Tire Size | P245/60HR18 | P255/55HR18 | |
| Spare Tire Size | NA | NA | |
| Front Tire Order Code | NA | NA | |
| Spare Tire Order Code | NA | NA | |
| Rear Tire Size | P245/60HR18 | P255/55HR18 | |
| Rear Tire Order Code | NA | NA | |
| Trailering | |||
| Dead Weight Hitch - Max Trailer Wt. (lbs) | 3500 | 5952 | |
| Wt Distributing Hitch - Max Trailer Wt. (lbs) | 3500 | 5952 | |
| Maximum Trailering Capacity (lbs) | 3500 | 5952 | |
| Dead Weight Hitch - Max Tongue Wt. (lbs) | 350 | 595 | |
| Wt Distributing Hitch - Max Tongue Wt. (lbs) | 525 | 893 | |
| Weight Information | |||
| Base Curb Weight (lbs) | 3960 | 4680 | |
| Wheels | |||
| Spare Wheel Size (in) | NA | NA | |
| Rear Wheel Material | Aluminum | Aluminum | |
| Rear Wheel Size (in) | 18 X 8 | 18 X 8.5 | |
| Front Wheel Material | Aluminum | Aluminum | |
| Spare Wheel Material | NA | NA | |
| Front Wheel Size (in) | 18 X 8 | 18 X 8.5 | |
| Electrical | |||
| Maximum Alternator Capacity (amps) | 150 | 210 | |
| Engine | |||
| SAE Net Torque @ RPM | 267 @ 4700 | 300 @ 1200 | |
| Engine Order Code | NA | NA | |
| Displacement | 3.5 L/212 | 3.0 L/182 | |
| SAE Net Horsepower @ RPM | 290 @ 6200 | 300 @ 5800 | |
| Engine Type | Premium Unleaded V-6 | Intercooled Turbo Premium Unleaded I-6 | |
| Fuel System | Direct Gasoline Injection | Direct Gasoline Injection | |
| Mileage | |||
| Fuel Economy Est-Combined (MPG) | 22 | 22 | |
| EPA Fuel Economy Est - Hwy (MPG) | 27 | 27 | |
| EPA Fuel Economy Est - City (MPG) | 19 | 19 | |
| Transmission | |||
| Sixth Gear Ratio (:1) | 0.81 | 1.00 | |
| First Gear Ratio (:1) | 4.71 | 4.71 | |
| Eighth Gear Ratio (:1) | 0.58 | 0.67 | |
| Final Drive Axle Ratio (:1) | 4.33 | 3.15 | |
| Third Gear Ratio (:1) | 1.91 | 2.11 | |
| Trans Type | 9 | 8 | |
| Drivetrain | Front Wheel Drive | Rear Wheel Drive | |
| Fifth Gear Ratio (:1) | 1.00 | 1.29 | |
| Trans Description Cont. Again | NA | NA | |
| Seventh Gear Ratio (:1) | 0.70 | 0.84 | |
| Reverse Ratio (:1) | 3.83 | 3.30 | |
| Second Gear Ratio (:1) | 2.84 | 3.14 | |
| Trans Order Code | NA | 205 | |
| Fourth Gear Ratio (:1) | 1.38 | 1.67 | |
| Trans Description Cont. | Automatic w/OD | Automatic w/OD | |
| Summary | |||
| Vehicle Name | Acura MDX | BMW X5 | |
| Body Style | Sport Utility | Sport Utility | |
| Suspension | |||
| Suspension Type - Front (Cont.) | Strut | Double Wishbone | |
| Suspension Type - Rear | Multi-Link | Multi-Link | |
| Suspension Type - Rear (Cont.) | Multi-Link | Multi-Link | |
| Suspension Type - Front | Strut | Double Wishbone | |
| Emissions | |||
| Tons/yr of CO2 Emissions @ 15K mi/year | 8.1 (Est) | 8.0 (Est) | |
| Crash Test Ratings | |||
| Overall Rating |
|
|
|
| Overall Frontal Barrier Crash Rating |
|
|
|
| Frontal Barrier Crash Rating Driver |
|
|
|
| Frontal Barrier Crash Rating Passenger |
|
|
|
| Overall Side Crash Rating |
|
|
|
| Side Barrier Rating |
|
|
|
| Side Barrier Rating Driver |
|
|
|
| Side Barrier Rating Passenger Rear Seat |
|
|
|
| Side Pole Rating Driver Front Seat |
|
|
|
| Combined Side Rating Front Seat |
|
|
|
| Combined Side Rating Rear Seat |
|
|
|
| Rollover Rating |
|
|
|
•
个人感觉吧,就是弯路转弯的延迟感和加速的反应。X5的操控感觉是好一点,但是路面的感觉太硬了。
-History2008-
♀
(0 bytes)
()
11/20/2015 postreply
09:13:07
•
X5和MDX俺都特地比试过。X5操控和MDX不是一个档次。你可能把舒适性和操控性混为一谈了。
-reader007-
♂
(0 bytes)
()
11/20/2015 postreply
17:02:09
•
行家。以前也有个哥们比过,结果他把油门松紧,反向盘力度和悬挂软硬的个人习惯
-日理万机-
♂
(272 bytes)
()
11/20/2015 postreply
17:35:33
•
Too good to be true for a Honda Accord chassis and Honda doesn't
-bridge008-
♂
(0 bytes)
()
11/20/2015 postreply
12:33:16
•
lol
-日理万机-
♂
(0 bytes)
()
11/20/2015 postreply
17:35:57
•
这些人评法拉第很多肯定0分
-soccer88-
♂
(2097 bytes)
()
11/20/2015 postreply
17:42:15
WENXUECITY.COM does not represent or guarantee the truthfCCPA ulness, accuracy, or reliability of any of communications posted by other users.
Copyright ©1998-2025 wenxuecity.com All rights reserved. Privacy Statement & Terms of Use & User Privacy Protection Policy