'10 MB GLK350 vs '09 Acura RDX

[PhoKingGuy]

VW Tiguan anyone? Think GTI SUV, quite nice actually

 

[Descartes]

I bought the '10 GLK and I think it's gorgeous. Here is a picture a few days after we got it.

The style isn't for everyone, but you don't buy a car to please others. I think the X5 and the Range Rover Sport are the next most gorgeous SUVs in my view, but it's quite a bit larger both in appearance and how it handles.

I test drove the RDX extensively. Not knocking your potential choice of vehicle, but it rode like a cheap sedan in comparison to the GLK. Test drive both if you don't believe me. This isn't snobbery about the Mercedes vs. Acura; I like Honda products, and I've owned two (one Acura, one Honda).

For the price, the RDX is a great vehicle and it handles overall very well. If ride quality is secondary to you, then you'll be a happy camper for sure. The turbo, as you said, is quite nice but overall unnecessary in my opinion.

I'd be happy to answer any other questions if you have any. I was searching for a while before I test drove the GLK, and once I did the choice was obvious.

Good luck!

 

[thomsbrain]

She will prefer the GLK, I can practically guarantee it. The RDX has a very firm ride due to its sporty intent, and it doesn't have that all-important badge. I'd get the RDX for myself, but I wouldn't have any doubts about which one would make a girl happier.

 

[sdifox]

Originally posted by: Descartes
I bought the '10 GLK and I think it's gorgeous. Here is a picture a few days after we got it.

The style isn't for everyone, but you don't buy a car to please others. I think the X5 and the Range Rover Sport are the next most gorgeous SUVs in my view, but it's quite a bit larger both in appearance and how it handles.

I test drove the RDX extensively. Not knocking your potential choice of vehicle, but it rode like a cheap sedan in comparison to the GLK. Test drive both if you don't believe me. This isn't snobbery about the Mercedes vs. Acura; I like Honda products, and I've owned two (one Acura, one Honda).

For the price, the RDX is a great vehicle and it handles overall very well. If ride quality is secondary to you, then you'll be a happy camper for sure. The turbo, as you said, is quite nice but overall unnecessary in my opinion.

I'd be happy to answer any other questions if you have any. I was searching for a while before I test drove the GLK, and once I did the choice was obvious.

Good luck!

err, those tires are really thin... not a good idea for something that is supposed to absorb bumps.

 

[Descartes]

Originally posted by: sdifox

Originally posted by: Descartes
I bought the '10 GLK and I think it's gorgeous. Here is a picture a few days after we got it.

The style isn't for everyone, but you don't buy a car to please others. I think the X5 and the Range Rover Sport are the next most gorgeous SUVs in my view, but it's quite a bit larger both in appearance and how it handles.

I test drove the RDX extensively. Not knocking your potential choice of vehicle, but it rode like a cheap sedan in comparison to the GLK. Test drive both if you don't believe me. This isn't snobbery about the Mercedes vs. Acura; I like Honda products, and I've owned two (one Acura, one Honda).

For the price, the RDX is a great vehicle and it handles overall very well. If ride quality is secondary to you, then you'll be a happy camper for sure. The turbo, as you said, is quite nice but overall unnecessary in my opinion.

I'd be happy to answer any other questions if you have any. I was searching for a while before I test drove the GLK, and once I did the choice was obvious.

Good luck!

err, those tires are really thin... not a good idea for something that is supposed to absorb bumps.

Supposed to absorb bumps? All of my vehicles have 18" wheels or larger, and in no case have I ever dented a wheel or otherwise damaged my vehicle. This includes in places with roads that look like the surface of the moon, like Cleveland, areas of Chicago, etc.

The 20" wheels on the GLK (you have to order the wheels) still rides as smooth as an RDX or similar with much smaller wheels (I think they're 16-17"; I forget).

So, I see no compelling issue.

 

[sdifox]

Originally posted by: Descartes

Originally posted by: sdifox

Originally posted by: Descartes
I bought the '10 GLK and I think it's gorgeous. Here is a picture a few days after we got it.

The style isn't for everyone, but you don't buy a car to please others. I think the X5 and the Range Rover Sport are the next most gorgeous SUVs in my view, but it's quite a bit larger both in appearance and how it handles.

I test drove the RDX extensively. Not knocking your potential choice of vehicle, but it rode like a cheap sedan in comparison to the GLK. Test drive both if you don't believe me. This isn't snobbery about the Mercedes vs. Acura; I like Honda products, and I've owned two (one Acura, one Honda).

For the price, the RDX is a great vehicle and it handles overall very well. If ride quality is secondary to you, then you'll be a happy camper for sure. The turbo, as you said, is quite nice but overall unnecessary in my opinion.

I'd be happy to answer any other questions if you have any. I was searching for a while before I test drove the GLK, and once I did the choice was obvious.

Good luck!

err, those tires are really thin... not a good idea for something that is supposed to absorb bumps.

Supposed to absorb bumps? All of my vehicles have 18" wheels or larger, and in no case have I ever dented a wheel or otherwise damaged my vehicle. This includes in places with roads that look like the surface of the moon, like Cleveland, areas of Chicago, etc.

The 20" wheels on the GLK (you have to order the wheels) still rides as smooth as an RDX or similar with much smaller wheels (I think they're 16-17"; I forget).

So, I see no compelling issue.

Humm, really soft suspension then? I drive in the pothole capital known as Toronto. People sue the city for cracked windshield all the time. Not that they win or anything.

One particular memorable one was on a city street 1 foot in from the crossing on the inside lane. You turn into that street, you have no choice but to run over it (or hit another car). sucker killed my tire and dented my rim. And I am talking 195/50/16.

 

[Descartes]

Originally posted by: sdifox

Originally posted by: Descartes

Originally posted by: sdifox

Originally posted by: Descartes
I bought the '10 GLK and I think it's gorgeous. Here is a picture a few days after we got it.

The style isn't for everyone, but you don't buy a car to please others. I think the X5 and the Range Rover Sport are the next most gorgeous SUVs in my view, but it's quite a bit larger both in appearance and how it handles.

I test drove the RDX extensively. Not knocking your potential choice of vehicle, but it rode like a cheap sedan in comparison to the GLK. Test drive both if you don't believe me. This isn't snobbery about the Mercedes vs. Acura; I like Honda products, and I've owned two (one Acura, one Honda).

For the price, the RDX is a great vehicle and it handles overall very well. If ride quality is secondary to you, then you'll be a happy camper for sure. The turbo, as you said, is quite nice but overall unnecessary in my opinion.

I'd be happy to answer any other questions if you have any. I was searching for a while before I test drove the GLK, and once I did the choice was obvious.

Good luck!

err, those tires are really thin... not a good idea for something that is supposed to absorb bumps.

Supposed to absorb bumps? All of my vehicles have 18" wheels or larger, and in no case have I ever dented a wheel or otherwise damaged my vehicle. This includes in places with roads that look like the surface of the moon, like Cleveland, areas of Chicago, etc.

The 20" wheels on the GLK (you have to order the wheels) still rides as smooth as an RDX or similar with much smaller wheels (I think they're 16-17"; I forget).

So, I see no compelling issue.

Humm, really soft suspension then? I drive in the pothole capital known as Toronto. People sue the city for cracked windshield all the time. Not that they win or anything.

Not soft at all. Not being completely educated in the topic of suspensions, I can't exactly say why one is better than the other or why one handles such conditions better. All I know is that the GLK handles such conditions well but without the jarring you might expect, and also without the boat feeling that you will get from a Lexus.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
i'd go with the acura on looks alone. i think the GLK is ugly 😛

oddly enough, i feel 100% the opposite. i've never seen uglier vehicles than what acura has been projectile vomiting onto the market lately.

 

[sdifox]

Originally posted by: Descartes

Not soft at all. Not being completely educated in the topic of suspensions, I can't exactly say why one is better than the other or why one handles such conditions better. All I know is that the GLK handles such conditions well but without the jarring you might expect, and also without the boat feeling that you will get from a Lexus.

Probably well designed springs with soft x" travel and then gets really hard to protect car. I just worry when I see really low profile wheels.

 

[rh71]

Originally posted by: sdifox

Originally posted by: Descartes

Not soft at all. Not being completely educated in the topic of suspensions, I can't exactly say why one is better than the other or why one handles such conditions better. All I know is that the GLK handles such conditions well but without the jarring you might expect, and also without the boat feeling that you will get from a Lexus.

Probably well designed springs with soft x" travel and then gets really hard to protect car. I just worry when I see really low profile wheels.

Runflats can help prevent rim damage too. Then again most ppl hate them as they make the ride really stiff. I changed out and have 20s... not really a threat to bend a rim unless you hit a hole square. Watch where you're actually going or drive really slow. 😉 I wouldn't want to drive normally over pothole-ridden areas even with a regular tire.

 

[sdifox]

Originally posted by: rh71

Originally posted by: sdifox

Originally posted by: Descartes

Not soft at all. Not being completely educated in the topic of suspensions, I can't exactly say why one is better than the other or why one handles such conditions better. All I know is that the GLK handles such conditions well but without the jarring you might expect, and also without the boat feeling that you will get from a Lexus.

Probably well designed springs with soft x" travel and then gets really hard to protect car. I just worry when I see really low profile wheels.

Runflats can help prevent rim damage too. Then again most ppl hate them as they make the ride really stiff. I changed out and have 20s... not really a threat to bend a rim unless you hit a hole square. Watch where you're actually going or drive really slow. 😉 I wouldn't want to drive normally over pothole-ridden areas even with a regular tire.

I lost 3 tires to road hazard over the course of 173,000 km. Sad part is it is always the newest tire that takes the nail/screw/"pothole"...

When you are going 120kmph and highway is packed, you don't really have the luxury of getting out of the pothole's way.

 

[nomrah]

We both actually prefer the sportier suspension. We don't want to feel like we're driving our sofa.

 

[nomrah]

Well, I think we've decided to go with the RDX. Looking to buy used, been working with the local dealer to find one we want. Finally got a call last night about a certified pre-owned 2009 RDX w/ Tech Pkg, Black (really wanted the Dark Gray), Ebony leather, ~9200k miles, $30500, served as a dealership loaner. Going to check it out this weekend. What do you guys think? Any room for negotiation on the price?

Will update first post.

 

[Descartes]

Originally posted by: nomrah
We both actually prefer the sportier suspension. We don't want to feel like we're driving our sofa.

I'm guessing you didn't test drive both if you think the GLK is like driving a sofa.

 

[Descartes]

Originally posted by: nomrah
Well, I think we've decided to go with the RDX. Looking to buy used, been working with the local dealer to find one we want. Finally got a call last night about a certified pre-owned 2009 RDX w/ Tech Pkg, Black (really wanted the Dark Gray), Ebony leather, ~9200k miles, $30500, served as a dealership loaner. Going to check it out this weekend. What do you guys think? Any room for negotiation on the price?

Will update first post.

When I was looking, they were offering huge incentives. Are you getting a good financing deal, assuming you're financing? They usually offer one or the other, but that sounds like a respectable price.

Enjoy the car...

 

[PhoKingGuy]

Don't buy a service loaner, its the same as buying a rental car, just don't

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: PhoKingGuy
Don't buy a service loaner, its the same as buying a rental car, just don't

This needs to be repeated.

 

[PhoKingGuy]

Additionally I guarantee you that 50% of the people who had that as a service loaner did not put 91 gas in it. A very good friend of mine puts the cheapest 87 gas he can find into his BMW service loaner before returning it, and I know many more people who do the same.

You can find much better if you just look around a bit more. Try carmax.

 

[nomrah]

Originally posted by: Descartes

Originally posted by: nomrah
We both actually prefer the sportier suspension. We don't want to feel like we're driving our sofa.

I'm guessing you didn't test drive both if you think the GLK is like driving a sofa.

Was referring to Lexuses

 

[nomrah]

Test drove it tonight. Actually they're letting us keep it til Saturday so we can spend some more time with it. They wouldn't budge on the price tonight. They were able to give me a 5.9% finance rate. Comes with 7 yr / 100k mile warranty.

Any feedback about the car itself? The fact that it's a loaner does not bother us.

 

[nomrah]

Originally posted by: PhoKingGuy
Don't buy a service loaner, its the same as buying a rental car, just don't

I understand where you're coming from, but on the flip side I've know many people who have bought loaners/rentals with no issues.

 

[theeedude]

No reason to be paying 30 grand for a (ab)used RDX in this market with such awesome deals on new cars.
I am seeing Infiniti EX35 Journey go for ~30K new on Carsdirect.com (which buys from dealers, so dealer should be able to beat their price)
RDX goes for $30,600 new. Why on earth would you get a used one?

 

[Dman877]

If they won't budge on price, walk away. Like others have said, there's no reasons to deal with that crap in this kind of economy.

 

[evident]

Originally posted by: PhoKingGuy
Additionally I guarantee you that 95% of the people who had that as a service loaner did not put 91 gas in it. A very good friend of mine puts the cheapest 87 gas he can find into his BMW service loaner before returning it, and I know many more people who do the same.

You can find much better if you just look around a bit more. Try carmax.

fixed

you should NOT be paying $30k for a used RDX.

 

[nomrah]

Originally posted by: senseamp
No reason to be paying 30 grand for a (ab)used RDX in this market with such awesome deals on new cars.
I am seeing Infiniti EX35 Journey go for ~30K new on Carsdirect.com (which buys from dealers, so dealer should be able to beat their price)
RDX goes for $30,600 new. Why on earth would you get a used one?

Are we talking about the same car? The price, at least on Acura's site for an 09 RDX w/ Tech Pkg start at $37,195...where can I buy a new one for $30,600?