Learn Me: Seven seat crossovers (I know, I know)

Yes, I know that any minivan is more practical by nearly every measure than a seven passenger crossover. And yes, I know that a station wagon would be a better driver with 90% the capability. But this will be my wife's vehicle - she insists that minivans aren't on the table, and new-ish seven passenger wagons are unicorns.

So the new family bus will need to regularly schlep two+ adults, three kids in car/booster seats, a large stroller, and various kid and household accouterments. I've never even seriously considered buying an SUV, let alone a mid-size one, so the only requirements we've decided on so far are:

7 Passenger
Comfortable, upscale-looking interior
Unibody construction
$15-25K, lightly used

There's a hell of a lot of choice in this segment, so here's what's on the table at the moment: Buick Enclave/Chevrolet Traverse/GMC Acadia/Saturn Outlook, Cadillac SRX, Ford Flex, Honda Pilot, Hyundai Santa Fe, Hyundai Veracruz, Kia Sorento, Mazda CX-9, Mitsubishi Outlander, Subaru Tribeca, Suzuki XL-7, & Toyota Highlander.

What my wife really wants is a Volvo XC90 but only older/higher mileage examples are in our price range, and the ownership costs would be the highest of anything else on the list.

Do any of you have experience with any of these vehicles or advice to offer about this segment?

Anything I would suggest would be from the days of station wagons. 70s to mid-90s. I assume those are out of the question.

You just listed a bunch of vehicles that are in everyway inferior to a Minivan! With the only exception being some of them are available with AWD.

Seriously though tell her you will help her shop for a 7 passenger SUV but after you rent a Minivan for a few days and she uses it day in, day out. Then do the same with a 7 passenger SUV. If she still really need to look "cooler" than a Minivan and doesn't see the light then fine.

Of the 7 passenger SUV's you really can't go wrong with a Highlander. The Pilot is the most "SUV" least car of the list. The GM triplets are nice but rear seat access sucks (it's pretty bad in all of them) and materials quality is typical GM.

I'd also look at finding the lowest mile nicest condition Buick Rendezvous you can. They where actually pretty nice but at this point are getting older so finding a good one may be dificult.

Ugh, the Flex is the only thing on that list even worth looking at, mostly because it's a minivan in every way but sliders.

You really, really need to rent a minivan. Odyssey if you can, or Grand Caravan.

nocones wrote: You just listed a bunch of vehicles that are in everyway inferior to a Minivan! With the only exception being some of them are available with AWD. Seriously though tell her you will help her shop for a 7 passenger SUV but after you rent a Minivan for a few days and she uses it day in, day out. Then do the same with a 7 passenger SUV. If she still really need to look "cooler" than a Minivan and doesn't see the light then fine.

Great advice, we have a RAV4 and an Odyssey, and it's much easier to take the kids with the Odyssey. The power sliding doors are a godsend, and you don't have to worry about the kids opening up the doors and slamming them into the car next to you. Plus, with the lower step-in height the kids can get in themselves easier, as opposed to carrying them and putting them in. My wife and I were anti-minivan for a while, but I wish we had just sucked it up and gotten the uncool minivan right from the get-go. As a bonus, an Odyssey will transport a drum to drum 8.8" rear axle, two adults, and two kids with all their stuff.

Have your wife drive examples of each (maybe even with the kids) and see what works best for her.

I sat in enarly every one of those on my way to a minivan, yes, every one is inferior in nearly every way to said minivan, but fine, wife wins:

Acadia and it's brothers/sisters, hands down. it had nearly the utility of the minivan. Flex is next.

Honda Pilot. SIL has a new one, which replaced an older one. Not exciting, but very competent and comfortable.

I vote Flex, but really that's just because I don't hate the styling. I kinda like the boxy-ness.

I have no idea if it meets the budget, but they released this cool "Titanium" version in '11.

Not making your list is also the Ford TaurusX which once restyled was rebadged The Ford Flex. There may be some savings to be had by buying this often overlooked model.
Before being called the TaurusX, it was known as the FreeStyle and though the body was the same, the drivetrain was a 3.0L V6 with an unreliable CVT tran. When renamed TaurusX, the drivetrain went to 3.5L and typical auto trans. The 3.5L is the same used in the Flex.

I hate to say it, but I'm going to suggest the minivan too. It's what they're actually for. Like big pickup trucks, minivans are one of the things the domestic manufacturers take seriously so they do a pretty darn good job. The rental suggestion is a good one.

Do any of the X5's disguised as Range Rovers come with 7 seats?

Keith wrote: I hate to say it, but I'm going to suggest the minivan too. It's what they're actually for. Like big pickup trucks, minivans are one of the things the domestic manufacturers take seriously so they do a pretty darn good job. The rental suggestion is a good one.

I know Chrylser does, but have Ford and GM ever really a comparatively good minivan?

In that price range you are only going to find 07-09 Acadiaclaves and you need to run far and fast from them. Transmission issues, water leak issues, timing chain issues, and, they suck to drive (engine and transmission re-calibration in 2010) with that said the Traverse should be off your list the materials and fit and finish are not even kind of ok for the money. The Acadia/Enclave is ok if not a little plain. Rear seat access and size is great, rear cargo space is good, middle row is fine I do recommend the buckets.

Your friendly neighborhood Buick/GMC salesperson.

PS the right answer is to capitalize on the hyper-depreciation that is the Jeep Commander fully loaded 09-10s go for about $20,000 with low mileage

I too have noticed the Commanders have crazy depreciation. Sure, it is just a boxed and stretched Grand Cherokee but they do sell for less than similar age and condition GC's.

m4ff3w wrote:

Keith wrote: I hate to say it, but I'm going to suggest the minivan too. It's what they're actually for. Like big pickup trucks, minivans are one of the things the domestic manufacturers take seriously so they do a pretty darn good job. The rental suggestion is a good one.

I know Chrylser does, but have Ford and GM ever really a comparatively good minivan?

My minivan experience is relatively limited, but I did rent a Windstar years ago for a road trip and was happy with it at the time. We were disappointed that we were unable to actually steer the car at highways speeds by using the power-actuated vent windows in the rear as rudders, though.

We rented a VW minivan for the Targa last year. It was the rebadged Chrysler. One of the most cynical vehicles I've been in - VW decontented the thing badly so that a number of features didn't actually work, such as moving the middle row of seats around. On the way home I stopped at a Dodge dealer to get an oil change in the tow vehicle and got to see the same minivan in Dodge trim - night and day in terms of useability. So get the Dodge/Chrysler, not the VW.

Yeah the Routan is Horrible. I'm not sure why someone would buy it. It's marketing power at it's worst.

Unfortunately, the answer is either minivan or Suburban/Excursion.

All the CUV's are so compromised to do so many different things, they make SUV's look like a good option, IMO.

When we had our third child we went through the same thing. In the end my wife was DEAD set against a minivan and we ended up with one of these:

Ours is a 6 seater and all of the seats are made for adults which is nice. Storage with people in all the seats is not great but it goes down the road very nicely and while gas mileage is not great it is better than I was expecting.

A crossover is a small stationwagon jacked up high so it's hard to get in and out of them. With three kids, you're going to have a tough time stuffing all the gear into even a big wagon.

Yep, a big minivan, or even a real van, is probably the best thing you can get.

You can still trick it out...

Ive driven a flex, and Ive driven an Acadia. Flex felt like a tall station wagon. Acadia felt like a small SUV, stuffed inside a moderately sized one. I wasnt a fan of the Flex's transmission, but an SUV wont ever shift as cleanly as a sports car. The GMC was somewhat less clunky, but only somewhat. Visibility was somewhat better in the flex, until someone sat in the back, then that single head became an aggravating obstruction no matter where you were looking behind you. The Accadia was about the same. The Accadia felt like it had more grunt, and was a bit quieter. I think it also was more expensive new. In the end, we bought a GMC, but not an Accadia. We got its little brother the Terrain. Price was a big factor.

Thanks to all of you for weighing in. My parents have an Odyssey and my brother/sis-in-law have a Windstar, so we have plenty of experience driving, hauling, and road-tripping in minivans. It may come to that eventually, but in the mean time the wife definitely prefers CUVs.

Thanks for the heads-up BoneYard - I'll scratch those years off our list. Thanks too for the R Class nod RBS - I'd totally forgotten about those, and they seem to be priced pretty close to the XC90's I've seen advertised.

I'm going to pick up our CX-9 tomorrow. It's a very overlooked option, especially with Ford's resurgence with the Flex and Edge.

Reasons we're buying:

Drove just about all of the options, from Toyota to Honda to Hyundai and Ford, etc. The CX-9, in my opinion, handles and drives the best of the bunch. The Pilot/MDX are good as well, but are more expensive and don't offer some of the gizmos at our price point.

Overall, it's an outstanding value. The highest trim has all the goodies at the price of most other brands' mid-level model: leather, xenon headlights, smart key, blind spot monitor, rain-sensing wipers, etc. I like my sports cars decontented, but if you're getting a land barge, load it up!

Another note on value: Prices have gone way up lately - $40k worth of Highlander ain't much, whereas $40k worth of CX-9 gets you everything, including features that flat aren't available on the others. That difference is reflected in the used market.

Things like the navigation and Bluetooth are probably a bit outdated - you can tell Mazda hasn't given the model much attention - but they work fine. HUGE upgrade over the 2004 330i we have now.

It's built on the Edge (I think) platform and is a bit bigger. Has the old Ford engine as well. To me, old = proven, and the engine makes enough power for what it is.

You just listed a bunch of vehicles that are in everyway inferior to a Minivan! With the only exception being some of them are available with AWD.

You can get an AWD Caravan. You can get an insanely good condition 2000 AWD caravan for like $5k.

I know Chrylser does, but have Ford and GM ever really a comparatively good minivan?

Not really. I mean, the ford freestar was pretty decent by the end, but the GM ones were a PITA to work on and had 3.4L's quite often which i pretty much hate. And the GM interior stuff falls apart a lot more.

Gotta say, GM made a smart financial move taking chrysler's idea (pacifica) and running with it (traverse, acadia, et al). They've made crap tons of money on it. But imo none of them are as good of vehicles (overall) as a Caravan.

But man, certain builds of Acadia Denali are basically the best looking SUV ever made. Gotta give props for that.