Big Time: Beans, Brains, and Brawn Meet Bling
Allow me to state the obvious: Americans live in a big country. Not the biggest, but pretty dang close. We Americans also like big things. Be it burgers, beers, buildings, boobs, butts, you name it, in America bigger is more often than not associated with better. That’s just how we think. For every fan of Sarah Susanka (the British-born architect credited with igniting the “Not So Big” house movement), I’ll point to 100 new subdivisions where the average floor plan is 3,000 square feet. When it comes to cars, though, bigger is not only perceived by many as better, but more luxurious, too.
All of which leads rather cleanly to the focus of this comparison test: big, luxurious SUVs. True, bigger SUVs exist (Chevy Suburban, Ford Expedition EL, GMC Yukon XL, Toyota Sequoia, just to name a few), but they don’t have the levels of luxury found on these near enough to full-size, leather-stuffed people-movers.
Enough with the preamble. Here are your 2015-model players in alphabetical order: Cadillac Escalade Platinum, Infiniti QX80 Limited, Land Rover Range Rover HSE, Lexus LX 570, Lincoln Navigator, and Mercedes-Benz GL450. Looking at the window stickers — instead of, say, the curb weights — you’ll notice that what binds this bundle of big guys together are the as-tested prices. They are all right around the $90,000 US mark, with one notable exception. The recently refreshed Navigator is the bargain of the bunch at a mere $74,635 US. An outlier for sure, but it’s competitive in every other category. Going in the other direction, the Range Rover is the most expensive SUV present (though not freakishly so at $96,456 US), and it’s the only one that doesn’t have a third row. Can we do that? Sure, as the cheapest Range Rover starts at $84,490 US. The Escalade Platinum’s base price is $90,270 US; it offers fewer options than the Range Rover.
Imperfection-ironing girth and long wheelbases make these six big guys ride pretty well.
Two points real quick: The Range Rover Sport does pack a (tiny) third row, but it’s not the brand’s top-shelf product. The second point is that you’d better believe people cross-shop ‘Slades and Rovers. Most are surprised to learn exactly how many people shop for these types of premium SUVs. We’re talking a category of more than 100,000 vehicles in the U.S. per year. The Cadillac and the Mercedes sell more than 25,000 units here. Each. When you factor in the profit per unit (hint: It’s mega), it is easy to see why these hulks are so important to their respective manufacturers. If the segment volume doesn’t impress you, always remember that while premium products only account for 11 percent of all cars, trucks, and SUVs sold each year, said vehicles make up fully 50 percent of the profits. So that’s the big picture. Let’s dive into the nitty-gritty.
Ride and Handling
Ride and handling are typically given equal weight. However, with these bruisers we feel that ride is the much more important metric. Therefore, let’s get the handling side of the equation out of the way. These are not sports cars. The Cadillac, Infiniti, Lexus, and Lincoln are all body-on-frame designs. In other words, they’re literally trucks. As such, three of them weigh more than 3 tons, and the Caddy is pushing it at 5,870 pounds. The GL is a unit-body, though it has vestigial frame rails and weighs 5,565 pounds. The five-seat Range Rover is the “lightest” SUV present at 5,348 pounds. That said, five of these dudes run our figure eight in the 27-second range. (The GL’s the quickest at 27.3 seconds, with the QX80 not too far behind the pack at 28.3 seconds.) To give you some context, a Mazda6 needs 27.3 seconds, whereas a Kia Optima requires 28.3. They ain’t athletes, but neither are they dancing hippos.
On the ride side of things, it’s a happy story. Imperfection-ironing girth and relatively long wheelbases make these six big guys, as a group, ride pretty well. The lone not-good-enough verdict goes to the Navigator. “Who let the previous-generation F-150 into this Big Test?” associate online editor Benson Kong asks. Harsh? Sure is, but so is the Lincoln’s ride when compared to others. The Navigator feels the most pickup-based. Now the good news. Says associate editor Scott Evans of the Infiniti: “I’m most impressed with the all-around comfort. The ride quality is very good despite the 22s. It soaks up bumps large and small with equal aplomb.” Kong cautions, though, that you “will probably feel under-controlled if you favor European rides.”
Here’s what associate editor Christian Seabaugh has to say about the Land Rover: “I love the Range Rover’s air suspension, as it rides wonderfully and doesn’t easily upset.” I couldn’t agree more. The Mercedes-Benz also sports air suspension. Associate online editor Nate Martinez simply states, “The ride on the air suspension is great.”
Speaking of fancy suspensions, the Cadillac has magnetic dampers. “As experienced in other GM SUVs of this particular line,” Kong says, “the magnetorheological shocks seem way more oriented for sport (even in the Tour mode) than for luxury.” But of course, giant 22-inch wheels and rubber band tires don’t help the Escalade’s case. “It’s hard to tell from time in the vehicle how to assess blame between the wheel/tire package and the suspension,” Kong continues. Still, the Caddy rides well enough. Air suspension and magnetorheological dampers are pretty fancy, but the Lexus has a hydraulic setup, a tiny bit like Citroëns of yore! The LX 570’s trucklike nature splits the judges’ opinions. Evans doesn’t care for the way it rides, but here’s what Scott Burgess says about the mighty Lexus: “This feels more like a Mercedes than a Lexus. The ride is extremely quiet, and it would be great on a long road trip.” I agree with Scott B. Is there an outright ride quality winner? No, but four — the QX80, Range Rover HSE, LX 570, and GL450 — are very good.
The weakest SUV here makes 340 horsepower. That would be the Range Rover with its supercharged, 3.0-liter V-6. Remember, though, the Range Rover has less mass to move, and as such its straight-line prowess is solidly mid-pack at 6.3 seconds to 60 mph. The QX80 also hits 60 mph in 6.3 seconds, while the Lincoln and the Mercedes both do it in 6.2 seconds. The slowest SUV to 60 mph is the 7.0-second Lexus, while the quickest is the Escalade, which gets it done in a tidy 5.9 seconds. The Cadillac also wins the quarter-mile battle, doing so in 14.4 seconds at 96.8 mph, while the Lexus once again brings up the rear, running the quarter in 15.4 seconds at 90.8 mph. The Escalade has the worst braking performance (133 feet to stop from 60 mph), but the braking champ Infiniti only stops 10 feet shorter from 60 mph and we’ve stopped plenty of sporting sedans in a similar distance.
Off the test track, the judges’ subjective impressions of the six SUVs are worth noting. We all love the Cadillac, and while it’s not an actual performance metric, the burbly rumble of the big 6.2-liter V-8 has us all swooning. Says Evans: “The Escalade definitely sounds the best,” though he cautions that “it also gets the most engine noise in the cabin.”
All of us are impressed by the Lincoln’s EcoBoost mill, a sporty 3.5-liter, twin-turbo V-6. “The powertrain is Grade A stuff,” Seabaugh says, “as long as you’re willing to write off other aspects of the SUV.”
The burbly rumble of the Cadillac Escalade’s big 6.2-liter V-8 has us all swooning
We also like the Infiniti’s big motor. Says Burgess: “The 5.6-liter V-8 was the lone highlight of the vehicle’s performance, with lots of power (400 hp), so acceleration felt quick.”
Despite its worst-in-test numbers, the Lexus actually feels pretty good on the street in terms of acceleration. However, its brake pedal feel leaves something to be desired. Evans describes it as “braking by semaphore,” whereas Burgess calls the braking input odd: “Start to push the pedal down and nothing happens, then you push it a little harder and still nothing. Then the nose dips and the brakes are fully engaged.” I should point out he’s being kind when he says “the nose dips.” The Lexus looks like it’s doing an endo.
The GL450 has a new 3.0-liter, twin-turbo V-6 that has no trouble hanging with the big boys. Says Martinez: “Excellent low-rev torque from the V-6. I actually double-checked the Monroney to make sure it was a six-cylinder and not an eight.”
Going off preconceived notions, you might expect the Range Rover to be the athlete of this group, but it simply isn’t on the street. “It’s got enough power, but in-gear acceleration is very sluggish,” Evans says. “Give me some throttle response without going to overkill Sport mode. It’s much better leaving a stop or if you floor it.”
The only thing I’ll add is that this isn’t the Range Rover’s top engine. If power is what you seek, pony up for the 510-horsepower, supercharged, 5.0-liter V-8. Same (of course) goes for the Mercedes. Not only is there the 429-hp GL550 but also the whack-a-doodle, overkill GL63 AMG that kicks out 550 hp of unnecessary fun.
There’s no way to put this kindly, but if you’re a Prius fan, it’s best to skip this part. According to the EPA, the most efficient vehicle here is the Range Rover. The Feds rate it at 17/23/19 mpg city/ highway/combined. Our Real MPG results for this group are not pretty. The Range Rover falls considerably to 14.4/19.9/16.4 mpg. Quite the plunge, don’t you think? The others don’t fare much better. The Escalade is EPA-rated at 15/21/17 mpg but actually achieves 14.1/20.5/16.4 mpg. The QX80 is rated at 13/19/15 mpg but in the real world nets 12.5/17.9/14.5 mpg. The Navigator is rated at 15/20/17 mpg but actually records 13.9/18.1/15.5 mpg. The Mercedes-Benz is closest to its EPA numbers (17/21/19 mpg)—we got 16.7/20.7/18.3 mpg. The lone surprise of the group is the Lexus LX 570, which is dismally EPA-rated at 12/17/14 mpg but bests those in our testing with 13.3/17.5/14.9 mpg. Better, sure, but you’d never know it because of the LX 570’s relatively small 24.6-gallon gas tank. You’ll be at the pump more often than not. Moving on.
The Escalade Platinum’s interior is the group consensus for best in test. Frankly, I’m shocked at the quality. As are the others. Seabaugh sums up what we liked so much: “The Escalade has gorgeous, supple leather and great wood trim.” Says Burgess: “This is the Cadillac of Cadillac interiors. The brown leather with contrast stitching makes the interior pop with luxury.” I’ll go so far as to say it is the highest-quality interior from a materials perspective I’ve ever seen in an American car. Still, there’s CUE and all the haptic, (not-so) touch-sensitive controls, which really aren’t good enough. Evans and Seabaugh think they’re OK, but I would be so bold as to advise Cadillac boss Johan de Nysschen to throw them in the garbage can.
The Infiniti’s cabin materials impress—gorgeous leather and glossy wood everywhere
You might think that the Range Rover would have a lock on interior quality. But you’d be mistaken. Like CUE, Range Rover’s infotainment solution just isn’t good enough. Not at this price point. Confirms Martinez, “The infotainment is second worst behind CUE.” The materials are also just behind the Cadillac, and worse yet, the damn thing squeaks! I’ll let Evans explain. “The driver’s right fold-down arm rest rubs against the seat and center console making constant squeaking and creaking noises,” he says. “The cupholder cover makes scraping noises as it opens and closes, and the covered door pockets creak as they open and close. Unacceptable in a vehicle of this class.” The unwanted sounds drove us all nuts.
The Infiniti’s cabin materials also impress us. Gorgeous leather and glossy, fussed-over wood are everywhere. The Infiniti’s problem is that — like the Lincoln — its proletarian roots (the QX80 is based on the Nissan Patrol) show through. Says Kong: “I have deemed the QX80 the deceiver of the group. It looks enormous, yet there doesn’t seem to be as much passenger space as you’d expect.” Case in point is the middle-row captain’s chairs. Good seats, but because they are fixed in place, even moderately tall folks (hi, Mom!) don’t have enough legroom. One great fix would be to make them slide backward, but because of the QX80’s hard points, that’s impossible. Too bad. We also all felt the seating position was too high.
The Mercedes-Benz GL was our 2013 SUV of the Year, but shockingly the 2015 cabin feels dated. Perhaps that’s because things such as the infotainment screen are a generation behind the new Benzes we’ve been busying ourselves with, such as the C- and S-Classes. The screen looks small. Martinez notes: “The dash isn’t aging too well. The configuration and the placement of controls are excellent. But the visual meh of the black plastics is something that you really wouldn’t want to have in this price range.” He also notes that the hard seats were the first thing he noticed. The leather is pretty good, but who would have imagined a world where a Mercedes-Benz is noticeably less nice inside than an Infiniti or a Cadillac?
The Lexus is the oldest vehicle here by some margin, first introduced in 2007. It’s also the worst-selling by quite a bit, moving around 4,000 units in the U.S. last year, which puts it at just over 3 percent of the segment. Its aged interior is also let down by how single-purpose the truck is. Look, if you need to pre-run the Baja 1000 or compete in the Paris-Dakar Rally, the LX 570 is the obvious choice. But for pulling up to South Coast Plaza in gilded luxury? Not so much. “The leather isn’t that great, the cabin materials are meh, the infotainment system is ancient — the Lexus is just plain old,” Seabaugh says. “Yet at the same time, there’s something incredibly luxurious about the capability the LX 570 brings to the table. It’ll fit in just as seamlessly at the valet stand in Manhattan as it would in a war zone in Mogadishu. Now that’s luxury.” I couldn’t agree more. Others, however, feel different. “The wood trim is shiny and plastic-looking,” Evans says. “The plastic is as cheap-looking as the Infiniti’s, and there’s a lot more of it. The name of the game today is leather-wrapped everything, and this doesn’t have it. The infotainment system is just plain old. It’s painfully slow, and some of the graphics wouldn’t look out of place on a Sega Genesis.”
That leaves the Lincoln, and its interior comes in last. It’s an open secret that the 2015 refresh is nothing but a placeholder for the new, all-aluminum version that’s coming for the 2018 model year. As for this truck, Burgess says: “Luxury is about the details, and this is where Lincoln misses the mark. There are some aspects of the Navigator that are great, such as the fold-flat seats. But the Navigator misses with the quality of its interior. The gear shifter feels like the handle of a Super Soaker, and the exterior had trim that you could snag your clothes on. This one needs to go back into the oven and finish baking.” Seabaugh piles on: “I’m not sure Lincoln ever finished designing this interior. Did you see those A/C vents?” Ouch.
As for third rows, they are all passable, save for the Range Rover, which doesn’t have one. The Cadillac and the Infiniti feel the most cramped, with the dimensionally larger QX80 seeming slightly worse. The surprise was that the solid rear-axle Lexus had an adult-usable third row. While the Lincoln measures largest, the best in the test was the Mercedes. Go unit-body, go.
Those third-row vent windows that minivans used to have.
Only SUV here to offer a truly flat load floor.
A console for those in the second row captain’s chairs.
Land Rover Range Rover HSE
Cameras at all corners for wheel placement.
Cadillac Escalade Platinum
Standard 4G LTE Wi-Fi and a refrigerator in the
Lexus LX 570
The most off-road features of the group.
All six contenders have a built-in safety feature: hulking size. As our friends at Informed For Life put it: “Bigger, heavier vehicles protect their occupants better. A bigger, heavier vehicle provides better crash protection than a smaller, lighter one, assuming no other differences. Both size and weight affect the forces experienced by vehicle occupants during a crash. The magnitude of those forces is directly related to the risk of injury.”
However, longer stopping distances and all that mass reduce each SUV’s active safety threshold. No vehicle here is an IIHS Top Safety Pick or Top Safety Pick Plus. Note that the Mercedes-Benz ML-Class (soon to be renamed the GLE) is closely related to the GL and is in the safest 1 percent of passenger vehicles per Informed for Life.
The least expensive SUV in the test to own after five years is the Lincoln Navigator. However, the Lincoln has the lowest purchase price. If you look at the five-year metrics, it becomes clear that because of depreciation, the Navigator is the only vehicle here that winds up costing more than its purchase price. Poring over the data, a few other numbers pop out. The average repair costs of the Range Rover and Mercedes are more than three times higher than the others. The depreciation leader is the Range Rover, which goes down in value by almost $55,000 US. On the other end of the spectrum, the Lexus LX 570 holds its value well. After five years, it will be worth 57 percent of what you paid for it. All that said, these are all premium products and are heavily leased. So value isn’t as important a consideration as it is with B segment cars.
|Cadillac Escalade Platinum||Infiniti QX80 Limited||Land Rover Range Rover HSE||Lexus LX 570||Lincoln Navigator||Mercedes-Benz GL450 4Matic|
|DEPRECIATION||$49,277 (51%)||$45,500 (49%)||$54787 (54%)||$39,844 (43%)||$42,335 (56%)||$47,797 (53%)|
|5-YEAR COST OF OWNERSHIP||$86,083||$83,512||$97,411||$83,353||$75,680||$88,660|
|INTELLICHOICE TARGET PURCHASE PRICE||$95,833||$92,828||$101,989||$91,964||$75,012||$90,640|
|PURCHASE PRICE Target purchase price includes destination and average applicable state taxes applied to a transaction price between invoice and retail, based on applicable incentives. U.S. data only.|
This particular Big Test was more contentious than others I’ve been involved with. Looking over the first-round balloting, one guy’s first place was another’s last. (The
Lexus is extremely polarizing because of its off-road priorities.) I only mention this to illustrate that these six large luxe SUVs are evenly matched. As with any premium or luxury product, emotion plays a larger role than it does when it comes to basic transportation. Can you make a bad choice here? No, not a bad one. But we’re pretty confident that some choices are better than others.
Can you make a bad choice here? No, not a bad one.
But we’re confident that some choices are better than others.
6th Place: Infiniti QX80
When you factor in worst in test fuel economy, a cramped third row, and those awkward looks, you have a big SUV
that only one of us loved.
5th Place: Lincoln Navigator
Although it’s cheaper than the others, it’s not nearly as luxurious. We love the powertrain and the ‘Gator’s utility.
4th Place: Land Rover Range Rover HSE
Gorgeous truck, Gerry McGovern be praised. But the suspect build quality and pricey everything else leaves us cold.
3rd Place: Lexus LX 570
Old age and treachery get some respect! Not ideal for all owners, but there’s something uniquely desirable about Lexus’ go-anywhere bruiser.
2nd Place: Mercedes-Benz GL450
Our former SUV of the Year is starting to show signs of age. Still, the GL remains one of the smartest SUVs you can buy.
1st Place: Cadillac Escalade Platinum
The best looking, the best interior, the best sounding, and the quickest in our test. The Cadillac Escalade Platinum stole our hearts.
|2015 Cadillac Escalade Platinum||2015 Infiniti QX80 Limited||2015 Land Rover Range Rover HSE|
|DRIVETRAIN LAYOUT||Front-engine, 4WD||Front-engine, 4WD||Front-engine, 4WD|
|ENGINE TYPE||90-deg V-8, alum block/heads||90-deg V-8, alum block/heads||Supercharged 90-deg V-6, alum block/heads|
|VALVETRAIN||OHV, 2 valves/cyl||DOHC, 4 valves/cyl||DOHC, 4 valves/cyl|
|DISPLACEMENT||376.0 cu in/6,162cc||338.8 cu in/5,552cc||182.7 cu in/2,995cc|
|POWER (SAE NET)||420 hp @ 5,600 rpm*||400 hp @ 5,800 rpm||340 hp @ 6,500 rpm|
|TORQUE (SAE NET)||460 lb-ft @ 4,100 rpm*||413 lb-ft @ 4,000 rpm||332 lb-ft @ 3,500 rpm|
|REDLINE||6,000 rpm fuel shutoff||6,300 rpm||6,500 rpm|
|WEIGHT TO POWER||14.0 lb/hp||15.0 lb/hp||15.7 lb/hp|
|TRANSMISSION||8-speed automatic||7-speed automatic||8-speed automatic|
|SUSPENSION, FRONT; REAR||Control arms, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar; live axle, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar||Control arms, coil springs, hydr anti-roll control; multilink, coil springs, hydr anti-roll control||Control arms, air springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar; multilink, air springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar|
|STEERING RATIO||17.3:1||19.7:1||16.6-19.4:1 (est)|
|BRAKES, F;R||13.0-in vented disc; 13.6-in vented disc, ABS||13.8-in vented disc; 13.8-in vented disc, ABS||13.8-in vented disc; 13.8-in vented disc, ABS|
|WHEELS||9.0 x 22-in, cast aluminum||8.0 x 22-in, forged aluminum||8.5 x 20-in, cast aluminum|
|TIRES||285/45R22 110H M+S Bridgestone Dueler H/L Alenza||275/50R22 111H M+S Bridgestone Dueler H/T D684 II||255/55R20 110W M+S Goodyear Eagle F1AT|
|WHEELBASE||116.0 in||121.1 in||115.0 in|
|TRACK, F/R||68.7/68.7 in||67.5/67.9 in||66.5/66.3 in|
|LENGTH x WIDTH x HEIGHT||203.9 x 80.5 x 74.4 in||208.9 x 79.9 x 75.8 in||196.8 x 78.1 x 72.3 in|
|GROUND CLEARANCE||8.1 in||9.2 in||8.7-11.6 in|
|TURNING CIRCLE||39.0 ft||41.6 ft||40.4 ft|
|CURB WEIGHT||5,870 lb||6,017 lb||5,348 lb|
|WEIGHT DIST., F/R||51/49%||52/48%||48/52%|
|TOWING CAPACITY||8,100 lb||8,500 lb||7,716 lb|
|HEADROOM, F/M/R||39.7/38.7/38.1 in||39.9/40.0/36.8 in||42.5/39.2/- in|
|LEGROOM, F/M/R||45.3/39.0/24.8 in||39.6/41.0/28.8 in||39.1/40.2/- in|
|SHOULDER ROOM, F/M/R||64.9/64.4/62.6 in||63.8/63.5/60.5 in||60.7/59.4/- in|
|CARGO VOLUME BEH F/M/R||94.2/51.6/15.2 cu ft||95.1/49.6/16.6 cu ft||71.7/32.1/- cu ft|
|ACCELERATION TO MPH|
|0-30||1.9 sec||2.3 sec||2.2 sec|
|PASSING, 45-65 MPH||3.2||3.3||3.4|
|QUARTER MILE||14.4 sec @ 96.8 mph||14.9 sec @ 93.7 mph||14.8 sec @ 92.8 mph|
|BRAKING, 60-0 MPH||133 ft||123 ft||126 ft|
|LATERAL ACCELERATION||0.77 g (avg)||0.74 g (avg)||0.78 g (avg)|
|MT FIGURE EIGHT||27.4 sec @ 0.68 g (avg)||28.3 sec @ 0.64 g (avg)||27.7 sec @ 0.67 g (avg)|
|TOP-GEAR REVS @ 60 MPH||1,400 rpm||1,450 rpm||1,650 rpm|
|PRICE AS TESTED||$94,565||$89,845||$96,456|
|AIRBAGS||Dual front, front side, front-center side/head, f/m/r curtain||Dual front, front side, f/m/r curtain||Dual front, front side, f/r curtain|
|BASIC WARRANTY||4 yrs/50,000 miles||4 yrs/60,000 miles||4 yrs/50,000 miles|
|POWERTRAIN WARRANTY||6 yrs/70,000 miles||6 yrs/70,000 miles||4 yrs/50,000 miles|
|ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE||6 yrs/70,000 miles||4 yrs/unlimited||4 yrs/50,000 miles|
|FUEL CAPACITY||26.0 gal||26.0 gal||27.7 gal|
|EPA CITY/HWY/COMB ECON||15/21/17 mpg||13/19/15 mpg||17/23/19 mpg|
|ENERGY CONS., CITY/HWY||225/160 kW-hrs/100 miles||259/177 kW-hrs/100 miles||198/147 kW-hrs/100 miles|
|CO2 EMISSIONS, COMB||1.13 lb/mile||1.28 lb/mile||1.01 lb/mile|
|REAL MPG, CITY/HWY/COMB||14.1/20.5/16.4 mpg||12.5/17.9/14.5 mpg||14.4/19.9/16.4 mpg|
|RECOMMENDED FUEL||Unleaded premium||Unleaded premium||Unleaded premium|
|*SAE Certified, **Regular permitted, but engine output is reduced|
|2015 Lexus LX 570||2015 Lincoln Navigator||2015 Mercedes-Benz GL450 4Matic|
|DRIVETRAIN LAYOUT||Front-engine, 4WD||Front-engine, AWD||Front-engine, AWD|
|ENGINE TYPE||90-deg V-8, alum block/heads||Twin-turbo 60-deg V-6, alum block/heads||Twin-turbo 60-deg V-6, alum block/heads|
|VALVETRAIN||DOHC, 4 valves/cyl||DOHC, 4 valves/cyl||DOHC, 4 valves/cyl|
|DISPLACEMENT||345.6 cu in/5,663cc||213.3 cu in/3,496cc||182.8 cu in/2,996cc|
|POWER (SAE NET)||383 hp @ 5,600 rpm||380 hp @ 5,250 rpm||362 hp @ 5,500 rpm|
|TORQUE (SAE NET)||403 lb-ft @ 3,600 rpm||460 lb-ft @ 2,750 rpm||369 lb-ft @ 1,800 rpm|
|REDLINE||5,900 rpm||5,800 rpm||6,250 rpm|
|WEIGHT TO POWER||16.0 lb/hp||16.2 lb/hp||15.4 lb/hp|
|TRANSMISSION||6-speed automatic||6-speed automatic||7-speed automatic|
|SUSPENSION, FRONT; REAR||Control arms, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar; live axle, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar||Control arms, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar; multilink, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar||Control arms, air springs, adj shocks, adj anti-roll bar; multilink, air springs, adj shocks, adj anti-roll bar|
|BRAKES, F;R||13.4-in vented disc; 13.6-in vented disc, ABS||13.8-in vented disc; 13.5-in vented disc, ABS||13.8-in vented disc; 13.6-in vented disc, ABS|
|WHEELS||8.5 x 20-in, cast aluminum||9.5 x 22-in, cast aluminum||8.5 x 20-in, cast aluminum|
|TIRES||285/50R20 111V M+S Dunlop Grandtrek PT2A||285/45R22 114H M+S Pirelli Scorpion Verde All Season||275/50R20 109H M+S Pirelli Scorpion Verde All Season|
|WHEELBASE||112.2 in||119.0 in||121.1 in|
|TRACK, F/R||64.6/64.4 in||67.0/67.2 in||64.8/65.5 in|
|LENGTH x WIDTH x HEIGHT||197.0 x 77.6 x 73.4 in||207.4 x 78.8 x 78.1 in||201.6 x 76.1 x 72.8 in|
|GROUND CLEARANCE||8.9-11.9 in||8.1 in||7.9-10.9 in|
|TURNING CIRCLE||38.7 ft||39.0 ft||40.7 ft|
|CURB WEIGHT||6,109 lb||6,150 lb||5,565 lb|
|WEIGHT DIST., F/R||51/49%||50/50%||50/50%|
|TOWING CAPACITY||7,000 lb||8,600 lb||7,500 lb|
|HEADROOM, F/M/R||38.3/38.9/35.8 in||39.5/39.7/37.6 in||41.2/40.0/38.9 in|
|LEGROOM, F/M/R||42.9/34.4/28.3 in||43.0/39.1/37.7 in||40.3/38.5/35.0 in|
|SHOULDER ROOM, F/M/R||61.0/61.4/62.3 in||63.3/63.7/51.9 in||58.5/58.3/50.5 in|
|CARGO VOLUME BEH F/M/R||83.1/41.0/15.5 cu ft||103.3/54.4/18.1 cu ft||93.8/49.4/16.0 cu ft|
|ACCELERATION TO MPH|
|0-30||2.4 sec||1.9 sec||2.2 sec|
|PASSING, 45-65 MPH||3.5||3.6||3.2|
|QUARTER MILE||15.4 sec @ 90.8 mph||14.9 sec @ 90.6 mph||14.7 sec @ 94.6 mph|
|BRAKING, 60-0 MPH||125 ft||128 ft||126 ft|
|LATERAL ACCELERATION||0.78 g (avg)||0.79 g (avg)||0.81 g (avg)|
|MT FIGURE EIGHT||27.9 sec @ 0.66 g (avg)||27.6 sec @ 0.66 g (avg)||27.3 sec @ 0.68 g (avg)|
|TOP-GEAR REVS @ 60 MPH||1,550 rpm||1,650 rpm||1,650 rpm|
|PRICE AS TESTED||$90,970||$74,635||$88,085|
|AIRBAGS||Dual front, f/m side, f/m/r curtain, front knee||Dual front, front side, f/m/r curtain||Dual front, front side, f/m/r curtain, driver knee|
|BASIC WARRANTY||4 yrs/50,000 miles||4 yrs/50,000 miles||4 yrs/50,000 miles|
|POWERTRAIN WARRANTY||6 yrs/70,000 miles||6 yrs/70,000 miles||4 yrs/50,000 miles|
|ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE||4 yrs/unlimited||Unlimited||Unlimited|
|FUEL CAPACITY||24.6 gal||28.0 gal||26.4 gal|
|EPA CITY/HWY/COMB ECON||12/17/14 mpg||15/20/17 mpg||17/21/19 mpg|
|ENERGY CONS., CITY/HWY||281/198 kW-hrs/100 miles||225/169 kW-hrs/100 miles||198/160 kW-hrs/100 miles|
|CO2 EMISSIONS, COMB||1.40 lb/mile||1.15 lb/mile||1.04 lb/mile|
|REAL MPG, CITY/HWY/COMB||13.3/17.5/14.9 mpg||13.9/18.1/15.5 mpg||16.7/20.7/18.3 mpg|
|RECOMMENDED FUEL||Unleaded premium||Unleaded premium**||Unleaded premium|
|*SAE Certified, **Regular permitted, but engine output is reduced|