I Drove It!!!

[**DONOTDELETE**]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well Murano Friends-

Guess what I got a call at work today, a local dealer took delivery of one that was earmarked for the Nissan Rep.. I got to drive it, My knees are still knocking!

Describe it? It was breath-taking the vehicle is DROP DEAD gorgeous inside and outside!

I took it out on the freeway, acceleration was peppy and brisk- the CVT almost drove me nuts, silky smooth almost too good to believe it was happening, and at lower speeds my right foot became my worst enemy as everthing you do is translated to the engine-

On the freeway it was an eyestopper, several folks stuck their heads out the window and gasped "Wow" what is it?

I am a hairs breath away from Nixing my MDX order and taking a Murano- The vehicle is beyond spectacle, it is gorgeous, and exciting.

I am going back to the dealer tommorow night to try again, as I need to do a walk-around and pre-flight the Murano as though it was a Fighter Jet-

Missing immediately- Rain Sensing wipers, On Star telemetrics and High Pressure Headlamp Washers for the Xenon's- Theatre Lighting Auto Dim Down would be nice.

I have to also say after having a Lexus RX300 for 4 days that th4e Murano put the Lexus RX300 in the Garbage Can permanantly no contest- Other vehicles the Murano "Nixed" or put in garbage can:

Pilot: Not even a remote chance
GMC Envoy with the whole works, 41k MSRP what a piece of Junk
Audi A4 and A6, Nice Cars but Murano runs circles are them
Bravada: Yunk no hope at all-
Buick Rendevouz- What a Joke-
GM-Ford Trailblazer and Escape No way Jose-
Toyota: 4 Runner Limited, alot of money but nice vehicle
Highlander, LIke a undersexed Rx300 didnt like

The only real competiton is the Acura MDX and now the question becomes Dollars a sense- I cannot slight the MDX and I cannot slight the Murano they are both gorgeous. The MDX has an established track record, I recently visited a Acura dealer who had a 2002 available used with the custom wood steering wheel added- it was 1500.00 less than a 2003 MDX at Full Sticker- The vehicle lasted exactly 1/2 a day on the lot it was sold in hours! The MDX typically commands an awesome resale price.

Now comes the Murano which has stole my heart away- the dealers are talking Full MSRP- I find that hard to swallow on a completely new and unseasoned model that has absolutley no track record. Z Car full sticker absolutely yes in a heart beat, it is a seasoned veteran of many years of refinement with a proven track record, Murano Full Sticker absolutely not, Copeditive pricing, absolutely yes, get them out there in numbers, and let Nissan shake their fanny at the world, "Look what we did"

Although I drove a fully loaded SL AWD today with the Navi Unit, I have to tell you Im sticking to my guns and will grab a SE AWD with the whole works except the Navi- where does that leave me?

around $36,500- I also have to say that today I visited with probably the best of the best when it comes to Nissan Dealers, Impressed ? Yes, but my original worry is still in place:
How will Murano fare with regards to it is retail value, its percentage ALR is unknown (Residual %) anyones guess. The bottom line boils down to dollars and sense. There is absolutely no question in my mind, that if I buy a MDX and divorce it a year later, I probably will only lose around 1500-to $1800.00 and resale will be no problem whatsoever-

What about the Murano? No history, no numbers, no track record-

I will however clearly make a wager, Murano is going to put a big dent into the "SUV or Crossover Gang" I would even not be surprised if the Muarno takes Best SUV or Crossover awards, Oh yes, I also got my hands on the New Volvo as well, Hate to say it but for some one whos got nothing better to do with their money than throw it out then maybe the XC90 is okay?

Can you believe it, I have absolutely probably palyed with ten of the best of the rest SUV's or Crossovers-

First Place is tied: Acura 03 MDX touring and Murano SL AWD-

Who am I? I have absolutely no ties to any car manufacturer, I dont sell cars, and no one has paid me a rotten nickle to do what I have done here- I am a Professional Consumer who works hard for his money and is tired of getting ripped off all the time. Just like the rest of you, I want to maximize my Purchase and get the biggest bang to dollar-

Both cars are missing several important things to me... The Vehicles should both have ON-Star telemetrics, "it is worth its weight in gold when needed"- One has rain sensing wipers and no Xenons, the other has no rain sensing wipers but has the Xenon bilevel lamps-

The CVT trans was absolutely almost too good to believe it was silky smooth, and I am still trying to find out if the accelerator is "Live by Wire"

The vehicle overall is flawless, seams fitted wonderful with equal spacing on both sides, 100% accurate, leather was really nice could have been better. Both Vehicles are beautifull-

Any comments from anyone out there would be gratefully apppreciated, contact me at-
ItsaRaid@columbus.rr.com

Hope this helps some of you-
Thanks-
Larry

[MuranoFANATIC]

GREAT REVIEW!!! I am more excited than ever for mine to arrive. Boy Nissan seems to seriously be on a MAJOR roll lately, and to think they have something like 6 more new models in the next 18 months! There competitors better wake up fast or it'll be over...

For what it's worth I think the Acura's a very respectable car but typical Honda boring, cookie cutter styling they've been so good at for some time now. And I think the Acura's still about $5k more, no CVT, and less fuel milage.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

I agree with MuranoFanatic...Honda = Boring. MDX = effectively and expensively boring. Have driven both vehicles as well. Murano is the way to go, hands down. NO question. Call now. Cancel. Do the right thing.

[CoCo_PuFf]

I agree with both of you http://forums.freshalloy.com/ubbthreads/images/icons/grin.gif .......the MDX to me, looks like a minivan with bigger wheels....it was clearly designed for functionality, and convenience above all else (same with the Pilot) in fact all honda cars these days (except the S2K, NSX) look like they are designed with the styling being an after thought. I havn't seen the Murano in person but from pics this is one badass crossover suv......imagine how badass the FX35/45 will be! http://forums.freshalloy.com/ubbthreads/images/icons/shocked.gif .

[OP240SX]

I agree with everyone regarding styling... Murano beats them both in interior and exterior styling. http://forums.freshalloy.com/ubbthreads/images/icons/cool.gif

If you require room for more than 5 people, the other two are your only "quality" choices in a midsize SUV with decent gas mileage.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Thanks for the nice review. I'm looking for an SUV, and I've limited my choices to Murano, MDX and 2003 4Runner. I haven't driven the Murano, but I have driven the other two. Here's my short-take on them:

Styling: Murano (no question about it) (MDX in 2nd place)
Room: MDX
Power: 4Runner (V8 motor - yum yum)
Functionality: 4Runner (4wd model)
Ride/Handling: ??? (haven't driven Murano)
Price: ??? (too close to call)
Resale: MDX (short term) and 4Runner (long term)
Service: MDX (Nissan and Yota dealer service departments typically aren't very good)

Even though the 4Runner is expensive, I keep coming back to it. I hate the plastic cladding on the non-limited models. But, if you want a dependable vehicle that will last 10 years and hold its value, while also being more off-road capable than the others, its probably the 4Runner.

While the MDX is hot right now and resale value should be excellent over the next year or so, what about 4-5 years from now? I suspect a similarly price 4Runner will hold its value better over the long term. As you indicated, the Murano is a real wild card on resale value.

[fatddyslam69]

WHAT ARE U THINKING!!! The 4RUNNER? Oh well, not my car. I am joking, get whatever you would like driving is what i say. Unless u plan on selling the car soon (like 3 years) who cares how much its worth later on. Murano looks pretty quality built. (if that made sense) Anyways, the 4RUNNER isnt all that cheap either. If you get it, get the LIMITED, so that damn cladding doesnt show! KEEP US POSTED! http://forums.freshalloy.com/ubbthreads/images/icons/tongue.gif

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Hey, Slam, what's wrong with the 4Runner (other than that ugly cladding)? Do you have any serious disagreements with my list? If you haven't driven the 2003 4Runner, it's a lot different than the 3rd generation. A lot more interior room also. (And, yes, they are expensive!)

Frankly, the 4Runner may be the better overall vehicle, but the Murano is just so danged good-looking. I can't wait to drive one to check out the power and the handling.

[fatddyslam69]

i totally think that the 4Runner is awesome in quality. The only prob i have with it is the styling really. That is why i said get a LIMITED so all that ugly cladding doesnt come with i. Ok if ur buying the car for how much it would be worth in 5 years, go ahead, but i thought buying a car meant buying something that looked good in ur eyes, had a reasonable amount of resale value, good quality, and powerful. Sure, the 4RUNNER is all that, except for lookin good.....but u gotta make the compromise, not us. Other than looks, however, go agead, the 4 is all urs....me? Ill take the Murano http://forums.freshalloy.com/ubbthreads/images/icons/grin.gif LET US KNOW WHAT U END UP PICKING!

[memnoch]

to me, it's all about the features. my wife and i will both be driving the murano so the memory seats and adjustable pedals are a definite must-have. who else offers satellite radio, Bose system w/ subwoofer, and CVT(!!!) as options/features? utility is just a bonus, so torque and cargo space is not a high priority, but AWD is. with my requirements, only Volvo XC90 and Acura MDX can compete with the Murano. but those two would be about 5K more expensive and have less features. Lexus RX300 is fine but the feature set and styling is old. the VW Touareg looks like a serious contender but i can't wait for it. can't wait for the Lexus RX330 either.

[Breslini]

I just drove it as well...everything you said about it was true except for the CVT. I agree that it's silky smooth...almost to the point of not realizing it's "shifting" at all! However, the acceleration from a dead stop is very unsatisfying. It's just like a car with absolutely no torque! At this point, the many positive attributes of this beautiful, cutting edge vehicle persuade me that I can acclimate myself to this...I hope!

[**DONOTDELETE**]

The only thing on your list that's not available on the 4Runner is the adjustable pedals and CVT. The 4Runner has the JBL system, which sounds good. Bose is way overrated, and usually sounds muddy with boomy base and no midrange.

As for the CVT, I'm hopeful that it's great and is a huge success. But, I'm somewhat leary of buying a first-year vehicle with a brand new, unproven transmission.

You said "utility is just a bonus, so torque and cargo space is not a high priority, . . . " So why are you looking at SUVs in the first place.

I'm not dissing the Murano. I love the looks of it. But I also recognize that it has some real competitors out there in its price range.

[memnoch]

i want an SUV mainly for the raised driving position. more and more SUVs, trucks, and vans are crowding my forward view of the road on the highway. the extra cargo space also helps (in times when you need it).
nissan has been building CVTs for years. Xtronic is just the first application of a CVT to such a powerful engine. i'm no mechanic nor engineer, so i can't say if that makes too much of a difference. i wonder if buyers of Audi's Multitronic are experiencing problems? besides, there's a 5-yr powertrain warranty to ease the worry.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

I've had a couple test drives now and can really only find one thing wrong with the Murado and that's that it doesn't go like it has 240 hp. I found the acceleration very disappointing, I suspect high losses in the CVT. Otherwise the CVT and rest of the vehicle are great, it will be a big seller. My dealer has sold twelve in less than a week.

[FStephenMasek]

I drove an SE on Saturday 11/23. The Murano will sell very well, but I think my 2002 Murcury Mountaineer is slightly better, and the 2003 Lincoln Aviator is far better. It should compete well with the Toyota Highlander / Lexus RX300 and the expensive Acura MDX, but Ford and Dodge have new crossovers coming, so it will be a very competitive market segment. I only saw two colors - the dark blue and the light tan. The Murano looks far better in the darker color, and I suspect it also looks very good in the gold. It looks as good or better than in the photos. The seats are wide, but flat, and the leather has no ventilation holes. The belt line (the bottom of the window glass) is too high, giving somewhat the feeling of being in a bathtub. The front cup holder only holds one cup at a time, as the holes overlap - what a silly oversight. The cell phone storage holes are too small, and the radio and climate control panel covers the open bin at the front of the console. It would have been better if they had placed the transmission control on the steering column. The console storage bin is indeed very large. The instrument panel does need more shielding from sunlight. The compass in the rear view mirror is easy to see under all conditions. There are only two rows of seats, and the rear storage compartment is on the small side, but still bigger than the tiny little areas in the BMW X5 and Mercedes M-Class. The adjustable pedals and good seat travel are nice, but the steering column does not telescope, so some people with long legs may still not be able to move as far back as they would like. However, I am 6' 1" and fit just fine under the sunroof. My 5' 10" wife's legs did not hit the lower dash. My long legs did not touch the console or door panels. In the Acura MDX my wife's shins hit the hard plastic of the lower dash, even with the seats all of the way back, and the Acura dealers would only discuss buying at over list, take it or leave it (southern California). My wife thinks the Murano looks more like a mini van, but I think it drives more like a car.

[The_Chosen_One]

The Aviator? Although I have not seen it in person, the pictures I seen are blah! It looks like a cheap Navigator (especially in the back).

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Your MOUNTAINEER is better?!?! Wow. I have no words. But if you're comparing Murano to Lincolns, Fords and Dodges, I would venture to say you're in sparse company.

[FStephenMasek]

Why? Have you looked at and driven a Mountaineer? It has THREE rows of better quality seats, V8 power (even better with the 3.73 rear axle which is part of the Class III trailering package), a very good automatic transmission, more rear storage space, a premium sound system not made by Bose, and four wheel independent suspension. It compares very favorably with the GM (Envoy Trailblazer, and Rainier) mid-sized SUVs (either just two rows and a solid rear axle, or very long and heavy with three rows and a solid rear axle). My 2002 Mountaineer with all options except the sunroof and running boards, cost $36,000 with tax, license, Etc. in southern California. The Aviator is quieter, handles even better, and has many really nice features, but is significantly more expensive, so it probably should be compared with the X5, M, and XC90. I drive far more miles per year than most people, but will keep my Mountaineer until it reaches 100,000 to 120,000 miles.

[FStephenMasek]

I suggest that you drive an Aviator - you will be pleasantly surprised. The Murano is more stylish, as is the RX300, but in most cases style can not be the most important factor when spending $35,000 to $45,000. The Aviator looks better than in the photos, although I could also do without the side plastic (on it or any other vehicle).

[ownersite]

Considering that in October 2002 (according to Ward's Automotive), the top-selling SUV in America was the Ford Explorer, followed by the Chevy Trailblazer and Jeep Grand Cherokee (with no Japanese manufacturers in the Top 10), I would be led to believe that people do and will compare the Murano (or Pilot, Highlander, MDX, etc) to the American alternatives, if they are in the market for a mid-sized SUV - "crossover" or otherwise.

[jberger]

The problem I have with American Cars, is that they are American Cars. Which is to say, they are poorly built, depreciate rapidly and age quickly.

Now before someone jumps on me for saying that, let me say it's not to say I think they are all bad. I rent ALOT of cars each year and spend hours behind the wheel. Everytime a rent a Ford I swear they managed to engineer windnoise, INTO the design. From the Taurus to the Expedition, none of them are quiet.

I think GM is the closest to making a huge resurgant, if they can get a handle on the quality of materials, they will be in the running for a long time.

If you haven't driven the Envoy/Trailblazer (regular, not the EXT) go drive one, the inline 6 is fantastic. But the number of recall notices is sobering.

The new Aviator is nice, but it's still an Explorer at heart. The new chassis is much better than the new old explorer, but it's no MDX. The lease rates are poor and the resale is terrible, so the Mercury or Ford is out. Not to mention the dealer experiance.

The Murano/FX is attractive because they drive like a car, not a truck. Can't say that about the Explorer. Which is why I think it's wrong to lump them into the same catagory.

[222Max]

"The Murano/FX is attractive because they drive like a car, not a truck. Can't say that about the Explorer. Which is why I think it's wrong to lump them into the same catagory. "

Exactly. The Murano is a Crossover vehicle. It's not a true SUV, meaning it's based on a car platform, not a truck such as the Explorer/Mountaineer. The ride is more carlike and, in the case of Murano, more sporty than most in the class. ** ** **

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Admittedly, I have a huge bias against American vehicles...I'd venture to say a lot of people on this site do...so, obviously this is not an objective opinion. However, I just haven't found any reason to lay aside my belief that US cars continue to be sub-par in terms of quality. Granted there have been significant changes in their designs, and two or three cars have threatened to emerge from the pack of mediocrity, but I definitely wouldn't put any of Ford's products in that group. Having said that, I have driven the new Mountaineer and found it to be much better than its previous incarnation. I can see why you like it. Add Ford financing and pricing to that and you have an attractive package...until you hit 30K, or have to trade it in...regardless, my original point, as 222Max stated, was that you're comparing apples to lemons when you start throwing a mid-size urban SUV into the mix with SUVs that have edged closer to FULL-size with their new designs.

[fatddyslam69]

That is, IF you CAN keep your Mountaneer for that long-will probably shut down before then. And FELIZ-STOP CALLING IT A DAMN MURADO....IT IS MURANO. It is highly unlikely that you could still call it a Murado, even after you drove it, so im saying that u have never driven it. http://forums.freshalloy.com/ubbthreads/images/icons/wink.gif Just kidding, its just one of my pet peeves when people get the names wrong. ESPECIALLY INFINITY. IT IS INFINITI! hhaha. Anyays, no way can an american car compare to the murano....what are u thinking?!?! http://forums.freshalloy.com/ubbthreads/images/icons/wink.gif And another thing, the JBL System on toyota vehicles are absolutely nothing special-at all! My dad used to own a 2001 TOYOTA CAMRY Gallery package with two toined paint, 5 spoke alloys, etc (handsome car) and part of the GALLERY package was the JBL Added-Speaker Stereo system. I think all that they changed were the speakers, and it still sounded really bad. BOSE is absolutely better than the JBL System, but i thought that INFINITI vehicles should have at least used INFINITY stereos, that would be nice. Harmon Kardon and Mark Levinson, i heard are the absolute best. I think ACURA just uses BOSE? or their own? As well as MBENZ, just their own? http://forums.freshalloy.com/ubbthreads/images/icons/confused.gif

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Sorry. Murano!!! I've actually driven it four times now and enjoying it better every time. My main beef with domestics is the crappy resale value. I came pretty close to making a deal on a Murano in a moment of weakness after a test drive and was suprised at how much they would give me for my TL-S, quite a change after the shock one gets when getting rid of a domestic.

[FStephenMasek]

Well, I don't know about the financing or leases, as I pay cash for vehicles. Just about any new vehicle will loose a huge amount of value in the first year / first 25,000 miles. If you drive less than I do, it seems that the best thing to do is to wait until somebody with a short term lease trades on in, then buy it used.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Off lease vehicles are a smart call when purchasing a car...being in the car business myself, I don't understand why anyone would pay cash for a car that cost more than $10K, especially when there are such low interest rates available (that is, of course, unless you have more cash than you know what to do with, in which case more power to you!)...your money is almost always better off working for you, not losing value in your garage! Lease items that depreciate, buy things that appreciate. And if you're going to go new, lease! MHO, and of course no one trusts the opinion of a car salesman. http://forums.freshalloy.com/ubbthreads/images/icons/frown.gif

[jberger]

Well, there is a lot to be said for paying cash, namely it's nice not to owe anyone anything. I subscribe to that, in most cases.

That being said, my next car (probably the FX45) will be leased, as it makes a better tax advantage in my case. This would be my first new car. Really, my first new car.

Buying a new car hardly ever makes sense, especially paying cash, as the depreciation when you drive off the lot is tremendous. But when it comes to buying a used car, I'd rather buy one from an owner than a lease. My thought is that most leasee's do the minimum service where as buyers tend to perform more regular maintenance.

What we can all agree on, is that it's better to buy a 3-4 year old car than a new one, especially if you are paying cash.

For years I've been a real road warrior, so I chose cars with high milage because I was going to pile on the miles anyway. I'm changing positions soon, so I won't be on the road as much, so leasing will make better sense for me then.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Agreed, it's good not to owe anyone, and again, if you can spend the cash for a good used car without missing the accrued interest on a lump sum, more power to you. I do have to disagree with regards to how lessee's maintain their cars vs. buyers. In general, I've found that the "excessive wear and tear" threat looms large over lessee's and is a great motivation to them to mantain their cars BETTER than if they could just say, "it's my car, who cares?". In my experience, "bought" cars being traded in tend to have more miles than off lease vehicles, and cosmetic problems are less likely to have been taken care of. Having said that, it's more likely you'll get a better deal on a trade-in than you would on an off lease vehicle. Dealers typically own those for less.

[jberger]

I was mainly referring to maintenance items, like oil changes and periodic scheduled maint.

The people I know with leases, tend to push the oil change farther, skip the periodic scheduled maint like 5,15,30K and use cheaper gas/oil/tires etc. Take a look at all the Camry's and es300 lease cars which are recalled under the "Gelled Oil" problem. Most of these cars had very few oil changes during thier early life span and developed oil starvation issues later on.

I've always tried to buy my cars from someone who was in sales (like myself) and replaced the company car every few years because they piled on the highway miles.

I'd always rather have highways miles over in town stop and go miles, even if it's double or triple the miles. And in general, since the company is paying, the cars are very well maintained.

Most buyer thought they were going to own the car for longer than 36 months (that's why they bought) so they tend to perform more service on the vehicle.

If you're only referring to wear and tear differences, then sure, most off lease cars will look better than a typical used car. The off lease car is generally newer, it's also lesses concerned with wear and tear. I immediately disreagard a car if the interior is in bad shape, (Dennis's car excepted) cuase if the inside is poor who knows what you can't see.

[MO2Go]

I must agree 100%. Other qualities won me over but it was definitely not the acceleration from a dead stop!
I just drove it as well...everything you said about it was true except for the CVT. I agree that it's silky smooth...almost to the point of not realizing it's "shifting" at all! However, the acceleration from a dead stop is very unsatisfying. It's just like a car with absolutely no torque! At this point, the many positive attributes of this beautiful, cutting edge vehicle persuade me that I can acclimate myself to this...I hope!

[MO2Go]

i totally think that the 4Runner is awesome in quality. The only prob i have with it is the styling really. That is why i said get a LIMITED so all that ugly cladding doesnt come with i. Ok if ur buying the car for how much it would be worth in 5 years, go ahead, but i thought buying a car meant buying something that looked good in ur eyes, had a reasonable amount of resale value, good quality, and powerful. Sure, the 4RUNNER is all that, except for lookin good.....but u gotta make the compromise, not us. Other than looks, however, go agead, the 4 is all urs....me? Ill take the Murano <img src="http://forums.freshalloy.com/ubbthreads/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" /> LET US KNOW WHAT U END UP PICKING!



Toyota quality? I find this not to the case from experience. My father-n-law's Camry, my dad's Corolla, my sister's Forerunner (34K by the way), all had their problems. None of them seemed too luxurious to me and all were lacking in power. Their doors were very light and seemed extremely flimsy. True story, I took my sister's brand new 34K Forerunner to the video store and slammed the door shut on my way out. When I returned, I found the power doorlock and window module tangling from its wiring harness. I guess I shut the door a bit too hard and the module just popped right out of the door! http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/rolleyes1.gif

[SCUBADON]

I can not believe anyone could possibly test drive a 4 runner then not be impressed by the quickness of the M-O. The M-O will simply "blow the doors off" a 4 runner, V-8 vs V-6. While doing this, the M-O will get several more MPG. The only advantage for the Toy I can tell is the chance of a higher resale value (baised on past performance); however, I think the M-O may do well on resale as well.

You cannot compaire Japan cars to US ones. Let's see...
M-O, MDX, 4 runner or Mountainier, Aviator, Aztec...
need I say more!

You have to drive a M-O to understand how great it is http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/smile.gif http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/smile.gif http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Gr8wall]

Isn't the 4-runner supposed to be more tougher meaning you can take it off roading and beat on it more so than the Murano. That is my worry, how much punishment can a murano take?

[CVeeT]

Sure you can take Murano offroad almost anywhere, as long as you have a 4Runner to tow it back to the road http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[SCUBADON]

Most of us take our SUVs "off road" less than 1% of the time. I had rather be comfortable the other 99% and avoid that 1%. Be honest, how many people buy a new $35,000 4 runner then say, "guess it's time to take my new 4 runner to the mud or the woods". I think not many. If you really want to go off road, buy an old Hummer H-1, not the new H-2. Or buy an old Jeep, add good sized tires, and put a Chevy 350 engine in it.

[Path2Murano]

Okay, let's see how much of this 10-month old thread I can remember.

shift_driven: I just leased a Pathfinder for 3 years (ends next month). I made certain that I met every maintenance requirement, not really because of the "threat", but because... well, it's not mine, and I have an obligation to return it in good shape. A dealer here sells only lease returns: most are in excellent condition, and are about $2,000 less than anything comparable (say, $22,000 instead of $24,000).

To the original poster: did you buy a Murano? I think that the MDX for a year scenario was wise/prudent/good idea. I'm waiting for the '04 Murano (another month to wait).

EStephenWhatever: I think you just "missed" what a Murano is and is not. I don't question your taste. I just think you don't really get it about Murano, and so are best maybe to just leave it alone, stick with what you know and like.

Ask anybody (driving anything) if they like their car. Most say Yes. That's why they bought it. Does that mean I will like it? No.

Ask anyone for car advice, and they will recommend that you buy exactly what they drive and/or like, even if it's absurd for your needs. I stopped asking.

I check ratings, reviews, recalls... and in the end, I buy what pleases me (resale be damned; I want to enjoy the damn thing). If I wanted an investment, it would not be a motor vehicle (unless I found a mint '64 Mustang for $50).

[Path2Murano]

If anyone is interested in off-road, I cannot imagine why they would even consider a Murano.

4Runner, if you want off-road, need to pull a boat... if you need a 4Runner, you'd know, in which case, it would be my first choice (over anything else that will do what it does very well).