| 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
2013 BMW X5 and 2017 Acura MDX Specifications
| Model Year | 2013 | 2017 | |
| Model | BMW X5 | Acura MDX | |
| Engine | |||
| Transmission | |||
| Drivetrain | |||
| Body | 4dr SUV | 4dr SUV | |
| Difference | |||
| Wheelbase | 2,934 mm | 2,819 mm | 0 mm |
| Length | 4,856 mm | 4,983 mm | 0 mm |
| Width | 1,933 mm | 1,961 mm | 0 mm |
| Height | 1,775 mm | 1,712 mm | 0 mm |
| Curb Weight | 2,250 kg | 1,815 kg | 1 kg |
| Fuel Capacity | 85 L | 74 L | 11 L |
| Headroom, Row 1 | 998 mm | 968 mm | 30 mm |
| Shoulder Room, Row 1 | 1,524 mm | 1,552 mm | 0 mm |
| Hip Room, Row 1 | 0 mm | 1,461 mm | -1 mm |
| Legroom, Row 1 | 1,016 mm | 1,052 mm | 0 mm |
| Headroom, Row 2 | 991 mm | 973 mm | 18 mm |
| Shoulder Room, Row 2 | 1,473 mm | 1,501 mm | 0 mm |
| Hip Room, Row 2 | 0 mm | 1,468 mm | -1 mm |
| Legroom, Row 2 | 930 mm | 930 mm | 0 mm |
| Headroom, Row 3 | 0 mm | 904 mm | -904 mm |
| Shoulder Room, Row 3 | 0 mm | 1,389 mm | -1 mm |
| Hip Room, Row 3 | 0 mm | 1,031 mm | -1 mm |
| Legroom, Row 3 | 0 mm | 714 mm | -714 mm |
| Total Legroom | 1,946 mm (over 2 rows) | 2,695 mm (over 3 rows) | -1 mm |
| Cargo Volume, Minimum | 201 L | 425 L | -224 L |
| Cargo Volume, Behind R2 | 620 L | 1,087 L | 619 L |
| Cargo Volume, Maximum | 1,750 L | 1,937 L | 0 L |
TrueDelta Reviews the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2013 BMW X5
| 2013 BMW X5 Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
| Year | Comment | |
| 2014 | BMW's multicontour seats, a $1,300 option on six-cylinder X5s and standard with the V8, deliver a rarely matched combination of support in turns and comfort on long drives. In a reversal of traditional tendencies, the buckets in the Range Rover Sport feel firmer and less comfortable. Though you'll find a commanding view forward in either driver seat, the Range Rover Sport maintains an edge in this area. Unusually large windows are one thing that makes a Land Rover a Land Rover. see full BMW X5 review | |
| 2013 BMW X5 Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
| Year | Comment | |
| Audi and Mercedes both offer much longer SUVs. At least until BMW fields an X7, the X5 is available with an optional third-row seat. Especially considering the size and price of the X5, said third row is absurdly tight, thinly upholstered, and difficult to access. The door openings are small, and the entire second row seat pivots forward and upward off the floor in an only partially successful attempt to compensate. To provide even minimal legroom for those using it, the second row must slide forward a few inches, to the point that its occupants find their own legroom severely compromised. Both rows are too low to the floor for adult comfort. The third-row seat optional in the Range Rover Sport probably isn't much better, and deletes the spare tire (not available on the BMW regardless). This might explain why it wasn't on the tested vehicle. If you want a usable third row, Land Rover offers the less stylish, but also much less expensive and roomier LR4. Shift focus to the second-row seat, and I found that in the smaller X3 at least as comfortable, and easier to get into and out of thanks to the more compact vehicle's lower ride height. That in the Range Rover Sport, though also not the roomiest or the most comfortable, is better than the X5's. see full BMW X5 review | ||
What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2013 BMW X5
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2013 BMW X5.
What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2017 Acura MDX
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2017 Acura MDX.
See TrueDelta's information for all SUVs
See TrueDelta's information for all BMW models.
