2007 Murano SL and 2007 XC90 3.2 Pricing

[jsct]

I used to own a 2004 Murano and am considering going back to a 2007 SL to get more features than I would get in a used 2009 S at a comparable price, but I am also considering a 2007 XC90. The Murano appears to hold it's value better since the XC90 has a higher starting price and costs about the same as a 2007 Murano SL wiht leather, seemingly making a used XC90 a good used car bargain as a luxury brand, and I find the fit/finish more luxurious than the 1st gen Murano. I don't like the tiny display screen, but the leather is of a higher qualilty. Wondering if anyone has experience with both vehicles and an opinion. I took a brief test drive of the XC90 3.2, but it wasn't enough to determine if the engine is as "adequate" as some reviews say.

If I stay with the Murano, I'm also still struggling to decide whether the 2009 is improved enough that a used S with cloth would be better than a 2007 with leather and Bose stereo.

[jeffs3232]

Originally posted by jsct
I used to own a 2004 Murano and am considering going back to a 2007 SL to get more features than I would get in a used 2009 S at a comparable price, but I am also considering a 2007 XC90. The Murano appears to hold it's value better since the XC90 has a higher starting price and costs about the same as a 2007 Murano SL wiht leather, seemingly making a used XC90 a good used car bargain as a luxury brand, and I find the fit/finish more luxurious than the 1st gen Murano. I don't like the tiny display screen, but the leather is of a higher qualilty. Wondering if anyone has experience with both vehicles and an opinion. I took a brief test drive of the XC90 3.2, but it wasn't enough to determine if the engine is as "adequate" as some reviews say.

If I stay with the Murano, I'm also still struggling to decide whether the 2009 is improved enough that a used S with cloth would be better than a 2007 with leather and Bose stereo.

I was in the same boat as you when we bought our 04 MO nearly two years ago. The wife wanted the Volvo XC90, Lexus RX330, or the MO.

We drove all three extensively and did tons of research on all of them. The first one to get scratched off the list was the Volvo. While it is a very safe car, the 5 year cost of ownership was very expensive, and the fact (while safe cars), Volvo's tend to stay parked in the service dept. than in drive way. We loved the looks of the Volvo, but once the warranty was gone, didn't want to have to keep fixing an expensive import.

We like both the MO and Lexus, but after carful consideration, we picked the MO because (at the time) a used 04 MO cost $8,000 less than the 04 Lexus. They were both same in size, and equally had nice features, but we chose the MO.

We still have our 2004 MO SE, and liked it so much we just bought an 06 SL - now having two MO's. Since Nissan extended the CVT warranty to 10 years / 120,000 miles we have not much to worry about.

Knock on wood but the Nissan VQ35DE engine is one of the best on the road, and I expect to get 200,000 miles out of it. As you can tell by my signature, I've owned several Nissan's. The quality of Nissan is far better than Toyota or Honda. I will say he customer service of Nissan has been sketchy at times, but they are getting better. Our next Nissan will probably be the Armada or Pathfinder (with the third seat) now that we have a growing family. If you are looking for something a little nicer than the MO, check out the Infiniti FX series. They are fantastic cars!!!!