When Lexus introduced the RX 300 as a 1999 model in the spring of 1998, Detroit took notice. The first luxury SUV based on a car chassis (in its case the Camry), the RX 300 seemed to provide exactly what customers were actually looking for: the looks and high seating position of an SUV, with the ride and handling of a luxury sedan. Acura introduced a larger, seven-passenger version of the same concept, the MDX, in the fall of 2000. Recently Toyota and Honda have also joined the fray.

Ford and Chrysler have been a bit slow responding. Chrysler’s entry into this market is still half a year away, and Ford’s is…well, it’s still years off. GM, in contrast, moved with uncharacteristic speed, introducing the Buick Rendezvous in the spring of 2001 as an early 2002 model. The Rendezvous is available in two models, CX and CXL. Unlike the related Aztek, the Rendezvous has sold fairly well, roughly equaling the sales of the Lexus it resembles. So, is it a viable alternative to the imports? I took a Rendezvous for a test drive to find out.

Styling

Inside and out, the styling of the Rendezvous is distinctive. Some of the details, such as the headlamp clusters, oddly shaped vents, and instrument cluster, border on the bizarre. I remain undecided on the headlamps and vents, but the instruments are decidedly attractive, with dished metallic faces and turquoise graphics.

The overall exterior styling doesn’t work for me. GM based the Rendezvous heavily on its minivans to get it to market quickly, and this forced various compromises. The Acura MDX and Honda Pilot are similarly based on the Honda Odyssey, but do not share as many parts with the minivan. (Click on the hyperlinks to read my reviews of these related vehicles.) The Rendezvous retains a minivan-like heavily raked windshield, forcing the hood to be much shorter than the SUV norm. For the appearance of an SUV, the hood is higher and flatter than on the minivans (there’s lots of air between the engine and the hood), but this isn’t enough to make up for its bluntness.

For similar reasons ground clearance is car-like. Compare the clearance under the rear suspensions of the Buick, Acura, and Lexus to see what I mean. Like a minivan but unlike a traditional SUV, the wheel openings fit tightly around the wheels (the Honda products share this attribute). Like the Honda products, only more so, the Rendezvous is really a minivan for people who won’t be caught dead in one.

I also don’t care for the RX 300/Mercedes M-Class-like swooping rear side window. Actually, on the Lexus and Mercedes it looks okay. With the Buick, however, the forward edge of this window continues into the wraparound taillamps. A unbroken downward sloping line like this is an aesthetic no-no, as it drags the eye down with it and makes the rear end look droopy. (BMW made a similar mistake with the trunk cut-line on the new 745i.) I’d rather see a thin strip of body-colored metal separating the window from the lamp, which would hold the eye up. A chrome strip, similar to the one dividing the headlamps from the parking lamps on the front end, might also work.

I personally prefer the brushed aluminum wheels, standard on the CXL and optional on the CX. The wheel covers standard on the CX don’t belong on this vehicle. They cheapen it substantially. Chrome wheels of a different design are optional on the CXL. I hate chrome wheels in general, and the basic design is also less attractive.

Overall, the exterior looks appropriately upscale, even interesting, but the smallish wheels (to think that ten years ago 16” wheels were considered large) and minivan-based proportions keep me from truly liking it.

Inside, as I have mentioned, I find the instruments and various pieces of metallic trim appealing. I’d even call the overall dash design appealingly interesting. Unfortunately, much of the plastic here looks and feels too cheap for a premium-brand vehicle. The headlamp and climate control knobs, large in size for easy operation, have a cheap clunky look to them. Acura does only somewhat better here, but the Lexus is in a league of its own.

The CX’s standard cloth seats similarly lack an upscale feel. The CXL’s standard two-tone leather helps, but it’s a bit slick in look and feel, much like that in a Regal. Definitely not high-grade leather. Then again, this vehicle stickers for quite a bit less than an Acura or Lexus, so I guess corners had to be cut somewhere. Leather with Buick logo cloth inserts are optional with both the CX and CXL. Snazzy.

Accommodations

The driving position is mostly good. The view forward is largely unobstructed. The dash is low, but deep—those minivan origins. Rear visibility is compromised by a very thick C-pillar and a thick D-pillar. These pillars are much larger than they appear from outside the vehicle. The rearmost side window is correspondingly much smaller than it appears from outside.

The slightly modified minivan package yields a bonus in room. In the first and second row, this is a roomy vehicle. The third row seat (a $465 option on both models) is a bit cramped when the second row is adjusted for decent legroom, but is good enough for kids. Acura’s is significantly tighter, and Lexus doesn’t offer one.

Seat comfort is another matter. The front seats are a bit too soft, especially in the cloth, and feel cut-rate somehow. A more substantial seat would be more fitting for a vehicle of this size and type. Comfort is okay, but should be better.

The standard seat has manual adjustments for height and lumbar support. The lever for the former requires a bit of effort to operate, and you have to bend over to reach it beneath the right side of the seat cushion, so it’s not for the unfit. Otherwise, it works well enough. It's certainly much better than no height adjustment at all. A power driver’s seat is optional on the CX. Dual power front seats are standard on the CXL. As a general rule, those who want many of the optional features (power passenger seat, full leather, DVD system, etc.) are forced into the $4,000 more expensive CXL.

The second row bench seat, straight out of the minivan, is simply uncomfortable. The cushion is too flat, such that it feels like you are actually tipping forward a bit. Thigh support suffers. The rear seatback is reclined a bit too much even in its most upright position (it reclines a bit in a series of steps). The second row is better in nearly any competitor. The optional captain’s chairs are somewhat better than the bench, though still not great.

To its credit, the second row bench does include a fold-down armrest in each half, with a storage compartment and fold-out cupholder inside. Nice, but not enough to make up for the seat itself.

Rear seat passengers on the CX will have to entertain themselves. With the CXL, rear seat audio (with headphone jacks) is standard, and a DVD system with overhead screen is optional (no sunroof this way though).

I’ve already mentioned the third row a bit. Aside from limited space and comfort, it’s a bit closed in feeling back there because the rear pillars are so thick.

Interior storage is a strong point. The glove box is large, though the lid will hit the front passenger’s knees when opened more than a crack. The center console contains a pair of useful lidded compartments, and additional storage underneath. The smaller compartment includes a second power outlet, to keep a cell phone charged. The larger compartment is huge, and shaped to hold a notebook computer.

Cargo room is a matter of how many seats are in the vehicle. Both the second and third row can be tipped forward or removed. With all three rows in place, cargo room is marginal. Fold the third row seat flat to the floor (it doesn’t come out), though, and the cargo area becomes long and tall. The minivan basis really pays off here, as a traditional SUV has much less space floor to ceiling, and even floor to the base of the windows. Tip the second row forward, or remove it, and there’s a tremendous amount of cargo room. Less than a long minivan, as this is a shorter vehicle, but about the same as a short wheelbase minivan. Buick claims the Rendezvous offers more cargo space than any other mid-sized SUV, and I find this easy to believe. Easier to believe than that this is an SUV.

For those interested in numbers, maximum cargo volume is 108 cubic feet for the Rendezvous, vs. 90 for the already spacious Honda Pilot. The Highlander (Toyota’s larger version of the RX 300) lags well behind at 81 cubic feet.

On the Road

I suspected that the 185 horsepower engine would have more than enough weight to move with the over two-ton front-wheel-drive model, so I opted to test drive that one. Alas, the affable salesman came along for the ride, and was large enough to require a seat belt extender. So I suspect the performance I experienced resembles that of the heavier all-wheel-drive version.

This performance, as expected, was less than stunning. In typical traffic, with cars ahead of me at each light, the engine felt easily up to the task. It doesn’t make much power, but is reasonably torquey at low RPM. On the highway the lack of power is much more apparent. Acceleration from 60 on up can best be described as leisurely, even with the pedal floored.

Update: For 2004 an Ultra version of the Rendezvous will be available with a 255-horsepower 3.6-liter DOHC V6. I’ve sampled this engine in the Cadillac CTS, and it’s spectacular.

With the optional all-wheel-drive system, expect slower acceleration. Otherwise, the vehicle should feel much the same, as the rear wheels are not driven unless the front wheels slip, in which case they are automatically engaged. This is similar to the Honda all-wheel-drive system. None of these car-based SUVs are built for even half serious offroading, no matter what the salesman might say. (My salesman recounted how he told an earlier customer to go ahead and hop the curb to get into the turning lane, since this is an SUV.)

The transmission shifts smoothly. Alas, it is a four-speed unit. The Acura and Honda not only have 55 more horsepower, but it’s fifth gear permits the first couple of gear ratios to be lower, getting the engine up into its powerband more quickly and keeping it there better with each shift.

The Rendezvous’s ride and handling resemble those of an upscale minivan. Which means this is no sports car. Lean in turns is prominent. A substantial amount of understeer has been dialed into the chassis, sending another message to take it easy. If this isn’t enough, the Uniroyal Tiger Paws squeal easily. At least the Buick’s steering isn’t traditional Buick light, even if it is largely devoid of road feel. The Acura MDX, though no sports sedan, corners with somewhat less roll, and has better tires. The Honda Pilot, though, shares the weak tire problem with the Buick. The Toyota Highlander is the best handler of the bunch, but I’m personally not ready to trade a good sedan for any of them.

The ride is generally composed, though the tires clomp somewhat noisily over various joints and divots in the road. My main problem with the ride was a floaty feeling to the rear end, much like I’ve felt in many minivans. I suspect the rear suspension is tuned to carry a load, and that people and/or cargo back there would settle it down.

On the highway the Rendezvous cruises well, with noise levels close to those in the Honda products or a Chrysler minivan. I suspect the Lexus is quieter, but haven’t driven it.

I was unable to measure fuel economy, but would expect high teens in typical suburban driving, maybe low 20s on the road. EPA ratings are 19/26, 18/24 with all-wheel-drive.

Pricing

For quick, up-to-date pricing, and especially user-specified price comparisons, check out the website I created: www.truedelta.com. Why yet another vehicle pricing website? Well, I personally lacked the patience to keep using the others. They were too slow and required too much effort, especially when trying to compare prices. So I taught myself some programming and created a site where there is no need to dig through option packages, prerequisites, and the like one by one -- the TrueDelta algorithm figures these out for you in one swift pass.

The following is from when the review was originally written:

If this were truly a competitor to the Lexus RX 300 (my review of the 2004 RX 330 can be found here) or even the Acura MDX, then the price would seem quite reasonable. But it’s not. There are two sides to Buick. There is the luxury car Buick. That’s pretty much just the Park Avenue these days. Then there’s the “affordable luxury” Buick. As in a premium brand with a few luxury features thrown in for those who really want to spend very little. Think Buick Century. The Rendezvous is the Buick Century of car-based SUVs. As such, I have no qualms pricing it against the Honda Pilot and Toyota Highlander.

One important note: All-wheel-drive adds roughly $2,000 to the price of the Rendezvous. This is a bit much. Toyota charges $1,400 for all-wheel-drive on the Highlander. At most all-wheel-drive should cost $1,750, the price Audi and BMW—which generally charge outrageous amounts for options—charge for this feature.

Prices with leather, power driver’s seat, side airbags, third row seat on Honda and Buick:

RX 300 all-wheel-drive (2002): 37,580
Pilot EX all-wheel-drive: 30,980
Highlander Limited all-wheel-drive (2002): 32,625
Highlander Limited two-wheel-drive (2002): 31,225
Rendezvous CXL all-wheel-drive: 32,590
Rendezvous CXL two-wheel-drive: 30,665

But then these are sticker prices. Honda and Toyota don’t offer rebates. Honda dealers aren’t even dealing off sticker. Some even add a few thousand to the sticker. Edmunds suggests Toyota dealers offer an average discount of $2,300, though they may ask sticker in some especially Toyota-crazy parts of the country. Buick dealers knock about $2,000-$2,800 off (the higher figure for the all-wheel-drive model—it must be proving harder to sell), and GM at the time I am writing this kicks in a $3,000 rebate or 0% financing. My suspicion is that similarly large rebates are here to stay. After discounts and the rebate, the Rendezvous is a few thousand less than the others (deduct another $400 for no third row):

RX 300 awd (2002): 34,500
Pilot EX all-wheel-drive: 30,980
Highlander Limited all-wheel-drive (2002): 30,300
Highlander Limited two-wheel-drive (2002): 29,100
Rendezvous CXL all-wheel-drive: 26,800
Rendezvous CXL two-wheel-drive: 25,665

Ultimately, the low transaction prices might compensate for the Rendezvous’s disadvantages, depending on what your priorities are. Need all-wheel-drive and three rows of seats? Don't have much to spend? If so, it doesn’t get much cheaper than this. Just be aware that the Buick is likely to depreciate much faster than the import brands, such that you might lose much more at trade-in time than you save up front. The flip side of this is that used Rendezvous, of which my dealer already had several, should be very inexpensive.

Last Words

The Rendezvous is a very interesting vehicle, with attributes of a luxury sedan, SUV, and minivan. Unfortunately, the roomy interior is let down by substandard power, handling, seats, and interior materials. This is ultimately less a luxurious SUV than a minivan for people who need but hate minivans.

At least the vehicle’s weaknesses are compensated for by low transaction prices—about $4,000 under Honda and Toyota. Be aware, though, that the Rendezvous is likely to depreciate much faster than the import competition.

A Note on Buick Rendezvous Reliability

Want better reliability information? Want to really know what difference it will make if you buy a Buick Rendezvous rather than something else? My website, truedelta.com, will be providing this information in the form of "times in the shop" and "days in the shop" stats.

From these stats you might learn that your first choice, compared to your second choice, is likely to make 2.3 extra trips to the shop in its first five years. You might decide its advantages compensate for this, or you might not. Either way, you'll be able to make a much better informed decision than you can today.

I aim to provide the highest quality information to as many people as possible. Unfortunately, these goals conflict. If I simply give the information away, few will help provide it. So I'm doing the next best thing: those who have been active participants for at least six months will receive free access to this site's reliability information; otherwise this access will cost $24.95. The average time commitment for someone reporting on two cars will be (at most) 15 minutes a year, so you'll essentially receive $100 an hour for doing your share to help everyone make better decisions.

For the details, and to sign up, visit www.truedelta.com.

Amount Paid (US$): 30600
Model Year: 2003
Model and Options: CXL front-wheel-drive