Because its true....

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Lift is irrelevant. Solid axles have a lower roll
center, meaning they have better rollover resistance without massive
sway-bars (this is troe ON highway, not just offroad!) Solid axles also
articulate better when offroad with sway-bars disconnected, allowing
each wheel to have a better contact patch (the "high" wheel actually
helps plant the "low" wheel to the ground).

As far as IRs and towing, the differences are less dramatic than with
offroading and rollover resistance. But all those added bushings and CV
joints will *never* hold up to towing as well as a solid axle.

I don't know. Probably a marketing advantage. Calling something a mini-van
or a station wagon makes it undesirable to a large portion of US consumers.
Whether it makes sense of not, names do matter to many consumers. Do you
think Toyota would sell as many RAV4s or Highlanders if they called them
Camry Wagons (which is what they are)? If Ford renamed the Freestyle "Five
Hundred Station Wagon," how well would it sell? Or worse yet, suppose they
revived the Country Squire name and slapped on some vinyl wood trim on a
Freestyle?

Yes, I towed often with my 2003 Expedition with IRS. It towed just as well
as my 1997 with a solid rear axle.

Why would you say that? Only idiots who want to "lift" a truck are bothered
by IRS. Doing a suspension lift on an IRS vehicle is very difficult in
comparison to lifting a truck with solid axles. Unless you are doing some
really weird rock crawling, or tying to drive across a swamp, highly lifted
vehicles are ridiculous. For any sort of mundane off roading, IRS is better
than stick axles.

Compared to?

Probably true for most people. And several of these really are station
wagons.

What's the point of calling it an SUV if you cannot tow with it,
or take it off road?
Ever try towing with independent rear suspension?
Not good for off road either.
Did I forget to mention how small they are.
People who buy these would be better off with a station wagon.

Just another evidence that CR is a stupid useless magazine for evaulating
cars.

People are dumping their gas-guzzling SUV's right and left and buying
economy cars, due to the gas prices, yet CR is still bothering to review
SUVs.  Yeah, right, real intelligent there.

Ted

The new Mercedes-Benz GL- and R-Class luxury sport utility vehicles
outpointed competitors from Volvo, Audi, and Cadillac in tests for the
November issue of Consumer Reports.  The GL- and R-Class posted "Very
Good" overall scores in tests against the Volvo XC90, Audi Q7, and
new 2007 Cadillac Escalade. Though the Volvo, Audi, and Cadillac
finished lower in the scoring, those three vehicles still posted
"Very Good" scores.

To read the full text, please go to:
http://www.contactomagazine.com/bestluxurycars1106.htm