Considering the RDX

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-09-2016, 11:14 AM
  #41  
Intermediate
Thread Starter
 
TannerG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: North Carolina
Age: 32
Posts: 48
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Comfy
I believe the previous gen MDX ran from 2007 to 2013. The 2014+ models are current generation.
Correct, the range im looking at is around 2009-2012 for MDX
and 2013+ for RDX. I've certainly found some good deals on some RDX w/ around 60k miles.
Old 02-10-2016, 09:40 AM
  #42  
Instructor
 
jimihaha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Canoga Park, CA
Posts: 105
Received 12 Likes on 12 Posts
Originally Posted by TannerG
Correct, the range im looking at is around 2009-2012 for MDX
and 2013+ for RDX. I've certainly found some good deals on some RDX w/ around 60k miles.


With that, I would be going for the MDX. RDX is a nice car but the SHAWD alone in the MDX is reason enough to choose the MDX, especially with your more active lifestyle.


Good luck!
Old 02-10-2016, 10:04 AM
  #43  
Intermediate
Thread Starter
 
TannerG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: North Carolina
Age: 32
Posts: 48
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by jimihaha
With that, I would be going for the MDX. RDX is a nice car but the SHAWD alone in the MDX is reason enough to choose the MDX, especially with your more active lifestyle.


Good luck!


Thank you, one big benefit for the RDX is the gas mileage as well. The difference between 20/28 and 16/21 is pretty big especially when using premium gas.
Old 02-10-2016, 11:33 AM
  #44  
2014 RDX AWD Tech
 
Comfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 4,146
Received 354 Likes on 325 Posts
Originally Posted by TannerG
Thank you, one big benefit for the RDX is the gas mileage as well. The difference between 20/28 and 16/21 is pretty big especially when using premium gas.
That's true too. But we all would be more happy if you could somehow strike a deal with the current generation MDX (2014+) in whatever trim that works out for you. That way you'll get the SHAWD as well as good gas mileage.
Old 02-10-2016, 12:20 PM
  #45  
Intermediate
Thread Starter
 
TannerG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: North Carolina
Age: 32
Posts: 48
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Comfy
That's true too. But we all would be more happy if you could somehow strike a deal with the current generation MDX (2014+) in whatever trim that works out for you. That way you'll get the SHAWD as well as good gas mileage.
yeah the trick is going to be finding this gen in my price range which is going to take a miracle me thinks.
Old 02-10-2016, 01:09 PM
  #46  
Instructor
 
jimihaha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Canoga Park, CA
Posts: 105
Received 12 Likes on 12 Posts
Originally Posted by TannerG
Thank you, one big benefit for the RDX is the gas mileage as well. The difference between 20/28 and 16/21 is pretty big especially when using premium gas.
That's true. The 2nd gen MDX mpg sucks. Although, driving around town exclusively, there wouldn't be much difference in mpg between 2nd gen and 3rd gen, a little bit better with the RDX.


The real advantage of the 3rd gen is in highway driving. Honestly, the mpg calculations in my 3rd gen is a bit generous (2 mpg more) vs my manual calculation. Around town, I'm averaging around 16 mpg (MID says 18 or 19mpg).


My wife's RDX is averaging around 24 mpg (70% freeway / 30% city) but like mine, it's a bit off by 1 or 2 mpg as well.


I would assume you don't like Subaru's? Their SUV has good AWD system and respectable mpgs as well. But yes, it's not an RDX or MDX.
Old 02-10-2016, 01:19 PM
  #47  
Intermediate
Thread Starter
 
TannerG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: North Carolina
Age: 32
Posts: 48
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by jimihaha
That's true. The 2nd gen MDX mpg sucks. Although, driving around town exclusively, there wouldn't be much difference in mpg between 2nd gen and 3rd gen, a little bit better with the RDX.


The real advantage of the 3rd gen is in highway driving. Honestly, the mpg calculations in my 3rd gen is a bit generous (2 mpg more) vs my manual calculation. Around town, I'm averaging around 16 mpg (MID says 18 or 19mpg).


My wife's RDX is averaging around 24 mpg (70% freeway / 30% city) but like mine, it's a bit off by 1 or 2 mpg as well.


I would assume you don't like Subaru's? Their SUV has good AWD system and respectable mpgs as well. But yes, it's not an RDX or MDX.
Not that I don't like Subaru's I respect them but Im not super WOWd by them. My parents bought a Subaru last year and its a nice car I just don't think I would see myself driving it. Maybe? My original and on going thought would be to keep both my cars in the Honda/Acura family.
Old 02-11-2016, 08:07 AM
  #48  
Burning Brakes
 
andysinnh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Merrimack, NH
Posts: 836
Received 303 Likes on 211 Posts
I moved from a '13 MDX to a '15 RDX AWD Tech about a year ago and can offer a few observations:

- The '13 MDX was the final year of the previous generation. It was built very solid, had a ton of usable room inside, and could handle anything I could throw at it.
- The '13 MDX was abysmal with gas mileage. My average of the 20K miles I had it (never reset trip B) was 17.3 MPG. My normal driving is rural with 30-40mph average speeds, with only a bit of stop-and-go and some highway. The BEST mpg I got with that MDX was 25 on one trip after I had the tires aired to 39 psi after taking a uhaul trailer from boston to NYC (without the trailer heading back, tires still aired up). It drove like a buckwagon that way but the mpg's were good. Normally, however 20-21 mpg was the best I could muster on the highway.
- The '13 MDX drove a lot bigger than it was. That sucker is WIDE in terms of wheel track width. It's very stable on the corners because of this wide stance, but after trying to manuever this on the rural roads narrowed with snowbanks on the side, I was getting tired of riding up on the edges.

- The '15 RDX is surprisingly roomy inside for 5 passengers - but the storage in the back is much smaller than the MDX. For me with only 1 kid left at home, I can fold 2/3 of the rear seat down and haul what I need. But if you need to seat both front and back seating rows, the rear is much smaller. But the RDX handles very well, is nimble, and is much quicker than the MDX was. Definitely more fun to drive
- The '15 RDX has MUCH better gas mileage. My Trip B lifetime MPG's after nearly 10k miles is at 23.8. Same driving patterns as the MDX. But as you can see, over 6 mpg better on average. And it's noticeable on the highway. I can average 25-26 mpg's in all conditions, and have actually gotten as high as 31 mpg on a tempered highway run of 100 miles where I kept the speed below 70. Never have I had a tank that had an average of under 20, even in the winter time.
- The '15 RDX is not built as solidly as the MDX was. You can tell it's based on the CR-V platform, and you hear bumps and feel bumps more than the MDX. And there is a bit more road noise. If you want a "luxury" feel the MDX will be more to your liking. But the RDX is by no means a rattle box or does it have a non-solid feel. It's just if you drive the cars back-to-back, the difference in this regard is apparent.

Many have talked about the SH-AWD in the MDX vs the regular AWD in the RDX (in this thread and countless other ones on the forum). There's no doubt the SH-AWD, when you push the vehicle to the limits on turning and hitting the loud pedal, adds to the traction and the "fun to drive" quotient. But in terms of traction in the snow/ice and even in mud, There's not enough of a difference for me to regret my decision to move to the RDX. Granted, I outfit my vehicles with winter tires/rims since I live in NH and drive lots of back roads and dirt roads. But with similar (and proper) tires, either vehicle will do what you need.

Hope this helps give you more info. I really am happy with my decision to move to the RDX, since for me it was the right vehicle for my usage, and the benefits outweigh any trade-offs, as listed abovel.

good luck - andy
Old 02-11-2016, 08:45 AM
  #49  
Intermediate
Thread Starter
 
TannerG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: North Carolina
Age: 32
Posts: 48
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by andysinnh
I moved from a '13 MDX to a '15 RDX AWD Tech about a year ago and can offer a few observations:

- The '13 MDX was the final year of the previous generation. It was built very solid, had a ton of usable room inside, and could handle anything I could throw at it.
- The '13 MDX was abysmal with gas mileage. My average of the 20K miles I had it (never reset trip B) was 17.3 MPG. My normal driving is rural with 30-40mph average speeds, with only a bit of stop-and-go and some highway. The BEST mpg I got with that MDX was 25 on one trip after I had the tires aired to 39 psi after taking a uhaul trailer from boston to NYC (without the trailer heading back, tires still aired up). It drove like a buckwagon that way but the mpg's were good. Normally, however 20-21 mpg was the best I could muster on the highway.
- The '13 MDX drove a lot bigger than it was. That sucker is WIDE in terms of wheel track width. It's very stable on the corners because of this wide stance, but after trying to manuever this on the rural roads narrowed with snowbanks on the side, I was getting tired of riding up on the edges.

- The '15 RDX is surprisingly roomy inside for 5 passengers - but the storage in the back is much smaller than the MDX. For me with only 1 kid left at home, I can fold 2/3 of the rear seat down and haul what I need. But if you need to seat both front and back seating rows, the rear is much smaller. But the RDX handles very well, is nimble, and is much quicker than the MDX was. Definitely more fun to drive
- The '15 RDX has MUCH better gas mileage. My Trip B lifetime MPG's after nearly 10k miles is at 23.8. Same driving patterns as the MDX. But as you can see, over 6 mpg better on average. And it's noticeable on the highway. I can average 25-26 mpg's in all conditions, and have actually gotten as high as 31 mpg on a tempered highway run of 100 miles where I kept the speed below 70. Never have I had a tank that had an average of under 20, even in the winter time.
- The '15 RDX is not built as solidly as the MDX was. You can tell it's based on the CR-V platform, and you hear bumps and feel bumps more than the MDX. And there is a bit more road noise. If you want a "luxury" feel the MDX will be more to your liking. But the RDX is by no means a rattle box or does it have a non-solid feel. It's just if you drive the cars back-to-back, the difference in this regard is apparent.

Many have talked about the SH-AWD in the MDX vs the regular AWD in the RDX (in this thread and countless other ones on the forum). There's no doubt the SH-AWD, when you push the vehicle to the limits on turning and hitting the loud pedal, adds to the traction and the "fun to drive" quotient. But in terms of traction in the snow/ice and even in mud, There's not enough of a difference for me to regret my decision to move to the RDX. Granted, I outfit my vehicles with winter tires/rims since I live in NH and drive lots of back roads and dirt roads. But with similar (and proper) tires, either vehicle will do what you need.

Hope this helps give you more info. I really am happy with my decision to move to the RDX, since for me it was the right vehicle for my usage, and the benefits outweigh any trade-offs, as listed abovel.

good luck - andy
Very very helpful thank you! Yes most of these things are what I've found in doing research in the differences between the two cars. Im really leaning towards the RDX right now b/c of how much it costs and the better gas mileage... That's honestly a big factor (maybe if it didn't only take premium). My wife and I don't even have kids *yet* so I think Im pretty set on the RDX. Of course it will take a test drive or two to make up my mind but I definitely see the practicality of the RDX. Thanks for your input.
Old 02-11-2016, 10:07 AM
  #50  
Advanced
 
MetalMan55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 76
Received 27 Likes on 14 Posts
That's honestly a big factor (maybe if it didn't only take premium)

Premium is "recommended" not "required".

I use regular for around town and fill up with premium on road trips as I do find that I can squeeze out a couple of extra mpg.
Old 02-11-2016, 10:10 AM
  #51  
Intermediate
Thread Starter
 
TannerG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: North Carolina
Age: 32
Posts: 48
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by MetalMan55
That's honestly a big factor (maybe if it didn't only take premium)

Premium is "recommended" not "required".

I use regular for around town and fill up with premium on road trips as I do find that I can squeeze out a couple of extra mpg.
On an MDX or RDX?
Old 02-11-2016, 11:12 AM
  #52  
Advanced
 
MetalMan55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 76
Received 27 Likes on 14 Posts
Apologies....on my 2015 RDX
Old 02-11-2016, 11:18 AM
  #53  
Burning Brakes
 
andysinnh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Merrimack, NH
Posts: 836
Received 303 Likes on 211 Posts
Originally Posted by MetalMan55
That's honestly a big factor (maybe if it didn't only take premium)

Premium is "recommended" not "required".

I use regular for around town and fill up with premium on road trips as I do find that I can squeeze out a couple of extra mpg.
I've not yet tried it on the RDX, since the price of premium keeps dropping (near $2/gal around here), so I have not been inclined to roll the dice. I did try regular a couple times on the MDX and you could feel the difference with normal acceleration - it was much happier on Premium...
Old 02-11-2016, 12:03 PM
  #54  
Intermediate
Thread Starter
 
TannerG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: North Carolina
Age: 32
Posts: 48
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I could see possibly trying it on the older gen RDX w/ the turbo charged 4 but idk about the 6.
Old 02-11-2016, 12:34 PM
  #55  
Pro
 
Kaputnik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 613
Received 72 Likes on 63 Posts
Originally Posted by TannerG
I could see possibly trying it on the older gen RDX w/ the turbo charged 4 but idk about the 6.
Nooooo! Premium only in our babies! It's "required" not "recommended."
Old 02-11-2016, 12:55 PM
  #56  
Intermediate
Thread Starter
 
TannerG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: North Carolina
Age: 32
Posts: 48
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Kaputnik
Nooooo! Premium only in our babies! It's "required" not "recommended."
yeah that's what I thought
Old 02-11-2016, 02:07 PM
  #57  
Suzuka Master
 
RDX10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 5,351
Received 874 Likes on 669 Posts
Originally Posted by Kaputnik
Nooooo! Premium only in our babies! It's "required" not "recommended."
Hahahha "our babies!" But so true, I shudder at the thought of regular in the 1G rdx with the turbo.
Old 02-11-2016, 02:26 PM
  #58  
Intermediate
Thread Starter
 
TannerG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: North Carolina
Age: 32
Posts: 48
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by RDX10
Hahahha "our babies!" But so true, I shudder at the thought of regular in the 1G rdx with the turbo.
Yeah I never planned to actually do that.
Old 02-11-2016, 05:12 PM
  #59  
Suzuka Master
 
RDX10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 5,351
Received 874 Likes on 669 Posts
Originally Posted by TannerG
Yeah I never planned to actually do that.
Phew!
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
PeteZ28
2G RDX (2013-2018)
147
02-20-2022 11:20 AM
RDX10
1G RDX (2007-2012)
37
04-05-2016 10:02 PM
bsprinker
2G RDX (2013-2018)
8
01-31-2016 02:16 PM
2k5TSX
2G RDX (2013-2018)
7
01-28-2016 08:17 PM
alexl.wilson
2G RDX (2013-2018)
7
01-08-2016 11:02 PM



Quick Reply: Considering the RDX



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:42 AM.