acura1972

hi guys, thanks for your insights... after re-visiting the audi and acura dealerships for another test drive, as well as questioning these guys (sales) on their reliability so far (eg. q5 is year 1 - there are more issues to be expected) and after market service, plus the potential 6k-11k difference in q5 vs rdx (eg. 6k if barebones, 11k if premium), we've finally decided to finally go for the rdx... at this point, my wife wanted a spunkier ride - and believe it or not she found the q5 actually lulled her to sleep and she wasnt too keen on driving it -- for some strange reason harsher [or dare i say sportier] ride and growling engines are preferred! [for my sake, at least i managed to save $ and get the vehicle she was more keen on! - was fine with the rdx but found q5 more luxurious]... in my personal case, i actually preferred a smaller vehicle (a3 or tsx) but that's a whole different story maybe in the year(s) to come... but thank you very much for all your insights... ill continue to post/lurk now that im lusting for my own vehicle... ps. never had my own car pre-marriage as i lived in the city == we're moving to the burbs next year so needed a "utility" vehicle first... never realized looking for a car would be so much fun... ps. i actually enjoyed the turbo engines... dunno why... maybe im just a weird driver...

MMike1981

congrats , good luck, enjoy it

acura1972

thanks mike!

cp3117

Congrats on your purchase.

Out of curiosity, did you ever compare the RDX to the VW Tiguan? I know a few people that have and they where actually surprised at how well it compared to the RDX and even appeared to have more features for a little less money. (although the RDX is a little larger).

acura1972

hi, thanks for the well wishes and no i didnt test drive tiguan vs rdx... i was really wary about reliability problems of the vw/audi truth be told.... people really asked me to test drive the q5 before i made my final decision but in the end, the rdx just won out based on "feel" and that i was not going to lease it... i couldnt "test drive" reliability, truth be told, but when i read that consumer reports had bad reviews of some vw models, i kinda wrote it off... even audi q5 was not rated, q7 was poorly rated in reliability and a3 was "average" (and it was labelled improving in reliability)... believe it or not, i drove my grandfather's vw bettle (1972 model engine at back no radiator) when i was in college way back when (eg. early 90s) -- i kinda had high hopes for vw's reliability as i was growing up given but now, it seems that the japs are quite a ways ahead...

gungho_15

I have been following this thread and congrats on your purchase. I actually waited myself for the 2010 RDX to come out. I have had mine since September and absolutely love it. Congrats again! I know you wont be disappointed!

guytdt

Go with Q5. It's best looking in its class and it's true luxury. RDX is not quite yet.
But guess it's too late.
And I'm not concerned about reliability. Even Toyota can recall almost all of its product.

corduroygt

I checked out the tiguan and it has very little space behind the rear seats. It really not much more spacious than the gti so save your money and buy a gti instead if you want a vw.

ductman

You should be worried about the Q5 reliability, I am going thru the lemon law process, 56 calendar days and counting with transmission issues, 2 transmissions, 1 valve body, Out of 2.5 months I have had the car in my possesssion about 2-3 weeks, so you have been warned, other people have complained about the trans also, hard downshifts, lurching and jerking.

acura1972

thanks gungho and rest of posters... yes, it's too late and some posters actually followed up on my concerns about the Q5... i tend to "err" on the "safe" side with reliability and test a lot of sources --- consumer reports, talk to owners of cars, forums, not buying yr 1 models... after going through all that, i decided acura reliability should be better... of course that is no guarantee but im playing the odds...

in the end, as some posters also adviced me, go with "feel", and i felt i like the rdx more... i look forward to enjoying the car... the only "concern" about reliability i have with the rdx is corrosion... hence i was wondering if people here would recommend rustproofing? i live in toronto and snow/salt, i fear, may ruin the car -- i intend to keep the car 5-8 yrs max...

gungho_15

I opted out of the undercoat after I talked to a buddy of mine who is Certified Mechanic at one of our local dealerships. I had heard what he mentioned. Somtimes when they spray the undercoat on the vehicle, it can get bubbles it in, and when they open up it allows all the crap to get underneath it and traps it. I have seen it happen personally with an older vehicle I had it done on. The only benefit I have heard is that it cuts down on road noise. Keep the vehicle clean, and I don't think you'll have issues. Plus if you were only planning on keeping the vehicle for the time you specified, I highly doubt you would see any problems, plus our warranty is pretty good!

Thats just my 2 cents. I live on the outskirts of Vancouver were we can see a fair amount of salt. Not this year though!

greyghost04

Rustproofing is the biggest scam dealers try to pull on you. Look it up in Consumer's Report.

acura1972

thanks guys! i will not bother with it then... yes! that's the answer i wanted to hear

wrestrepo

I always find rankings funny....but, here it is....

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/02/04/2...s-your-favori/

2010 World Car of the Year

1* Audi Q5
2* BMW X1
3* Chevrolet Cruze
4* Kia Soul
5* Mazda3
6* Mercedes-Benz E-Class
7* Opel/Vauxhall Insignia / Buick Regal
8* Porsche Panamera
9* Toyota Prius
10* Volkswagen Polo

gungho_15

LMAO...Thats pretty funny. Lets see how long Toyota stays on that list for! HAHA

acura1972

audi q5 #1? i guess this cannot be just a list about reliability...

pittdoc

i travel a lot in the snowbelt, and the quattro is just a hands down winner, its just a marvelous system....however, I once drove a buddies rl with shawd, and wow, it was awesome...but those systems are secondary to what tires you car wears

Ugene

I can’t say about q5 and 2010 RDX in particular but would like to comment about SH-AWD vs. Quattro.
I and my wife own:

2007 RDX w/ tech
43K+ miles with no problem except windshield wiper motor changed under warranty.
This has been our family traveling and skiing car.
Has 2nd set of OEM tires.
Drove it through all kinds of slippery conditions, both snow and ice. Drove it on snow or wet very aggressively and was sometimes passing everybody on snowy roads on all-season OEM rubber.

2007 Audi S4
With considerably worse tires (for the moment) and 23K.
I only had a couple of days driving it when slippery and snowy.

While the cars are not really a match in agility and fun factor here’re my impressions on AWD.

When traction is lost SH-AWD is way better, reacting faster and keeping the car on course much better. On S4 I ended up on next lane when loosing traction on an icy patch in a turn; it understeers and it can rotate 30 degrees or so before stability control kicks in. SH-AWD feels a lot safer and I am actually not afraid to enter a corner with speed that may be unsafe without SH-AWD.

More impressions on RDX addressing some points made in this thread.

RDX feels like a car that turns so-so on which someone put electronics that correct all of that to make perfect turns.
Beware of some oversteer when exiting sharp corners taken at speed.
Slight steering corrections feels imprecise especially at highway speeds. But in turns SH-AWD gives you perfect confidence and precision.
I tend to switch to S(port) when in slow traffic or need to merge into traffic. Even then in stop-n-go traffic you can’t really change lanes quickly and safely when there’s a smallish opening in a faster moving next lane.
I prefer ergonomics of RDX controls to Audi any day.
ELS sound is definitely more clear and true than Audi’s Bose. Bose is nice to listen to pop, though.

Ugene

Oh, that was an old thread

bowler807

ol mdx 2002 only had to be repaired for stone chips despite road/salt/slush commute we have. also needed to replace suspension but thats to be expected. i think acura paint/corrosion has improved versus the 90's honda civic rear wheel well corrosions / perforations

bowler807

ha! youre not alone .happened to me too - thought i read an old thread before (that apparently never existed!) see my other thread on turbo reliability for a laugh

mikeyhd

I have consider the RDX and Q5 before setting in the MDX

I have drive both the MDX and RDX over two different weekends

the RDX is a harsh/firm ride compare to the Q5. the Q5 is just perfect, the only trouble it's really pricey, even with all discount (I have a rebate of currect audi owners) the price is really close to the MDX and much more expensive than RDX.

if I have funds I get the Q5, but thouse german cost a lot on maintenance

cFoo

If I have to do it again I would have waited for the Q5. I'll take my reliability chances with Audi.

I've always bought Honda/Acura (integra, legend, prelude, civic, s2000, tl,rdx, fit) let me tell you after owning the TL and RDX I will never ever buy another North American built Honda. They just don't build them the same. They rattles, they fall apart like Audi of the 90s. So you see if I have to do it all over again, I would rather buy the Q5 and take my chances. At least you ride around in style, even if the electrical don't work half the time

Jack Bauer

I have one month left on my RDX lease and have ordered a Q5 due to be delivered next month.

Still haven't decided what I'm doing yet though (Q5 deposit refundable). I may lease a 2010 RDX, but haven't test driven one yet. I like the fact that they added auto-headlights, auto-dimming mirror, power passenger seat and memory. But, unless the ride is a bit softer and the engine noise and turbo lag reduced, I'll probably go with the Q5. Stay tuned...

MMike1981

yep

Mikes_in_PA

We are all Acura family. MDX, TL-S and 4G TL. Just traded a 2007 RDX for the new TL SH. The RDX was trouble free for 40K miles but my only complaint was very poor gas mileage. The MDX actually did better that the RDX. We were averaging <14mpg around town. Although I'm in love with Acuras I would say that the RDX is at the low end of my list for cars I'd like to own. If you are set on getting a small SUVthen by all means do it but know that the gas mileage will be less than desirable.

Dima1978

Well, you may have to wait a couple of weeks until they fix an electrical, ride for a week then wait for a couple of weeks to fix a failed O2 sensor. Some sensors on Audis are well hidden-- maybe the whole engine has to come out to fix it.
Audi does look good though with all them LED stuff.

MMike1981

Audi also makes you look good while driving and makes you feel like you spent your money and that it went somewhere...a tech pkg RDX i mean no offense, but it doesnt feel at all like its worth its sticker - an Audi puts you into the stratosphere in terms of luxury/feel/quality imo...tangible things you can feel, look at and enjoy - dont get me wrong i love the honda reliability but when im inside my RDX i feel like im driving my old accord
-Yea audi may be more prone to breaking, but as ive stated before, no company is perfect, and who knows about reliability has been a crap shoot for me the last 10 yrs - including hondas shit transmissions pre 06 - all my V6 hondas were slipping , yea they may have fixed that but just goes to show that no company is perfect, you dont know what you are getting into, and anyone buying an audi may get a perfect one, or as I experienced, i got a lemon 2007 RDX ... call it rare , but if you are the one spending the money, get what you want to be in, look at and enjoy every day

cheffip

To satisfy my curiousity, I went for a long test drive in the Q5 last week on a variety of road surfaces. I liked it but I wasn't as blown away as I thought I would be. The interior was nicer for sure, but it didn't make my jaw drop. I did think the V6 was smoother accelerating from a stop (made me more aware of turbo lag) but the steering seemed heavy compared to the RDX. Bottom line is that here in Canada it would cost another $10K to have a comparably equipped Q5 and that's a good start for my 2012 (FMC?)RDX.

Dima1978

bottom line: it becomes a matter of one's opinion and personal criteria. Heavier steering is better on the road. IMO.

wrestrepo

Some people like skinny women, some like them curvy, some like them blonde, others to be brunettes.....some are high maintenance, some are easy going, some are faithful and some cheat, some are healthy and some get sick often, but they all have something in common, we love them....(don't take offense if you are a woman, or gay)

Which one is better? the one you like the most, whichever one that may be.

cavium303

+1!!! very subjective, this thing about buying cars. lots have said, buy what makes you happy and what makes you WANT to drive the car. might not be as simple as it sounds but a simple analogy: if i have a rolex watch but dont like using it and would prefer my timex for everyday use, nothing wrong with that.

DJ Iceman

Nope, gotta disagree. And the impartial facts provided by Consumer Reports disagree too. In my personal experience, I had a first-gen CL built in Ohio and now my RDX, and both are every bit as well-built as my Japanese-assembled Integra was and Lexus GS is.

It might make you feel good to bash the laziness of American workers, but the reliability data shows that it's the quality design and control processes of the Japanese companies, not the diligence of their domestic workers, that makes for well-built cars.

Dima1978

I agree and disagree. Lets clear up the laziness. American workers are far from "lazy", (maybe in comparison to Japanese workers, i cant really tell for sure).
I do agree it is the same car-- no difference. I used to own an 87 Legend and that thing leaked oil from every gasket, bad bearings, etc.

MMike1981

i dont think anything matches the build quality of the mid - late 90's hondas & acuras. very different from today. obviously designs/plants etc all change but those cars were bullet proof in their construction

cavium303

my sisters 94 honda civic lasted till 2003 when we sold it - just bec it was old (no defects) and we didnt wanna deal with more maintenance needs (eg. due to age more than anything else). knock on wood but so far i havent noticed any significant change. mike, per your own experience what do you think led to a slight drop in quality of build fm the mid 90's? {which i personally havent noticed}

MMike1981

Every model Honda and Acura I have owned that has been assembled/built in American has been greatly differernt from those models I have owned assembled/built in Japan. Thats been my experience over time. By differences im talking about rattles, squeaks and overall cabin noises, plastic/panel/dash tightness, etc

I guess you could say what is the test for such things - my test is pretty simple - take the car and run it over rough roads - what happens? what do you hear, feel etc - yea it could be subjective but my RDX is a milk crate, my 95 accord 2 door w/250k miles was as quiet on that day as it was on mile 1. Same can be said for my first CRV, RL compared to models subsequently from America. Im not trying to say that American built Hondas/Acuras are way off - its just not the same, they dont feel the same.
just my opinion from owning them over the course of 15 years, in various models, both ACura & honda, etc. I owned accords from 95 thru present, as well as first gen CRV thru present, and RL/TL (legend)/TSX's & Pilots from first gen thru present

brands obviously change over time

brizey

I have heard of studies that indicate quality is 85% white collar driven.

corduroygt

Well Mike in all honesty the RDX has more parts to rattle than your 95 accord, so it may not be an accurate comparison.

Dima1978

I had like 5 Hondas in 10 years. 1990 Accord was the only car that I really liked. I still miss my baby.
Yesterday, I drove a 2008 Accord and I could go one if it had an AWD(and a Turbo).