Acura has officially put the 2010 RDX on their web site! Go to www.acura.com

I cannot belive it is now also available as a two wheel drive. Why buy an SUV without AWD? What, to save $2K on a $34K+ vehicle? Couple more miles per gallon? One of the biggest selling points IMO is the SH-AWD which was loads of fun last winter! :-)

 

I agree. 2wd rdx is pointless. even if it were rwd..... stupid.

 

Well if it never snows where you live, no reason for the extra weight and loss of mileage. I will be considering a new one with FWD.

 

I looked it over but could not see if they are adding touch screen controls to the nav system?

 

Considering the reach on previous RDX models, a touch screen would not make too much sense. Plus, voice commands work better for me.

 

What the hell were they thinking with that rear bumper? Are they serious?

The black/grey plastic really ruins the new 2010. Plus the Accord 4cyl style wheels just don't make sense to me.

I have never been happier than I got the 09 instead of waiting for the 2010.

Acura better step it up in 2012-2013 when the FULL model change happens!!!!

 

Only 2 things I like is the apparently better Nav unit, which I believe is the same one in the 2009 TL, and the ipod connection. Well I've added the ipod connector myself, and I can live with the older Nav, since it still does the job. I am so happy I got the 2009, the front grill is ugly, just as I feared, and the wheels are actually worse then the 09, which weren't the best looking wheels to begin with. I don't mind the changes in the rear either.

 

Seems liek they might have the multi-rear view camera now.

 

uhhhhh, awful. glad i own the one i have. Upset that no moves, at all, were made on the interior...also either due to it just being released/new, gone are the options for the front spoiler mod, people may be stuck with that nose - from what i saw there are no body mods at all other than the running boards.

The overall look seems so much more - economy ish, like the truck looks almost like an american small ute now. If it resembles anything upscape, id say it take a similar wide nosed stance now like the GLK.

 

also, for a loaded/top of the line RDX/TSX...they are now at the 38,500 mark. wow.

 

the nav unit is not the upgraded one from the TL. the specs say nothing about the unit being a full VGA display, and the pictures look identical to the 09's. Take a look at the TL unit, imo, the RDX unit is the same old one.

unless im missing it...the only new addition is USB/Ipod functionality, i also saw that under "bluetooth" is says you can now import your phone book...it does not say whether or not that is in the base model or requires the nav unit, it reads like it doesnt require the nav unit "A simple phone-transfer process allows you to upload frequently used numbers so that they can be dialed by voice command."

Ive read on the net that the RDX would have ambient footwell lighting etc...i dont see any mention of that as well...

those are my observations for right now!

 

I like the front. The wheels are so so, but slightly better than current. The rear isn't as nice.

 

I don't like the standard rims and the front bumper. On the other hand, I like the grill (I think it looks good in this car), the rear bumper treatment, kinda MDXish, and the Ipod connector.
Rear view camera finally has an indicator of how far/close you are.
Controls look the same, no vents in the rear seat, no push button start, etc.

I like the idea of the 2WD, it makes sense!....well, a little bit of sense anyways. I would have preferred two more cylinders under the hood, or maybe a diesel version....three more years and we'll see what they come up with..

 

I am 6'4" and can reach the screen without even leaning forward, touch screen is a lot easier to use than the wheel controller we now have.

 

Overall I like the looks of the current model '07 to '09 better than the '10. I just cannot get myself to like the "shield" front. The other updates to the front of the '10 are OK. I'm on the edge over the '10 wheels. They just don't look right for some reason on the RDX. The wheels on the '07-'09, granted a bit plain, look IMO better suited for the RDX. I do not like the change to the back of the '10 RDX. The '07-'09 rear looks SO much better! I also prefer the round exhaust tips of our current '07-'09. Since there are absolutely no changes to the power train (the most important reason to change/upgrade a vehicle IMO) I guess I'll be holding on to my 2008 RDX for a while longer!

 

The dial isn't that bad once you get used to it.

 

I agree the dial isn't bad. But if you quickly want to get something typed in the touch screen would be MUCH better. That might be the one thing I do miss most about my 07TL vs my 09RDX.

 

I could never deal with the fingerprints on a touch screen. I would probably clean it daily.

I bet the FWD is a tick or two faster since the RDX is not really traction limited. They pretty much purposefully neutered the new TL FWD to make the SH-AWD look better, but I don't see them doing that here.

 

IF the voice commands would allow you to spell multiple letters at once it would be great, but the fact that you need to go one by one, then wait for the machine to repeat them and then do it over and over again is a pain the a55. That would be the ONLY reason I want a touch screen....I have to say that I would be pretty annoyed with prints on it too...

I don't really understand what you say here....they "neutered the TL"??
I think that both RDX (2WD and AWD) would be pretty close in times to 60, but the cornering and overall performance would be dominated by the AWD, despite the added pounds. Also, I wonder what kind of volume they are expecting for sales of the 2WD

 

One thing I notice is missing.... the front, and rear skirts. IMO the RDX looks much cleaner, and sportier with the aero kit installed. I'm sad to see these parts disappearing from Acura's lineup...

 

How about addressing... gas mileage (without dropping two drive wheels?)

stupid - we're leaving acura once our lease is up.

TL > RL > RDX > somewhere else

 

Agreed - the screen and navi is still the same old, not the new one from the TL. The dead giveaway is the description saying "...from its vast DVD destination database". The navi from the TL is hard drive based, not DVD.

I like the USB audio connector and both side mirrors tilting in reverse (if I read the latter right). Other than that, meh. Not even bluetooth audio or LED taillights!

 

for the black trim to stick, i wish it was brought around as a skirt for a real side-sill...about lets say an inch or 2in height - piece...i think i would have liked it implemented that way, i just cant get beyond the tacked on ass and front...especially when the black in the rear isnt even wrapped onto the rear quarter panels at all, it makes the rear look even more narrow than it is..

also...pretty sad they didnt add the new navsystem, because the new one is really really good...i would have liked to see some redesigned dash work, getting rid of the stupidly small face buttons for the base stereo, and on the nav model, why not the large finger print sized buttons that are found on all other Honda/Acura dashs...the tiny buttons are a pain

 

The FWD TL makes less hp than the AWD. The FWD has a 3.5L and the SH-AWD has a 3.7L. I am assuming the RDX will be the same engine for both.

 

Upon inspection of the interior photos on the Acura site, the HVAC buttons seems to have been re-arranged. Nothing major, but they shifted some of the buttons.

 

Lindros better gas mileage like what a CR-V?

 

I would have liked to have seen the 2010 model with SH-AWD at least claim 19/20 City and 25/26HW with an overall average of 22/23mpg. That would equate to a 3mpg GAIN in City,Average, and HW driving.

I really feel this could be done with the exact same engine, adding a 6th gear would really help or even tweaking the ECU a little more like the Hondata has done.

 

The best thing for the RDX would be to ditch the engine and put the one from the accord V6. It can't be much heavier or more expensive compared to the current engine, and we'd probably match the RAV4 V6 for fuel economy.

 

Would the Accord V6 be able to match the 260lb-ft of TQ?

 

It has 254 - so basically, yes.

 

There has never been anything out of Acura that a V6 will fit, but we have heard (indirectly to a car magazine writer) that the V6 does not fit. With a transverse mounting, I would guess it is the width between the shock towers that is the problem. One more slap to the dead horse.

I think the mileage would barely improve with the V6. The Accord is only 3 mpg better on the combined, and it is 10% lighter and has a way smaller frontal area. Keep in mind that the Accord weighs less than the RDX, does not have AWD, yet it is slower than the RDX to 60 mph in many tests (Edmunds: Accord 7.5s and RDX 6.8s). I'll keep the turbo4, the rest of you can have the slower V6.

 

The power band of having the turbo is what makes the RDX quick; its the availability of TQ. The V6 is much different, and if any V6 went into the RDX, that would or could match the numbers of the Turbo, it would have to be similar in output to AT LEAST the 3.5 in the TL or better the 3.7. Which is why, i am actually someone who likes the turbo because the performance it offers, regardless of how you feel about the power delivery, is really on par or better than all the V6 cuv's out there right now. Acura did something right with the turbo; the mpg eh whatever, the RDX kicks ass w/its turbo. It loses power at higher speeds, but so what, from 0-70 is more or less what the avg person drives in..if u want 70-100 power, then, thats a whole different ball game.

 

In my opinion, this is a step back for the RDX. It just looks more "Honda" now than Acura (yes I understand they're the same company). In comparing the two (my 2 cents)...

Grille: worse - 07-09 was more aggressive and gave the vehicle a unqiue identity among the Acura lineup (while still looking like an "Acura")
Front fascia: worse - the front foglamp housings look too Honda Pilot and are almost cheesy in appearance...07-09 was wayy more rugged looking
Wheels: worse - by a landslide - is this an Acura or an Accord coupe? The wheels are definitely too Honda-esque...the 07-09 wheels were basic 5-spokes, but flowed beautifully with the vehicle's lines and overall aesthetics...these aren' even close.
Rear (not pictured): tie - I like the cleaner bumper design and bigger exhaust tips, but I'm not a fan of the dark grey plastic (as on the MDX). I also miss that angular point below the license plate which gave the 07-09 so much design character.

Overall: enjoy your 07-09s, you definitely have the better of the two RDX models.

 

More data (while I am magazine racing):

Road and Track:

2008 Honda Accord Coupe with 6sp manual(!): 0-60 = 5.9s
2007 Acura RDX: 0-60 = 6.3s

The accord is pulling hard at the 1/4 mile mark, but still only 3 tenths ahead.

The Accord weighs about 3550 and the RDX weighs about 3950, over 10% more. I find it hard to believe the 3.5L V6 is a better engine choice for real world (<80 mph) performance.

 

Agreed 100% it took a backward step with all the Hondaish looks seriously.
The wheels don’t match the way the car looks and flow like they had a pair of left over Honda rims in the barn or maybe an over stock of Honda rims IN INVENTORY and decided to slap them on and call it a day
…….it doesn’t look ACURA it looks like a hybrid of the 2 brands. Wow.
I still love the way the 07 thru 09 looks. Man Acura needs to listen or get a good focus group together to help in the DESIGN looks department.

This is a refresh I undertand however there are much better wheels design than this to compliment the car no? even for stock. By the way the front facia stink of Saturn.

 

I couldn't agree more. Acura really screwed up with this refresh! :thumbsdow Maybe they'll realize and "fix it" for 2011 but I doubt it. Enjoy your 07 - 09 RDXs!!!

 

The front's ok, but it's flatter than the older aggresive looking "point"!
The back is ok, but it sure looks more "mdx little brother" looking.....the wheels have got to go! They could've done better than those! Will have to see an '10 in person to decide!

 

Not really. The 2010 has more presence and is hotter. Of course, all of these points in this part of the thread are just opinions and not objectively-knowable facts.

 

str8 honda. Acura has the worst rim designs, and worst vehicle designs out of, i dunno every brand i can recall. Amazing backwards progress. Give me a 2 door legend.

 

I disagree and the reason the times are close is because the RDX is AWD. Launching a powerful FWD car is much tougher and 0-60's and 1/4 mile times are largely launch depandant (See the 3900 pound TL running a 14.4). The "real world" people are talking about, the RDX has 1-2 seconds of off the line lag which is more of an issue when I'm trying to make that right hand turn from a stop unless I brake torque everywhere.

Also, you said it doesn't fit because of the width between the towers? A V6 is shorter than an I4.

I bought the RDX because it was the best performer, but a V6 wouldn't hurt that and it would be better suited to daily driving. I don't think a V6 would really change performance or mileage, it would just make the car more responsive to throttle input.