Clocking in at a base price 2100 LESS than the last model - starts @ 37,625 including BT, USB audio, a little smaller than an X5, 0-60 around 6.7 for the NA V6.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...t_drive_review

Not listed on BMW's website yet so dont know what else is standard equipment. Thought it was a cool option that the back seat can be a 40/20/40 split. I would expect a nice beefy model in the 45k range and the turbo to go over 50k FULLY optioned. That being said, perfect fight for the Q5, and its base price makes for attractive buy in for new customers. The bigger size is great, too.

 

Per MT: The 8.8-inch navigation display includes an Internet connection with voice-read e-mails and a top view/rear-view camera. A head-up instrument display is available.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...#ixzz12XIne6t5

 

The new X3 is a huge improvement over the last generation. Looks like a very nice vehicle.

At a starting price less than the last model, I'd expect the base model to be fairly stripped, but I could be wrong.

 

really, what does that mean these days? even at the base I would expect a very nice car.

 

Then you haven't shopped for a BMW. Their "base" models lack even common features, let alone those that should be expected on a so-called luxury brand that charges the prices they do.

 

True, I have never shopped for the Germans before. But to clarify what I mean there are two things:
- it's rare to find a true base model, most of those cars come with some stuff that makes them a bit more than just base
- what I meant was, what does base really mean for those cars? you still get nice seats, nice materials and nice performance, you get AC and electric windows, you get a radio with CD player and all the safety gadgets....so really, what else do you "need"?

 

Do you know hids aren't standard on BMW/MB like Acura? To pay that much for a car and not offer the best optics is a shame and BMW is my favorite brand.

 

Yes, I know.
I am not making excuses for the way that they price cars and the fact that everything is an option. What I am trying to say is that there is a difference (huge) between a base Cobalt with manual windows, maybe not even a CD player and a base BMW that has all the essential luxury items.
HID lights are nice, but regular ones are fine too.

 

when you move up into the realm of BMW/AUDI/BENZ, if you are someone who shops cars based on features/price then you will always have a difficult time justifying a true premium lux car. Ok so it doesnt come with std hid headlights, but how about that STANDARD INTERIOR lol. Acura has hids, but how bout ALL THAT PLASTIC?????? all the things Acura focuses on that actually arent even that great like their nav or their stereo - how about getting rid of 100% of the dashboard plastic as a start? I'd pay for optional hid headlights if that meant the RDX had a real interior or rear HVAC or a hydraulic hood. A base model in one car is not close to the same as a base model in another. Ya u could go down the line and point out feature for feature what is or is not missing...but just because one vehicle may have all the parts, some vehicles on the whole are better than a parts list. Its sort of like all those car commercials for i dunno, hyundai, who sit there and claim features not found in BMW or BENZ, but is the Hyudai a better overall product? Acura got a long way on including everything as standard, but now, their cars are starting to suck and are mid pack. Standard equipment only goes so far. im not saying the X3 is superior, not by any means, they didnt even get to drive the thing really...all im saying is lets relax on this price/equipment tirade because the RDX hasnt exactly been on the top of ANYONE's list since it came out and there was the old X3 ONLY as real competition.

 

I've been keeping my on the new X3, and am very interested to see how it compares to the 2011 RDX (and the new rumored 2012 RDX) and Q5. If the new X3 has anywhere decent reliability, it may be a strong contender to replace my TL in the future.

 

Mike - stop ragging on the RDX stereo. The unit in the tech model is quite wonderful.

A leather dash would be OK until it stopped looking new. That would happen fast here where I am, probably not where you are. I prefer the composite dash that still looks new like day 1 because I would go nuts watching my dash deteriorate here.

 

I wasn't trying to make an RDX vs. X3 comparison. But since mmike opened that can of worms, let's talk about interior materials and fit-and-finish for a second.

First, I'll admit that I haven't owned a BMW since my 2000 M Roadster and haven't seriously looked at a BMW since 2002 or so when it became apparent that both BMW's build quality and customer service were severely lacking. But I assume not much has changed, so maybe someone more knowledgable than me can confirm or refute the following.

First, on base BMWs the interior is not leather, it is vinyl (they call it "leatherette"). The base stereo is a no-name piece of junk. And on ANY Bimmer at any price range, the interior plastics are el cheapo and everywhere, unlike even the base model, entry-level RDX which at least has some soft-touch materials and a well-designed ergonomic layout.

So it's far more than a feature list, but I would hold any Acura interior to be superior than its competing BMW counterpart based on design, fit-and-finish, and materials alone. That doesn't even get into reliability, repair costs, etc.

And one final point--yes, I would also judge Hyundai interiors (and reliability) to be superior to BMW. If you disagree, you haven't sat in a Hyundai lately...

 

ive driven every model of the Sonata, no thank you. I shopped the Genesis and Sonata all this spring. I left the Hyundai dealer thinking i missed the group coolaid. nice cars, long way to go, and they are not so much bargains anymore.

also, no way in the world is an Acura interior superior to BMW. The only Acura on BMW level is the ZDX, and what does that cost?

 

I'll take Acura's plastic interior over BMW's vinyl "leather" interior and the thrill of having to push it's stalled carcass off the road in rush hour traffic any day.

 

Like with almost every topic, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I personally feel the Sonata has surpassed the Camry/Accord and that the Genesis has surpassed the Avalon. I fully expect the Equus to take things to the Lexus LS level of refinement.

As for BMW vs. Acura interiors, wow... I guess we're each just looking for different things.

 

I admit I have not spent much time in a BMW, but I was in a 3 series yesterday for a few minutes, and I honestly was not impressed. Perhaps my expectations were higher because of all the ooh and ahh things you hear, especially on the boards, but I really could not see what all the fuss is about. There were plastics in the 3, just like any other car. I didn't touch any of the buttons, but they looked very similar to others on the market. I did not see anything special. I also could not get over how tiny the interior was - very cramped - and it didn't help that the dash comes up so high, making it more difficult to see out the front windshield (which was very small also). The flat dash (as opposed to slanted ones in cars I'm used to) makes me claustrophobic, as it's right in your face. I just didn't like it. I was surprised, to be honest, as I expected more.

 

yes, not a fan of the 3-series as well. i find the interiors of the bmw not as good either. now with audi or volkswagen that's different. hence i stick with acura for now as i dont want to worry about volks' reliability issues. for me, interiors wise: audi>acura>bmw, in general.

 

yes

 

Wish all things silver in my RDX were real metal. That trim (epecailly the center console sides) is looking a bit marred up. Not to mention the glove box that scratches with a thumbnail.

Ever notice how there are a lot of copy cats in the automotive world. Seems like the other manufactures try really hard to get their product to look like something German from last year. (X-6 vs. ZDX)

 

...or the fact that the ENTIRE top of the dash is straight plastic. in an area that will take the most abuse, they put weak plastic trim. ive already replaced both sides of it so my dash doesnt look like shit. thank you acura, at least its replaceable.

 

take better care of your car... my 2007 looks damn near brand new still...

 

Mike can u take a pic of the stuff u replaced.?

 

the silver side panels of the dash (where your knees may rest against)

 

And complaining about the RDX's plastic dash compared to the X3 makes me wonder whether you have even sat in an X3?

 

I'd take a 'base' Acura over a 'base' BMW within comparable models. Now I'm talking 1-3-5 series here, obviously the 6 and 7 are something else. Even a base 5 comes standard with leatherette. I'd rather be sitting in my buddies RDX that's loaded with features and entertainment and fun, than my other buddies X3 that is BLAND and BORING.

 

i wonder if u know what model we are talking about?

 

Yeah, mmike, that dash looks way less plasticky...

 

Well, if you are talking to me - I have and was NOT impressed and if I consider the price diff, even less impressed.

 

a quick hop to automobile's buyers guide:
What a quick little crossover! Honda's first-ever U.S.-market turbo is a pretty good one, generating gobs of mid-range torque and providing a swift kick in the back when taking off from a light. I'm not so fond of the RDX's inability to put down all this power, as evidenced by frequent wheel spin at launch accompanied by a bit of torque steer. Opting for SH-AWD would likely render this complaint moot, and would put the price of this loaded Acura at $38,430 - about the same as a base Audi Q5 lacking features like navigation and Xenon headlights.

Honestly though, I'd have liked to have seen Acura forego its value advantage and finish off this vehicle a little better. Most of the extra money would go to the interior, which has far too many hard plastics, not to mention a navigation interface in dire need of an update. The RDX is also a bit fidgety on the highway for a luxury vehicle. All of this conspires to make the RDX feel more like a really nice, handsome CR-V than a downsized MDX.

David Zenlea, Assistant Edito

The RDX is aging only okay, I'd say. As David Zenlea points out, the interior is not exactly plush, and the navigation system interface is not great. I'm especially put off by our particular test vehicle because it's front-wheel drive, not all-wheel drive. When you're selling a premium crossover, to my mind all-wheel drive should be standard. Hit the accelerator when you're at an intersection in a $36,000 crossover, and you really don't want torque steer. The lack of all-wheel drive was exacerbated during the time we had the RDX because we had a lot of fresh snow in Ann Arbor.

On the plus side, I was struck this morning, when I opened the center console that's between the front seats, to see how absolutely huge it is. It's easily big enough for a laptop, and there are two flip-down trays mounted about two-thirds of the way down into the console cavity that allow you to, effectively, raise the floor of the bin. So you can store some stuff at the bottom, flip down the little trays, and then pile in even more stuff into your double-layer bin. Clever storage solutions like this make a vehicle easier to live with on a daily basis.

We've got the typical Acura cockpit here, with the alien-head steering wheel, the somewhat inscrutable array of buttons for climate and sound, and attractive blue-trimmed gauges. As for the turbocharged four-cylinder engine, it's not impressing me as much as it did when it debuted: it sounds okay but it lacks linear response.

Joe DeMatio, Deputy Editor

Once you remove fuel economy from the "positives" column, the only thing the Acura RDX does better is undercut the price of the other vehicles in its segment. Unfortunately, the hard plastics throughout the interior will be a constant reminder of the money you've saved.

Jennifer Misaros, Production Editor

thats just automobile. im still nto saying the RDX is NOT a great value; because it still IS. all im saying is man, if ur gonna say the RDX dash is fine, then well, i really dont know what to say to that.

similar reviews can be found everywhere, i think most telling is motor trends initial review of the RDX which called into question its selling price, IN 2007 as maybe not being justified. i think its all exacerbated now given the new competition.

 

so you're comparing a 4 year old model with one that won't even be out for another ~8 months? Got it.

If you're going to compare apples to apples, I'm sure I can find more than a few reviews complaining about the amount of plastic in the 1st gen X3 (especially the dash).

 

Mike wrote
"also, no way in the world is an Acura interior superior to BMW. The only Acura on BMW level is the ZDX, and what does that cost?"

That’s why the BMW costs more. What's the mystery? You aren't one of those German Engineering guys are you? They use better materials and they charge you for them. If Acura were to refresh the RDX they might run the price higher and use the ZDX style interior.

Acura tries to attract their base Honda customers who might stray over to Lexus Infinity and maybe low end BMWs. Honda customers like reliability first and foremost.

I never understand the point of comparing a 2010 design with a 2007 design.

Have you ever had much success finding that base price BMW? They don't exist in my zip code, with the exception of the entry level 3 series that they sell to people who just have to have a BMW, even a weak example of one.

I went down the BMW track twice, and they are a joy to drive, and a pain in the butt to own if you keep a car beyond 2 years or so.

 

had a new 6 series just sold this year. bought new in 06.

 

we have no hypothetical future RDX to make any comparison to, as long as the RDX continues to be sold, its competing with any new model that comes out as far as im concerned. if not, then its basically only competing against itself. And under that theory, Acura is losing out even more. What happened for the 2011 was a disaster - instead of getting in there and doing some re-tooling, they slapped new rims on it , made it look worse overall and called it a MMC. No ELS gen 2 (and thus no new nav) they say better material but id like to meet those from Acura and have them point it out cuz its not true

basically - im not trying to sit here and spew that the X3 coming out is going against the RDX or that the RDX compares to it. Both i would answer NO to right now, even without sitting in the yet to be released X3. The fact is, the BMW has managed to bring costs down and content up. additionally, they have made the X3 much more formidable with a lower buy in. Yea its more expensive, just like the Q5. But this is where the segment belongs. Right now the RDX is even more like a CRV than anything thats currently sold in the near lux CUV segment.

and to littlefeat - there is NO mystery to me in terms of price or Acuras customer aim & their values - but the mystery to others seems to be what is so different in a 38 n change RDX and a 43 k BMW or Audi...for some reason, that remains a mystery to many. 5k buys a boatload of difference in refinement (quietness, sound deadening, UNDERBODY INSULATION), materials, fit n finish and overall product (engine, tranny, mpg, features, options, etc). and yes reliability also factors in there, but ive had a Q5 for over a year and its perfect so far, too.

 

which i for one am hoping they do. they should do it to every car they sell. move away from honda bins.

 

maybe the thread title wasnt enough direction - whats the point in even having this conversation if we are talking about the old X3. I understand your apples to apples conversation - but im pretty sure when vehicles are reviewed they arent eliminated because some people have a new model out and some dont. in fact, its just usually alluded to somwhere that, 'expect down the road for X to change, because a new engine or (fill in the blank) is on the way. or, ' the model is showing its age here' etc. Unfortunately, we arent going back in time here; there were a billion comparos of the RDX and first X3, which most of us have read and the RDX stacked up awesome against it.

 

I dunno... I would never keep a car that I was as miserable with as you seem to be with your RDX. I hope your next car makes you happier because you rarely have anything positive to say about the RDX.

 

for 7 posts u need to do some more reading. also, point out in this thread where i am patently miserable with my RDX - i said the dash is straight plastic...it is. it should be improved. i said the RDX is a great value. it has somethings missing to be expected in this class - like hood prop rods (which motor trend mentioned when the RDX was RELEASED). not much has changed but the '11 acura made underhood refinements.

im happy with owning this thing outright and i also get great satisfaction thru the other cars i own. what i write is real comparison, dont misconstrue my comparisons for hating. totally happy, this is a cheap cuv with a turbo in this segment, thats alot of fun.

 

Like what?

 

How do you like the Q5? How would you compare the Q5 vs the RDX, X3, and Lexus RX?

My wife has a 2005 RX330 and is thinking of the Q5. For some dam reason, the RX seems to have "loosened up" quite a bit since then and just doesn't solid, stable, and safe anymore. Maybe that trait is typical of of Japanese cars as they age?

 

One of the serious main reasons I bought my RDX was the SH-AWD! This coming winter will be my third with the RDX. Still on OEM rubber but checked tread recently (6/32 inch on most tire grooves, some a little less) so I'll stick with the stockers for one more season.

Beside the SH-AWD I DO love the interior, audio system, and overall fit and finish of the vehicle. I don't have any serious compaints. It's just a fun vehicle, and when the SH-AWD is really needed, like snow, it performs excellent!

Granted, every vehicle can be improved upon. That's why (we) keep buying new cars. The RDX is a pretty awesome ride to date. In due time I'll be in the market for new ride, but, for now, gotta' love my RDX!