Like what I said several days ago on this thread, lot of CX-7 owners are coming here in the RDX forum to "REASSURE" they made the right choice

This is first time I heard of someone saying RDX is a women's car

I remember when I first saw the CX-7 at the Toronto Car Show last year, I thought its shape looks more like a van to me. That's why I stick with my origianl RDX purchase plan (was waiting for it over 2 yrs). Of course, 2nd major factor is the Acura brand is better than Mazda for sure. It does not matter if the Mazda is owned by Ford or not. (of course some people might say Mazda's quality could get worst after Ford got involved)

I think 2-3 thousands difference for the preminum brand and quality along with the SH-AWD system and other stuff. I am fine with it. I think for those who have budget concern, they can go for the base model CX-7. With the deeper discount from Mazda, there could be over 10,000 difference and still get a turbo CUV.

 

the Mazda is one ugly looking interior

 

Yeah, they seem to have some ugly circle theme going on, and whats with the alligator stripe on the seats?

Mike

 

Hi - I am new here and wanted to ask for opinions. We test drove both the RDX and the CX7 and like the Acura a lot better. The problem is I can get the Mazda at an employee discount rate (basically invoice) which is like $4,000 less than I quote I got on the base RDX ($31,700). I know I can do better on the RDX quote, but is it worth it? Even at invoice the RDX would be $2,400 more than the CX7. Any thoughts? Jay

 

Probably not. But that didnt stop me from buying the RDX. The CX7 may be the better value, but not the better vehicle. Most of us here were wiling to pay extra for something we desire.

 

Tech or non tech? If you are going with technology I'd say definatly. Given the look and reliability factor I'd take the RDX also.... For 2400 bucks I'd say get what you really want, in the long run it's not much of a hit.

Mike

 

Depends on what you value. The two vehicles, despite being in a similar market segment, appeal to slightly different customers. The CX-7 really is much more of an appliance for transportation. It does most things pretty well, but doesn't really have one thing that stands out about it.

The RDX is similar, by it does most things one step better than the CX-7. It's quicker than the Mazda, handles better, has more gadgets, has more luxury, and has a bit of brand cachet that Mazda cannot hope to match.

The question really comes down to, is that extra bit of improvement in nearly all areas valuable enough to you for the extra money?

 

Sorry, I couldn't resist writing this. Whenever I see people taking themselves too seriously I have to create a little mischief. I guess its the Irish in me.

Okay, for the record, the RDX is an outstanding SUV. I came very close to buying one but chose the CX-7 because it looked and handled more like a sporty SUV. The RDX, which is more refined, felt more like a luxury SUV.

Oh, I am at 2,500 miles on my Mazda CX-7 and am very happy with the purchase. Likewise I'm very happy with my '06 Acura TSX, which I found to better choice than the Mazda 6.

 

ok i dont know how you came to that conclusion but whatever makes you happy. i love my SH AWD

 

You do not have to tell me about Acura's reliability. We have an MDX that has been great. We also have a 98 CRV that we really love, but it is getting up there in age and needs to be replaced. The new car would be for my wife who really couldn't care about the tech items. She drove the MDX for the first couple of years and never even bothered to program the radio, let alone learn anything else. We did like the ride and drive of the RDX best but I am going to have a tough time convincing her to spend the extra $$$. Jay

 

I'd be hard pressed to find a car without radio pre-sets, and not everyone bothers to program them, I haven't in mine.

Mike

 

Does anyone listen to the radio anymore?
Anyway, on the CX-7 comparison, I think this has been covered top to bottom. As others have said, people have different opinions. Some like the CX-7 (it's a decent car), others see the value in the RDX. They are competitors, but are the extra features the RDX offers worth the $$$ to you? They are to me.

 

i preset my stations. i still listen to the raido. here in hawaii we have no XM

 

Bummer dude! I'm really starting to enjoy all the choices I have on XM! The sound is awesome, better than cd's, IMHO!

 

Personally, I don't care who else enjoys driving the RDX as long as I do.

 

Dudes, If you haven't read MT's comparison (RDX, RAV4 CX-7...listed in order of MT ranking here), I suggest you do:

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...son/index.html

I performed my own tests and have to agree [opinion], of the 3, with price not being the deciding factor, the RDX shines in a multitude of ways that the others simply cannot. If you are a driver that enjoys a firm ride, desires owning a vehicle that will respond to your driver needs AND has the athletic ablilities that the RDX brings to bear on the pavement, Acura is the leader of the tested vehicles. If you are looking to save dollars, go with the CX-7...but these three are clearly different vehicles. RDX comparably equipped retails for $6K more than the CX-7 and will go for at least that much more after the negotiation is over [many more CX-7s on the lots than the inflated inventory of RDX's], but for the extra $ RDX wins in my book hands down. The RDX drivetrain is more refined, the interior has less plastic and cheap looking appointments, the visibility is better (less blind spots), and throw it into some curves and neither the CX or the RAV can compete per MT:"it was no contest in lateral acceleration and our figure-eight tests." Agreed [more of my opinion].

 

now that's funny!

 

I drove the CX-7 and thought it was a really nice vehicle.

The biggest difference between it and the RDX, from the "seat of the pants" feel during the test drives, is that I thought the 6spd CX-7 transmission seemed overly busy, and combined with the turbo that seemed a little laggy, resulted in a more "lurchy" feeling, and it seemed fairly easy to catch the transmission/turbo napping.

Perhaps once I got used to the vehicle, I would learn better how to drive it smoothly, but I had no such problem in the RDX. I just felt at home as soon as I sat in it.

Is the RDX worth the extra cash? I would say so, particularly when it comes to resale, but I can certainly understand why others might not agree.

 

You said you like the RDX a lot better. "Worth" is completely subjective, and personal. there are plenty of people who couldn't be convinced any car is worth $30k...

The only advise I have is that I've tended to regret "value" purchases more than waiting a bit longer for those that I really wanted. That said, we went with a base RDX rather than a Tech, as we didn't think the package was "worth" it's additional cost. Many here feel the opposite.

Cheers,
Phil

 

Good point. I do, however, hate when people talk down about people who do choose to spend more money on something. I had a friend who's family would insult nice things other people had... That shit disgusts me.

I'd argue the RDX is more worth it as its a faster, better handling, more refined vehicle for not much more, but thats subjective.

Mike

 

Can't agree more. I also hate it when people say a product is crap just because it's not what they bought or it's just a little cheaper price wise.

In this case, the people that say the CX-7 is crap are wrong....as are the people that say the RDX is not worth the extra $$$. Both cars have their advantages. It's just a matter of what you prefer and where your priorities are.

 

I can see how Honda is really pushing the Acura brand more upmarket by putting even more technologies and features into their cars to differentiate them from their Honda counter parts. I can't imagine people cross shopping between the RDX and the CRV anymore (I heard people cross shopping pilot and mdx before) which, is a good thing. I guess Honda is doing the right thing, otherwise, the image of the Acura brand will not be improved from its current state (which is more prestigous than Honda, but not quite there with the likes of BMW, MB, Audi). It might be unfortunate to some people who want affordable luxury vehicles since upgrading the brand image also means increasing the price. But for Honda to stay competitive within the market, I guess it has no choice but to really make Acura a brand that represents real luxury/performance/technology. This, in my opinion, should also enable Honda to move upmarket a little bit more without creating internal competition with its Acura counterparts (ie, if Honda doesnt make Acura more prestigous, then people will cross shop between Hondas and Acuras, or in this case, Acura and Mazda).

But everything comes with a cost, I don't think Acura can enjoy its high sales anymore for a little while until people accept its position as a real premium brand. I mean there's no more RSX, the CSX (Canadian-only) is not really that affordable compared to the EL (It was less than CAD$20000 when the EL was first introduced!! CSX starting price is like $25000!), and just look at the price of RL. Without the RSX, the overall sales will definitely go down quite a bit. I don't see that many CSXs around here in Vancouver, but lots of ELs. And I also don't see that many RLs around either (but it's a great car). Though, if Honda is successful in improving the image by launching better vehicles, then I am pretty sure its sales will increase again.

Anyways, I don't even know why I am making this post since it's not really related to RDX vs CX7. I guess I am too bored from work.....

 

That sums it up...the value of your post appears to be equal to the value you provide to your employer.
Drive both cars and then you will know why there is a difference in MSRP, neither are selling well, but clearly the difference is more than just $.

 

I think agree that it is good that Acura is moving upscale. The RDX turned out to be too small so we are looking into an 07 MDX with Tech, which we test drove tonight. I can say this vehicle is MUCH nicer than the last generation, as is the TL with the last generation. Having also been in a Q7 and an X5 this car was MUCH much nicer IMO, and in addition much cheaper. It clearly is more than previous generations in price, but I think it is well justified.

Mike

 

May not be quite on subject, but you bring up some very good points.....

 

Wife and I just got back from our test drives of the CX-7, X3 3.0si and RDX.

Her choices are as follows in terms of performance, comfort and overall appeal:

1) X3 - so so exterior styling. By far the best handling of the bunch. Felt solid and powerful. Interior design is purposeful. Very thoughtful touches. Heated seats were the best of the 3. Must have panoramic moonroof is awesome.

2) CX-7 - Loved the overall exterior and interior design. Power was so so. Handled well. Lots of interior room. Thought it was more sure footed then the RDX - go figure.

3) RDX - Nice 19" wheels. Front end looks looks waaaaaaaaaaay to long. Interior dash reminded her of the new Honda Civic. She said she couldn't see me/guy driving it because it looks too "cute". Didn't like the idea that it was assembled/built in Ohio

We're going back to the BMW dealership as the salesman said he can get us a fully loaded X3 for $44.5K. I know it cost more then the CX-7 and RDX but you get what you pay for

We didn't look or wait for the new X5 or MDX because we don't need the size. However, we did consider the Audi S4 Avant Wagon but there wasn't one on the dealer lot to test drive.

 

US$44.5k....man that's pretty much the same as the RDX tech, except that it's CAD$45k instead of in US currency!

Anyways, did you test drive the 2007 X3 or 2006? I am not sure whether the 07 is out yet or not. I still prefer the RDX cause I am biased I just don't like its front (especially its weird shaped headlights) but that's of course my opinion only. I like the appearance of X5 more actually. But nonetheless it is still a Bimmer, so I guess paying an extra 7g is fine with you.

By the way, the post i made before this one, I was typing it during my lunch break.....

 

For that price I'd take a new MDX, but that's your choice based off what you need. BMWs are excellent machines, but a lot of what you pay for is in fact the name, not that there is anything wrong with that. As far as Made in Ohio vs. Made in Japan, there really is no difference.

Mike

 

Anyone see the new Motor Trend? They praise the potential of the CX-7 while saying a few not so nice words about the RDX..

 

i could care less what a magazine says. i also could care less what other people think about it. i love my RDX and the fewer the better for me =)

 

Agree, I feel so unique on the street as I still haven't met another RDX on the road. I don't want to feel like when I was driving the CRV. Many of them in the same parking lot, could be two of the same color parking side by side

That's why I kind of like Acura keeping high lease/finance rate --> fewer people with lease the car

 

Well, I don't think the lease has much to do with it -- sales are just generally lousy (which I don't understand). But I am not sure that's something to celebrate!

 

Haven't seen it. Any more detail?

 

So this was after they compared the RDX, Rav4, and CX-7 and said the RDX was the best of the three followed by the Rav4? The CX-7 came in dead last....

 

I haven't seen the magazine but doesn't make a lot of sense that they didn't have many good words for the RDX after doing this report

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ver_comparison

 

and what about the RDX getting first place in the car and driver comparison? hmm....the RDX won first place against the same cars in the 2 most important (arguably) auto magazines....I think that's enough to prove its superiority, right?

 

Nah! Still ain't good enough for some people! It is for us RDX lovers, but we don't count I guess!

 

As I've said a number of times, when you read test reports, don't bother with the test's conclusions. The test driver doesn't have the same priorities and likes and dislikes that you have. Read about the features and performance (and I don't mean just specs and test numbers). Read as many tests as you can find (that you trust -- we all know how dependable information found on the Internet is) and decide if it belongs on your test-drive list.

 

Motor Trend seems to have changed their view on RDX vs. CX-7. Long term driving is the true test..

 

Nice! Well, at least you and your wife test drove all the cars and came to a conclusion. We had similar choices for our purchase and although our view points are different, it's obvious personal choice. We thought the RDX handled very comparable to the X3, it's just the steering feel that is still not up to par. Interior wise, the RDX's more modern design suited us a lot better. Exterior-wise, they are both "cute" utes and both not the best lookers. We do love the RDX's back a lot more than the X3 though. I do think the RDX feels extremely solid on the road. Much more so than the TSX and RSXs that I have driven before. Maybe, it's the new ACE structure, who knows.

Oh yeah, regarding the US built versus Japan built. Honda seems to do fine with their vehicles built in the US, so it's not a concern to us. You do realize that BMW doesn't actually build the X3 right??? It's the only BMW not built in a BMW plant. It's contracted out to Magna Steyr in Austria who makes mostly Saab 9-3s, a couple of Mercedes, and Chrysler products for various markets.