thekrazzie1

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll...607190334/1149

this guy is pathetic he shouldn't call himself a journalist

he didnt write anything about the car...
and most navigation systems don't go that far into country grr

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

Anita Lienert and her husband are on the payroll for GM (or they should be if they're not) because they seldom have a good thing to say about non-GM or even non-American made cars. She and her husband are total tools, based on the numerous articles I have read.

And yeah, she rags on the nav system for this, but every other GPS nav system does the same thing.

jaobrien6

It's not necessarily a bad article. It points out some valid flaws with the technology. The problem is, the article is written as if this a problem specific to the RDX, and that's not the case.

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

No, it is a bad article, just like all the articles written by the Lienerts. They're horrible journalists and never present all the information, instead picking only one thing they either like or dislike and write only on that.

hondamore

I must agree that the author of the article was negligent in not adding a brief statement that this limitation of navigation systems is not unique to the RDX. There are a hell of a lot of roads on the continent and many of them are constantly changing in response to population shifts and maintenance needs, so a navigation system that is 100% accurate at all times is impossible. The Acura system with real-time traffic monitoring of many major cities is state-of-the-art and functions better than most, if not all, of it's competitors. Bottom line - it's a bad article.

zircon

She typically handles stuff like whether the car has adjustable pedals, a purse holder and other more female stuff. Her hubby talks more about drive trains, suspensions etc. i find them humorous. They both rated the tsx 3 out of 5. I think they were having a crack day...

thekrazzie1

that's ludicrous. first of all, i'm a female and that purse space doesn't matter, hello be human and throw it in the back... plus she doesn't know jack about cars... she's like oo the cool air conditioning system on the tech package woo.. so when i'm in the passengers seat one arm wont get a tan when the other one doesnt'... stupid bimbo. sorry yes i'm ranting. but anyway she doesn't write anything about the actual performance of the car. and i agree she should recognize that ALL NAVI's HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM!... plus... how much traffic is there in cities as rural as that? maybe the local drunk driving home at 4am.

yes i'm a girl and i'm under 25... lol no making fun of me cuz i for damn sure know my cars

jaobrien6

I disagree. IMO, it's a bad headline. If you look at the first paragraph: "A recent drive I made from Ann Arbor to the middle of Ohio in a new 2007 Acura RDX hammered home how much automotive technology can be your friend -- and how much it can let you down."

*That's* what the article is about... and if you read the article keeping that point in mind, it's a fine article. The problem is, the headline makes it seem like it's about the RDX, when it really isn't, it's about auto technology. Obviously this is a huge flaw, having a completely misleading headline... but if you ignore that, the article is well written, and makes some perfectly valid points abouts bells and whistles in cars: sometimes they work great, other times, not so much.

I will agree that the Lienerts are not the most objective or unbiased reviewers, that's for sure. And they do nitpick and harp on the littlest things, while ignoring major points of a vehicle. I do like to see what they say, though, because I think they usually appeal to the masses... people who don't give cars nearly as much thought as people on this site.

thekrazzie1

as far as i know, in english class the title of the paper is supposed to sum up what it's about and the thesis is supposed to expand... so therefore, if what you're saying is true, i see your point, she's still stupid for starting out saying that. The title should have been Automotive Technology Delivers and Disappoints, and the RDX should have been an example.

hondamore

The technology did not fail in this instance, it just can't possibly know every change to every road in America. The road that Ms. Lienert attempted to turn onto was either new or changed from the time the program DVD was made or was so infrequently travelled that it never was recorded. It is even possible that it was a private road that was not for public travel and had therefore been omitted.
I recently took a trip to the mountains for a golf trip with some old high school buddies and used my Nav system to guide my way around. In particular, I used the system to find a golf course in Golden, British Columbia, a little mountain town in Canada. Late in the trip, the system gave the same "entering unverified territory" message to me because a new road had been built that wasn't on the DVD. I simply "zoomed out" the Nav screen to get an idea of where the new road was going and then followed the new road until the system picked up the trip from where the new road joined up to the existing roads and directed me right to the bag drop area within a minute of the original estimated trip length. I thoroughly enjoyed the course and will probably return to it next year, and I am confident that the updated DVD I'll be getting in the mean time will guide me right along the new road. If this system works in small town Canada, it's going to work exceptionally well almost anywhere in the U.S.. If Ms. Lienart didn't have the foresight to simply zoom out the screen to see where the "uncharted" road was taking her, this isn't the fault of the Nav system.

A future headline from Ms. Lienart may read: RDX makes driver and passenger coffee every morning but fails to pick up on the fact that I decided today to switch to decaf!

thekrazzie1

huh?

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

See, what you're describing is bad reporting, which is why this is a bad article. The headline doesn't match the content and the review is too narrowly focused on a single point and fails to discuss the vehicle in question as a whole instead focusing on the biased opinion of the author on a single item within the vehicle. It's okay for a writer to do this every once in a while when they want to rant about a particular piece of equipment, but any other writer I have seen usually makes it clear that they are talking about the technology in question and not the vehicle. The problem is that this type of writing is endemic to all the works done by the Lienerts, regardless of the topic of discussion. This is not really an "article" so much as it is propaganda for the Detroit automakers. It annoys me when the Lienerts' articles get passed off as real journalism because it really isn't.

thekrazzie1

thank you moderator... i agree with every word

jaobrien6

If this ends up being their only review of the RDX, then I would agree that it's an awful review, because it's not a review at all.

I guess I don't lay all the blame on Lienert, though... I thought it was common for an editor or someone else to actually come up with the headline, but maybe that's not the case for a columnist like this, vs. a regular reporter.

Oh well, back to waiting for my local dealer to get some RDX's in. I want to take this thing for a spin.

hondamore

Sorry, it was an obtuse attempt to criticize Ms. Lienart's propensity to lay blame on the technology when her own personal limitations are at fault or her failure to understand the natural limitations of the technology are at fault.

thekrazzie1

yeah, i understood it after re-reading that part a couple times hehe

zalypkin

This article is CRAP!!!!!
No metter how advanced the technology gets, never rely 100% on it, because all it is, is bunch of wires and sensors. And if you are going to the middle of no where on purpose, you got to be tripping!!! Mobsters and drug dealers go to the middle of nowhere to take care of their business. I wonder why she went out there???? It might explain her odd article.

thekrazzie1

http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/news/15085889.htm

all i have to say is HA HA HA!!!

old news

foolioness

Man.. the article is pretty brutal. Real time traffic is only useful on a certain metro area for now. Its not available nationwide yet. And no GPS out tehre are perfect. From what I uncerstand Acura's nav is one of the best in the industry. She should do more research before she ramble about these non-sense. WOW! and she's one of the few that drives the car?

vicpai

But here's where the new Acura disappointed.

I followed a nav-system-programmed route that took me southbound on U.S. 68 through Ohio farm country near the tiny town of Dunkirk. At one point, the road was barricaded, with no detour posted. I was surprised that the Acura's "real-time" traffic feature hadn't alerted me to this problem.

Later, when I talked to Acura spokesman Chuck Schifsky, he told me the real-time traffic feature would not have helped me in that situation.

"One of the handicaps of the system is it mostly covers big cities," he said. "There is no information out in the middle of Ohio."

......or have they been living under a rock???? .....what a bunch of stupid idiots. It's pretty much common knowledge by now that XM NAVTRAFFIC is available only in 31 metro areas ......besides, if these brain dead fools had done their research, they would've known that it's not one bit the Acura Nav's fault, but the simple fact that the FRIGGIN INFRASTRUCTURE does not exist to support real time traffic monitoring outside Metro areas. The techonology is so new, that even in metro areas it is barely up to snuff (providers like XM have to get this info from a ton of "unreliable" sources such as "the government" that places cameras on freeways, the police etc.) ......to complain that Navtraffic is not available in the middle of Podunk, Ohio is simply asinine

OK, so I figured that the navigation system on the RDX would help me to steer around the barricade. But when I turned onto a two-lane county road to avoid it, the nav system said, "entering unverified territory," and offered no help.

I turned back to U.S. 68, found a deputy sheriff and asked him for directions. He was able to tell me that there were more barricades ahead and how to avoid them.

So in this case -- despite the impressive array of equipment on the Acura -- the old-fashioned way of navigating proved to be the best.

This is a bunch of hogwash. The Acura Nav system's MAPPING DATABASE (and POI database,for that matter) is one of the most comprehensive and complete ever. Every single little town, including "one horse" places like RAY, NORTH DAKOTA with a population of 8 people is covered. As a matter of fact, this is one of the main attractions of the Honda/Acura Nav systems compared to virtually all other Nav systems, OEM or aftermarket.. Normally even in unverified areas a blue dotted line would have "manually" guided her. However, if this idiot of a woman would've known how to change the setting in the "SETUP" menu, it would've provided TURN BY TURN Voice guidance even in the "unverified territory" she talks about. The only thing is, it gives a disclaimer asking to use caution, because the guidance may not be completely fool-proof. For example it may ask you to turn the wrong way on a one-way street, since these DETAILED attributes are not available in unverified areas (and that is a shortcoming of NAVTEQ, which provides the database and is responsible for "digitally" verifing and mapping areas). However, anyone with a little bit of common sense can easily figure out what to do with the info provided by the Nav

Finally, the fact that she's chosen the Acura Nav system to ridicule makes me LAUGH, and is simply beyond the pale. This is not "one of the best systems" as people have said above, but THE BEST system available, BAR NONE.....period......no ifs, ands or buts.

Ken1997TL

Makes you wonder if they even bother reading the brochure of the vehicle before its tested. The Lienerts have consistently made me say "oh god" for years with their awful articles.