AcuraTL-CL-EL

This is my first post...so go easy. I have had a GSR, TL, CL and 1.7 and I have always been a supporter of Acura. Each time I have purchased one it has always been year 2 or 3 model.

I am now considering the RDX but am quite worried about this being the first year model and first year turbo! I have already been sold on the car in terms of the offering...just waiting for the price tag!$!$

I have been reading the posts and many points are raised that praise Acura and their history but also raise concern.

Can anybody put my mind at ease?

CL6

Wait until the 2nd or 3rd model year.

RDX Groupie

Has Acura or Honda had any major issues ith thir first year offerings? I know that some manufacturers do. Honda has been using turbos in their race engines for years.

bobq

The RDX will be my 3rd first year model from Honda/Acura.

A 99 Odyssey and an 01 MDX were the other two and I had no problems with either.

Now each of these was on a lease for 3 years and I sold the Odyssey to a friend with about 28k, the MDX was turned in with 42k for an 04 MDX.

I got a call from my dealer yesterday, 6/13 and placed the order for Blue/Taupe with tech package. He stated the delivery date had been moved to early August.

Still sharing the MDX with my wife until the RDX is here.

Bob Q

CL6

Every car company has issues with first year model year stuff. Could be minor like fit and finish could be major. With the MDX, for example, sound deadening was added and the windshield was re-shaped. Nothing huge but some things. Also, things like a power passenger seat won't be added until second year.

But the original poster wanted to be put at 'ease' about the RDX's first year. No way to do that except to wait a year or two.

I'm sure Honda's first year is better than many other companies second or third year.

Count Blah

I have a 1st year TSX with no regrets.

Nakamichi

Even the manufacturer of the "ultimate driving machine," BMW, has first year blues. Hop onto the M3 Forums and you will see majority of the people waiting for the 2nd/3rd year of the next gen M3 because of that.

You should have to worry. Honda/Acura is pretty good on trouble spots. Anything major will be fixed in recall/bulletin. Plus Honda has used turbo engines in the past for consumer vehicles in Japanese.

CL6

The TSX was 'first year' for the US in 04 but not 'first year' in production. I believe it was out before in Europe and Japan... much like the Honda Fit (though not for as long as the Fit was). Still, the TSX got some nice upgrades for the 2nd model year and even nicer ones for the 3rd.

TorontoTL

The TSX was not introduced later in the N. American market compared with the European Accord that it is based on.

wiz

I have a first model year TSX ('04) and I love it. I just crossed over 50k miles and have had the car for a little over 3 years now and it's been great and very dependable. I am very interested in the RDX too, but I think I will wait for at least the 2nd model run so that I can make sure I get all of the little things that they will be adding (memory seat, power passenger seat, etc). I'm sure there will be more features added, and since I have the ability to wait, I am going to wait and see what else they add (not to mention I hope they add some more color combinations).

quake97

I have a first year TL and given the whole tire fiasco, I'd still go for a first year car. I'm an early adopter-type, so I don't mind being a guinea pig.

Joe

P.S. This RDX looks badass! TL lease up in June 2007...

98AccordEx

I have a 1st year, 6th Gen Accord Coupe and I'm at 88000miles without trouble. Go for it, it feels nice to have something fresh and it's so hard to wait for the 2nd year models to come out.

simplesimon

I have a 1997 CRV, first year and first Honda SUV. Never had a problem with it. They got this one right, so I feel confident they will do a good job on theRDX.

ozwaldo

I also have one of the very first CR-V's from 1997 and it has been perfect, BUT I think they were making them for several years in Japan before they made a left side driver for the US, so it really wasn't a first year model.

CL6

First year 05 RL... I'd pass.

CJW

I bought a 2000 Ford Focus first year model and I lost count of the recalls, at least 15. The car was okay but I worried it would blow up while I was sitting at a stop light. We bought a 2003 Saab 9-3 which was very fast and got outstanding gas mileage BUT had almost as many problems as the Focus. We traded it in on a 2006 TSX MT, third model year, and we love it. I traded the Focus in on a 2003 PT Cruiser, third year for the model, and have had no problems. Its a very good car but I'm going to need all wheel drive SO I plan to trade the PT in for a small SUV.

I'd like to get the RDX but I've had so much trouble with first model year cars that I think I'm going to have to pass. I like the RAV and CRV but their makeovers could be considered first model years so I'm totally undecided. Any thoughts?

98AccordEx

Unfortunately the two models you chose as 1st year models were not reliable brands. Many Saabs and Fords have quality problems (unfortunately I too have Saab experience), this is why they rank lower in both JD Power initial quality and 3-year dependibility surveys.

MrJumbo

If you are concerned, don't be, Honda/Acura tests their products extensively. See Colin's Blog:

http://www.satoauto.com/cblog/

CJW

I remember hearing that the first model year for the Acura TSX had an annoying rattle which couldn't be fixed. I almost prefer they replace the entire engine on my new RDX as have a rattle that couldn't be fixed.

Saab really blew it with the 9-3. Our '03 MT 210hp turbo was much faster than our TSX and got better gas mileage, amazing gas mileage, BUT the brakes squeaked all the time, even after three visits to the dealer and endless explanations by mechanics that it was going to go away. The ride was harsh and it didn't handle that well. By contrast, our '06 drives like a dream and has had no problems whatsoever after 6 months of steady driving.

For me its going to come down to the new Toyota RAV V6 4WD vs. Acura RDX Turbo AWD. Right now I'm leaning towards the Toyota because its about five thousand less...

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

I think your Saab was just giving you an illusion of fast. According to a comparo done by Car and Driver when the TSX was first introduced, a 6MT TSX is actually quicker to 60 and through the 1/4 mile than the manual tranny version of the Saab 9-3 Vector/Aero.

And what were you trying to say in the first paragraph?

CJW

My first point was that the TSX in its first model year had a rattle that was difficult to fix. This was in response to the claim that honda-acura first year models are tested so well that they don't have any problems. Try and keep up, okay?

The TSX might have appeared faster on paper but I can assure having driven both that the Saab 9-3 was faster. I base this mainly on freeway passing.

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

But how did the RDX get pulled into it then? That's what threw me off.

Again, the illusion of speed does not necessarily translate into speed. Unless you timed it, you can only assume.

neuronbob

1st year 3G TL (in fact, very early production TL), and no big problems. Despite what you read in the 3G TL forum, my experience is more common than not, and I'd probably do it again. Oh yes, can you say...."e-x-t-e-n-d-e-d w-a-r-r-a-n-t-y"? I can...

Then again, I'm a bleeding-edge type, too. As long as they don't pull an RDX Type S trick in the third model year or something....

vishnus11

Those saab 4pot turbos are not Z06 like from a stop, but absolutely shine on the freeway - I've driven one quite extensively (~3000miles) and its pulls like a freight train at hwy speeds when the turbo kicks in. And like CJW said - EXCELLENT gas mileage.

CJW: I'm actually disappointed that you had a bad experience - I was hoping to pick up an 03 9-3 next year or so

CJW

The 2003 Saab 9-3 (210hp turbo) was half of a great car. If they fixed the brakes and gave it a decent suspension I never would have gone looking to trade it in on the Acura TSX. We love the TSX for overall quality and I'm considering a RDX because of it.

GM/Saab should have learned a lesson from Honda/Acura years ago...

SoCaliTrojan

I'd rather have a rattle than a car that would break down on me.

That's a butt dyno. Human perception changes. Only scientific measurements should be used to do truly accurate comparisons.

Also, the 0-to-60 speed is from a standstill. At a running start, I'm sure the turbo has it's usefulness.