ddb

I didn't ask for Acura's motivation in offering the engine (I understanding the marketing that goes into engine choice, and not wanting to make other vehicles in the lineup less attractive), but I asked why folks consider the Turbo a selling feature. Okay, I guess some folks prefer the different feel. Coming from a V8 sports sedan, I definitely don't prefer the Turbo 4-banger. I just don't personally see the advantages, feel or otherwise, of a Turbo4 vs. a naturally-aspirated 6.

Right, it doesn't quantify the cost difference, which was the claim that I was questioning.

- DDB

batman

It has 475hp and 449 lb/tq. Its like have two RDXs in terms of power and three in terms of price. I know it gets better mpgs. TAKE THAT.












I'm bored!!

brizey

I'm pretty sure it does not fit.

Honda did develop a truckish platform that is big enough for the V-6, and the result is the $40k plus MDX when made into an entry level luxury crossover. Even the Ridgeline, Pilot and Odyssey are all well into the $30's when well equipped. I would be shocked if the reason they chose the CR-V platform was not cost.

The EX35 and the X3 are based on cars that cost much more than the CR-V (FM and 3-series platforms). I have no direct evidence that using the CR-V was based on cost--but it is pretty obvious to me. Developing a special platform just for the RDX would have been pretty damn expensive given the potential volume.

For me, a loaded CX-7 is much more of a competitor to the RDX than the EX35 based on price and seating capacity.

Mokos23

i'd rather get an RDX than a CX-7.

Shoofin

I thought about getting one myself, until I sat in it. The interior is definately nice, more luxurious than the RDX IMO. I drove one the other day, it doesn't ride any different than a G35x. The most disappointing thing about it is the back seat, the space back there is TERRIBLE. I was talking about it with a friend at the dealer, he was telling me that Infiniti built that car for single women/mothers. I'd believe it...I will say that the VQ engines in these cars are great, with nice power as well. As for fuel efficiency? fuhgetaboutit. 16/23? I doubt that! I had a G35x before the X3 that my wife is driving now (lease ends this week and i'm getting an RDX Tech), the fuel mileage for both the G and X3, in local city driving, she consistently got between 12-13mpg. Sucks.

Mokos23

wait, 13 mpg in the city in the G35x? dang that sucks! the 2nd gen G35x right?

cwepruk

Based on what? Being that the CR-V is direct competition with all the other CUV's that offer a V6 option i.e. Rav4, Saturn Vue, Outlander, Escape and on and on, (or a turbo 4), it would have been retarded for them not to think of a V6 at some point.

It also not hard to fit a small displacement V6 under any hood. They are not that big.

FWIW, Honda has indicated the TSX has the room for more engine, including a turbo 4 or V6.

xav

X2

My girlfriend drives a MX-3 GS... The engine is a (small) V6! There is no room what so ever to work on anything under the hood, but it fits!

tlzx9

Okay..I've sat back long enough without saying anything. I currently own a 2008 Infiniti G37S 6MT in Athens Blue Pearl. The car is PIMP. 330 HP stock, Navi, the whole deal. I have always owned Honda and Acura vehicles. I owned a 2005 Infiniti G35 6MT, and HATED it due to a very rough ride, and poor customer service from Infiniti from the service department. I had an 07 TL Type S and traded it in in January for my 08 G37S. The car has an inherent exhaust rattle that is annoying as sin, and Infiniti's service department treats me like I am a HUGE PIECE OF SHIT. It is really frustrating to spend $45,000 on a car, and get the terrible level of service that I have received.

I am about to start touring as a full time musician, and am in negotiations to buy an 08 RDX Tech. I am SO excited to get back to the FANTASTIC customer service at Acura. NO CAR BRAND treats their customers better than the Acura dealers I have been to in Florida, and I am STOKED to be back into the Acura family.

Good luck with your EX..just pray you don't have any issues.

xav

tlzx9, are you still in Melbourne Fl?

If so, what Acura dealership did you (will you) deal with? (since we have none in melbourne... pretty weird we have all the dealership you could think of in Brevard, even Land Rover, but no Acura in the entire county).

Do you go to Fountain Acura in orlando or Coggin Acura in Vero Beach?

I went to Fountain Acura a couple time, and Tony, the internet sales guy is the best car sales guy I ever encountered. A really nice guy.

cwepruk

Odd. I get 22 city in my Maxima (summer). AWD usually saps 1-2 mpg, but not much more.

tlzx9

I buy all my Acura's from Acura of Orange Park. They are AMAZING with sales. World's largest Acura dealership..great prices, amazing people!

For service, I go to Courtesy Acura in Sanford. They give me a loaner, and since I am always in Orlando, it's no problem!
Cheers!

sluday

Ok your local dealership treated you poorly but that does mean that the hundreds of other Infiniti dealers have poor service. When I went to test drive the EX both demos were out with customers. I said i was going to lunch and would return and salesman handed me $10 for lunch and apologized that the cars were not there. Bribery, Yes but two months later he made the sale.

tlzx9

Exactly!! SALES was GREAT! When you're forking over $45,000, they love you, but the FACT of the matter is Infiniti service does not have the customer service satisfaction surveys, calls, ratings in place that Acura does. Acura's people are paid, rated, and rated again all based on how your overall experience was, not just sales. And go on some forums, it's all over the place about Infiniti.

Mokos23

so you're saying that acura customer service is better than infiniti?

it all depends on the dealer service, not the brand service cause i think infiniti overall customer satisfaction is better than acura.

tlzx9

Like I said..MY OPINION...and MY EXPERIENCE....best of luck to you. I hope you get GREAT service, and your car never has any problems. No need to take it so personal. Just stating my experience.

brizey

Based on pretty much every early press review. Obviously Honda told the press when they released the car that a V6 would not fit because it is an obvious question. My impression always was that while "a" V6 might fit, "the" V6 they currently produced would not. Honda does not have a small displacement V6, only 3 liters and up. It was probably easier to hit hp targets with the turbo four than say a 2.5L V6, so they went with the turbo. Don't forget they just built a turbo motor for their PWC, so this is not really the first Honda turbo.

The TSX is the Accord platform, so of course a V6 fits.

Look, the RDX motor makes about 230 hp to the wheels, fits in the engine bay, and gets about the same mileage as its competition. Why does everyone think it is a problem? After a year of ownership, I think it is a great motor. It makes about the same hp/liter (about 100 hp/liter to the wheels for both) as the $$$$ 335 motor and everyone gushes over that turbo motor (that also get mediocre mileage by most accounts). I just don't get it.

Don't get me wrong, if Infiniti had a product that could haul my kids for about the same price I would have cross-shopped it. But they don't. The FX is close, but it is way pricier for not enough extra content. The EX is also pricier with too small of a back seat. Neither fit my needs, but I am sure their owners are happy with them.

MMike1981

...and no, after owning both the CX-7 (altho on paper looks so close) is a far cry from the RDX. In almost every aspect, quality, reliability, powertrain, interior, exterior etc, the Mazda is just not there. good try...but the CX-7 needed more months or maybe even a year in development and testing before it came to the market, another rushed product from the blue oval.

Fishbulb

I wish I could get the RDX with the EX motor in it. Or even better, the RAV4 V6 engine.

The turbo 4 blows for this application. No pun intended.

cwepruk

You would pick the weaker Rav4 engine over the VQ?

Agreed. I drove a CX-7 for a week as a rental and it's a nice package, but it's noticably slower, a decent bit noisier and the engine is thrashy. The price was almost as much as the RDX and it doesn't have the same level of features.

brizey

Really, the RDX needs a six speed transmission. It could improve fuel economy a bit and still have more gear in first and second for even better acceleration.

The RAV4 V6 makes about the same power as the RDX (maybe even a little less) in real life. The RDX motor is way under-rated. The RDX motor definitely makes more torque at a lower rpm, making it a better motor for a heavier vehicle. The RAV4 is a bit faster more because of the 400 lbs less weight more than engine power difference. The better fuel economy is weight plus a six speed.

I actually thing the RAV4 is a great vehicle, just not sporty enough.