I've read just about everything there is to read about the RDX, from national magazine reviews to customer comments and have see comments anywhere from the "unsafe at any speed" to "the best thing since sliced bread".

I'm concerned about things I've seen regarding the MPG and turbo lag. Some people say they get 13MPG, some say 25MPG. Some people say the lag is horrible, some say it isn't noticeable.

So which is it? What do current owners think of their purchase and would you do it all again if you had the opportunity?

 

If there is no wind, I can easily get 24MPG on the highway. In the city, I get 18 MPG. If I'm slightly more aggressive driving then I have had city driving drop to 16 MPG. This is after 2K miles.

As for turbo, this is my first turbo so I have nothing to compare it to. It doesn't seem too bad to me. It just seem like a non-linear acceleration that you get used to. It seems slow to accel then like a light switch turning on, it takes off. You get used to it after awhile.

 

I think from all these comments you can come to the conclusion that every situation is different.

13-25mpg is probably accurate. You could say the same for any vehicle rated at 19-23mpg. I have averaged 19mpg over the first 1800miles. I also don't push my vehicle as hard as alot of people do (the 13 mpg'ers), and I do drive 90% city and alot of bumper to bumper traffic. If I drove in sport/manual mode and rode my gears high in the rpm range, I'd be running 13mpg too.

The turbo lag is there, but not a big deal IMO. yeah I could compare it with countless other turbos out there, and it would be better or worse for each of them. For this you just need to drive one for yourself and make up your own mind. Obviously for everyone here that bought one, they decided the lag wasn't very bad at all. if you thought it was bad and you bought the vehicle, then that is your own problem. I doubt there are many here that bought the vehicle without driving it at all, and if you did, then again, your own problem.

I love all the bells and whistles the vehicle offers with the tech toys. and I am happy I bought the RDX. Is there room for improvement? of course! I don't know of any perfect vehicle out there, if there was, then everybody would be buying it.

A vehicle is such a personal thing that people choose for their own needs/wants and every case is different. There have been no glaring problems with the vehicle as far as build quality or mechanical breakdowns, with the exception of the Acura MusicLink, so aside from that, everything comes down to a choice of if the vehicle is right for you or not.... my ....

 

i have no regrets about my RDX. absolutely love it.

 

Sasair, it seems to me the RDX MPG varies a lot more than any other car I've own. On highway the RDX seems to be very close to it's ratings, which is good, but for city driving it really doesn't take much to drop the MPG and I'm not talking about "race car" style driving. I mostly have to drive like an old lady to get 18 MPG in the city. I coast a lot just to get 18 MPG. My 10 year old V6 Isuzu Rodeo gets 18MPG with more aggresive city driving. IMHO, the RDX MPG seems to be wide between city and highway driving. It's not a problem for me but it is worth noting and commenting on.

 

Same experience here. I think in big urban settings, the mileage is even worse. I get ~15mpg if driving normally like my previous cars. However, if I do drive like a grandma... I am getting close to 18-19 now in the city. In a mix of surburban/highway with various congestion level, I have been getting 22-23.5 the past two days! It's not as bad as I thought before. Just coast when you can and take off lightly when you don't need to mash the pedal. Anyways, I guess bottom line is, after we are done w/ the break in period, I don't think I would pay attention to mileage that much anymore. It was not a deciding factor when we bought the car. We bought the car for its power, handling, and fun factor. Also, the interior and the tech stuff just rocks in this car. I guess I'll just pay more for gas and deal with it.

 

Regarding lag... I don't understand why honda fans are complaining about lag when most Hondas aren't exactely known for their low end power!!! My RSX-S feels just like a regular civic when driven casually. So when Honda releases the torquest car in their line-up, people complain about lag! It's truely not that bad.

You will get use to how this Acura drives... you won't drive it like your past hondas... Once you get spoiled by all the torque, go and try out a car without a lot of torque.... you will start to complain about how this and that car feels weak off the line too. When I moved from a torquey chipped 1.8 liter turbo VW to the RSX-S... I was like, "Where's the torque?" I then learn to rev the heck out of the RSX-S after a short learning period. See, different driving style for a different type of engine. Now that my wife has the RDX, the torque is back again! Most enthusiasts, when exposed to turbo engines for the first time will learn to love it for its low end power and the high tuning potential. It's hard to go back to a NA engine afterwards. IMHO anyways.

 

I have no regrets. The turbo lag is there, but its not bad at all. The car feels well built, and drives like it too. There is just something about honda innovation that other manufacturers lack IMHO. Test Drive it once or twice, then decide. But the car has an unbelievable fun factor even for a CUV.

 

Lag and acceleration are better than the 1.8T motor in the Audi A4 that we traded in. No turbo will feel like a V-6, but this one comes closer than most. In fact, while the test numbers indicate that the Rav4 V-6 gets to 60 or the 1/4mile in less time, the RDX "feels" quicker.

The overall feel is what led us to purchase the RDX. Handling is as close to a sports sedan as we found in a "higher seating position utility vehicle." As for mileage, my wife is averaging in the 17s, based primarily on a 30mile daily commute on Chicagoland/North Shore surface streets and freeways during rush hour. She doesn't granny it when given the opportunity, but isn't a speed racer either.

Overall, I think it is a great car for the segment. Over the course of 2 test drives, any defining characteristic of the car presented itself, such that we don't second guess our purchasing decision based on any suprises.

Cheers,
Phil

 

Who wrote that?

 

Here's my take. I don't own an RDX yet, but have been looking and test driving since August.

The engine does have turbo lag, like any other turbo engine. You have to decide if you're OK with the feel of the engine. It's about the same (maybe slightly worse) as my current turbo car, so no big deal to me.

If there is something to gripe about the lag it's that Acura marketing-speak would have you believe the RDX's variable geometry turbo virtually eliminated lag, and that's not the case. I think many people feel like Acura over-promised and under delivered here.

Regarding the MPG, my experience is that the RDX returns similar MPG as my current vehicle when driven similarly. When driven hard, however, it gets significantly worse MPG than my current vehicle.

I think Acura over-promised and under-delivered on the MPG too. Again, their marketing praises the turbo-4 for its power and fuel efficiency, and I think they fall short there. It's no better than most competing vehicles, and significantly worse in some cases.

Personally, I like the vehicle a lot and am willing to overlook some of the flaws. Basically, we have a regular old laggy turbo engine that does OK most of the time but gets poor gas mileage when driven hard. If you're cool with that, no big deal. Unfortunately, many people see this as a major departure from what the RDX was "supposed" to be, based on Acura's hype, and I can understand if they are disappointed. Acura made it sound like the engine would be a major advance at minimizing lag and maximizing fuel economy, and it really isn't.

 

I think in terms of gas mileage for me, the numbers are quite close. I'll certainly burn more gas at full throttle compared to a V6 but at the same time I expect that from a turbo engine. I'm getting quite close to the gas mileage numbers and I drive at 120 km/h (74 mph) on the highway. The only real time my gas mileage sucks is in stop go traffic as the engine seems to burn a ton of gas just sitting there. My driving style is still quite conservative so I limit the amount of turbo I use while in the city.

As for the turbo, I'd say the lag is there, but it isn't horrible as compared to others that I have driven. The bigger problem I have with it is the lack of low end (1000-2000 rpm)power which is inevitable with all smaller displacement engines that are turbocharged. At cruising speeds, the lag is quite minimal but far from non-existent. The only reason I can see that Acura went with a turbo 4 rather than a NA 6 would be because of emissions. Don't quote me on this one though as I would think that with a NA 6, it may have bumped the emissions to a higher level of ULEV or as far as a LEV for a vehicle in it's class. Personally I like V6's and I think Toyota has a good idea with the RAV4 but maybe it just wasn't feasible with the RDX or they wanted to use the RDX as a stepping stone for future direction of the Acura line up. Who knows, like it has been said before, BMW and Honda are both companies that have been companies that do not neccessarily follow the norm and have sometimes defined the future of vehicles. Maybe turbos will be more popular in the near future.

The one thing that I'd be interested in seeing the numbers for would be the weight factor. Acura says the turbocharged engine would be lighter than the V6 option but I'd like to know how much, like if the difference is 100 pounds, I'd find that quite minimal in comparison to the near 4000 pounds the RDX weighs and for one, with regular gas and possibly better gas mileage (albeit probably not too much better) I think it would maybe put a few more people into the "I'll think about it" category. For me, the extra cost of gas was pretty much covered by the increase in insurance premiums for the RAV4 so that came out as a wash but both my wife and I liked the RDX much better and thereby us having one now.

 

Have you test driven the CX-7? Better yet, driven the RDX and CX-7 back to back? If so, do you feel that they have a similar "lag" and power delivery? My feeling was that the RDX had significantly less lag and had more of a linear power delivery, whereas the CX-7 had more of the "on/off switch" nature of "regular old laggy turbos."

Cheers,
Phil

 

I have not driven a CX-7, but your observation agrees with what Motor Trend noted when testing the RDX and CX-7.

 

Why don't you just go and test drive one, then you can see for yourself if it has tubo lag.

 

I love my RDX and wouldn't trade it for anything - don't regret it at all.

Yes I wish the MPG was better, but I figured it wouldn't be great when I bought the car, and guess what? It isn't. I also wish it didn't use Premium gas, but since my magic wand doesn't work, I'll live with it!

- I do have a magic wand...my boss ordered one for me when I kept getting slammed with projects at the last minute for about 6 months straight, but unfortunately, it didn't come with instructions!

I've actually only noticed the turbo lag twice - both have been pulling out fast from a stand still. But maybe that's just me. Plan an extra second or two and it's fine.

If you arn't in love with the car, then keep looking because it's probably not the right care for you and if you get it anyway, you will probably just pick it a part and be disappointed.

I knew as soon as I drove it, it was the one. I had been looking for over a year and waiting for it to come out before making the decision.

I agree with everyone else...it's a personal decision.

 

Thanks for the responses guys. I went and drove one last night and the turbo lag wasn't all that noticeable as it was the first time I test drove the day they debuted in August. That was a day old car and this one was the designated test driver, so it was broken in. All automatics feel a little jerky to me anyways, but my next car needs to be auto so my wife can drive too.

The ride was VERY, VERY stiff on the freeway and may be too stiff, but then again the thing felt like a go cart. When I went from an original Beetle to my Integra 11 years ago, the ride of the Integra felt exactly the same to me. But I soon got used to it and appreciated the handling and road feel.

What (I think is about to) sell me on the car is when the sales guy told me to floor it on a freeway cloverleaf onramp. Any other SUV (and most cars) would have flown off the road but the SH-AWD was amazing.

I think I am going to go close a deal on a lease tonight. With the unkowns of gas prices and turbo life, I'd feel more comfortable enjoying the period of the lease and then moving on. And if things go well, I can always move on to a second generation RDX.

 

Congrats, let us know how the car works out for you.

 

I just want to add my 2 cents worth, I love my RDX. That, to me, is all that matters. It can't be all things to all people. I knew what I was buying when I signed on the dotted line. I loved my 05 TL but have not regretted trading it for the RDX. Does it get 30 MPG, no, but it doesn't wash dishes either....I don't care. I love this car.

 

It DOESN'T wash dishes????? *$#^@& lying salesman...

 

I had a Saab 92x which is the same as a subaru WRX. The turbo lag in that was horrible, you just waited until 3000 rpm and it expoled with power. Compared to that I do not notice any lag in the RDX.

I already have 6600 miles on my RDX and my real word mileage is about 21 mpg, I drive alot on the highway


I am very happy with the RDX, very nice, fun to drive for work, I can't wait for snowboard season to start!!!!!

 

Lake Louise and Sunshine (Norquay's been open since the 1st) are opening tomorrow for us here in Alberta....might take a jaunt out there this weekend or next to get some snowboarding in...have to take my crappy board though because I know it's gonna get torn up.

 

I have had my RDX for about two months now and just love it. Fun to drive, very comfortable and great features. I have no regrets with my purchase.

 

I would almost think financing is a better option for tentative buyers. For one, the current lease deal is not so hot, so you will be paying more interest than most loans. Second, the lease will lock you in to 3 years of ownership no matter what. If you like the vehicle, that's 3 years of paying too much for a car you should have bought. If you hate the car, you have to stick out the full 3 years. Financing will cost less in the long run, and you can sell/trade at any time. About the only advantage to the lease is a guaranteed residual at the end of 3 years, but this is rarely an issue with Hondas which generally hold their value well no matter what.

I make a lease vs. finance decision based solely on dollars. In some cases the lease actually costs less, but unfortunately the current RDX lease deal is not one of those cases. I am in a similar situation to you, and am looking at financing.

 

The lease on Acura's site is BS. Dealers are offering better.

 

We basically came to the same conclusion. The RDX lease deal was terrible, and with the yield curve inverted, there was basically no premium to a long-tenor loan from our credit union. Using the residual values that have been posted here and on edmund's forum for 3 and 4 years, my amortization schedule showed that I shouldn't be underwater. We were also very thankful that we had gone with the premier purchase on the Audi (balloon payment loan) vs a lease, which allowed us to trade it in early, with no penalty, at our convenience.

BMW offers a similar program, which gets the same benefits (usually) as the lease programs. And the Europeans are much more aggressive with their leases. So much so, that if you really want to lease, you could have a $10k more expensive X3 for about the same (or even less) than an RDX.

Cheers,
Phil

 

What terms are you seeing? Be wary of a third pary lease. If it's not from AHFC, I wouldn't take it. If it is an AHFC lease, the dealer can control the cap cost reduction, which will affect the monthly payment. They can easily get you a lower monthly payment. However, this does not change the fact that the money factor on the AHFC deal is too high. Take the same net cap cost and finance and it will surely cost you less.

Seriously, based on your earlier question about leasing, I would say to be careful. Dealers are good at making you think the lease is a good deal when they want to sell a car.

If you have some numbers, I can run them through my spreadsheet to analyze the deal.

 

Well, I haven't pulled the trigger yet, and am not sure when I will. Just got an unsolicited email from an internet manager offering $2200 off MSRP for the base and $2500 off MSRP for the tech. At $34,600, the lease that looked good a few days ago is now too high. Might as well wait a bit and see how low the prices go.

 

First of all I have about 1 month of ownership and 2k miles on my Tach Package RDX. I am not a tire kicker.

I have purchased over 20 new vehicles, so I know quite about about the once it's not new anymore letdown.

I traded in my well loved 2000 Volvo S80 T6 for the RDX. My Volvo had a straight 6 with twin turbos. The Volvo was a phenomenol handling vehicle for a sedan.

OK to answer the original POST, This RDX gets for me an average of 17.5 mpg just like my Volvo. There is turbo lag but it is less than any turbo I have driven, which means it is not an issue! The handling is too good for an SUV of any kind; it rivals most sport sedans out there. My RDX begs to go 85 to 90 mph on the highway. The 4 cylinder turbo does make noises well like a 4 cylinder at times. This could be construed as a lesser engine because of this; I couldn't help but feel that way at first since I have been used to larger displacement engines that made neat formula1 type noises. The engine has grown on me (alot), it has abundant torque, and horsepower.

Also the RDX was the ONLY vehicle for less than 40k that met all of my requirements, which were NAV, Bluetooth, Xenon lights, Real performance, and AWD.

The ride is choppy, if you dont like a choppy ride don't buy it. At first I thought it was a big issue, but now I like the controlled handling, and the choppy ride seems right. The stereo system is very good but overrated.

It's a great buy overall; if you are even contemplating buying one you wont regret it!

 

[QUOTE=creativeguy]The ride was VERY, VERY stiff on the freeway and may be too stiff, but then again the thing felt like a go cart. When I went from an original Beetle to my Integra 11 years ago, the ride of the Integra felt exactly the same to me. But I soon got used to it and appreciated the handling and road feel.QUOTE]

For this car the stiff ride actually serves a purpose, the sports car handeling is phenominal around corners and on the clover leaf ramps as mentioned. MPG isn't great but it is above average for an SUV. The leasing I heard is horrible so as mentioned go with the financing to have some flexibility.

The turbo lag issue is very apparent between 1st and the start of second gear. One of the issues is that in drive mode the car shifts too fast into second gear. The real benefit of the turbo is when you can ride out first to 4-6 k rpms in the sports mode. If needed you can just use the paddles while in drive to manually shift. Sports mode is good but is a pain in stop and go traffic. (Also sucks a lot more gas)

As far as the car, with the qoutes you got, take the tech package. (Wished I shopped around more to get your numbers).

Good luck,

JD

 

Can any former TSX drivers compare the ride? Is the RDX more stiff?

 

We have a TSX. I would say the RDX is a little stiffer in general. The RDX suspension is less compliant, so sometimes you will feel the whole body "bobble" rather than soak up irregularities. Same sensation I get in my S2K. I have never felt that in the TSX.

 

It's all been said here already... so here's my quick two cents...

1. It's "torquey" ... like my TSX was. I was already comfortable with how the engine rev'd and handled, so no surprises. This buggy goes when I tell it to...and when I YELL at it to go, it goes fast.

2. Turbo-lag - I had an A6 (2.7T) before my TSX. so I know what turbo lag feels like! One of the things I liked about my TSX was that even though it was 4cyl vs the A6 6cyl, it had enough get-up-and-go to make me forget it was a 4 - and I never missed the turbo (or lag) from the A6. I feel the same way about the RDX... and people I've driven around also don't believe it's a 4. Yes, there is a little lag when you punch it hard, but overall it's not bad, and when you do want/need the extra acceleration, it's there.

3. MPG ... just finished a 900 mile road trip - 75% highway, and averaged 20.5mpg. I'll put the actual receipts into my spreadsheet and report back my running MPG, but so far, it's getting better mileage than my A6. I do notice that city driving is not getting much better than 15-16, but that could be due to heavy traffic and Bah-stahn ADD (aggressige driving disorder). If you like to sprint from the start-line, you'll pay for it.

4. Premium-ish gas ... I've had to use Premium since 1999 - all of my cars required 91 octane. My trick has been to blend Premium with "Plus" 89-octane gasoline to achieve a 91 octane average (fill-er-up with 93, and at 1/2 tank fill-er-up with "plus", then alternate between the 93 and 89 for a few tanks... drive close to E, fill-up with 93, then repeat. It probably saves a few bucks a month.

 

...I"ll add that the ride - on these pothole-infested Boston roads - is a little softer. I don't feel the bad bumps as much, but I still feel very connected to the road. It's tight and crisp, much like the tsx.

I don't have the #s in front of me, but from a few tight U-turns I've made, it feels like the RDX has a better turning radius.

-mj

 

Hey MJ-bos: I live in MA and currently have a 2000 2.7t. Love it, but hate changing O2 sensors on the Audi as often as I used to change the oil on my Legend!

My concern is that I do LOVE to drive my car. Can you compare the ride/ drive of the RDX to the Audi 2.7t for me? I'm guessing the Audi has more initial lag, but probably more boost from 20 mph+?

Any info is much appreciated!

SC

 

For us, we needed AWD and preferably in a small package as parking is a real issue where we live. I also don't fit in many cars (6'5"). The RDX is packed with great toys which I love, fits me very well and is a hoot to drive. The interior is very modern and cool. Drives like a sports sedan. I also love the XM radio and will probably keep it. It plays on your computer too if you are an XM subscriber!!

 

Hey neighbor (Super_Call)-

It's been a few years since my A6, but I do remember how much more fun it made my daily commute to NH (45 miles each way). Moving "down" to a TSX didn't really "hurt" - it was peppy and fun - and had more toys in it (Navi). The RDX is a big step up from the TSX.

Now, comparing to the A6 ... the A6 felt a tad more "sturdy" - more solid (I can't articulate it any better that that, sorry!). It had more lag up front, but I never had to worry about not being able to pass anyone. The RDX, being taller, gives me much more of a vantage point - and I like that. It has more toys (MP3 / WMA files, bluetooth, Navi, traffic, etc.). It doesn't have as "refined" of an interior (memory seats, passenger power seats, sturdier switchblade key), but still quite nice.

I also don't have to worry about tearing off my front end if I make an "oops" and go over a parking bumper (that was a $2,000 mistake !)

All in all, I'm really happy with the RDX and am looking forward to seeing how it handles this winter.

Cheers,
mj

My lease payment is about $150/mo lower on the RDX,