Titanium2k2

iTrader: (2)

I’m looking for your opinions on a SUV purchase my wife and I will be making in the near future. We’ve pretty much narrowed down our choices to a certified pre-owned ’08 – ’09 RDX w/tech. package or a new CRV EX-L AWD w/navigation. Our budget is at about $30k. I’ve driven both of these rides and obviously there are pros and cons, but I wanted to see what you guys think since you are RDX owners. This vehicle will be for my wife and she is not a “car person” by any means so the extra ponies under the hood of the RDX won’t matter to her. She’s going from an ’04 Nissan Sentra base model so either one will be a huge upgrade. She has a 50 mile round trip (mostly highway miles) during the week for work so the gas mileage savings with the CRV is a plus. I know the CRV is being redesigned for 2012 so we might wait to see what that looks like too. I guess what I really want to know is if the Acura is worth the extra $$$ over a fully loaded CRV.

JCRDX11

If you are worry about the mpg - stick with the CRV.
Real Time™ 4-Wheel Drive is ok; Not bad but no great.

It is FWD until it detect the front wheels slipping and than the rear power kicks in.
Yes it takes regular gas which is a plus but with it fully loaded; you still ain't going anywhere with the engine's horse power.

27 mpg on the highway.
You can get the GMC Terrain which a better choice IMO.


RDX does not save gas and the ride is a little rough for some people.
But the inside and the SH-AWD is great; I could only picture how much snow you get in your area.

SH-AWD would be a plus in the snow or rain!

Titanium2k2

iTrader: (2)

Thanks for the good info! We definitely have some nasty winters here in the Chicagoland area. I had a '10 RDX SH-AWD loaner from the dealership a while back and my wife fell in love with it. I didn't realize how the CR-V's AWD system worked. I'm assuming the RDX's is vastly superior?

bluecarbonfiber

^ vastly is understatement compaired to CRV.. not to mention CRV doesnt have sequential shift.. i dont know about you but i still would like to feel some what like a man and have something to resemble a stick shift in the vehicle when i drive it..

in all honesty they are both good even the terrain that was mention is a great improvement from GM..
the thing you got to ask yourself is who will drive it more.. you or her? gas mileage, and next what will hold its value..

rdx takes the cake in those catagories once its leveled out im sure

alexverve

all small SUV have this system, including RDX.

BLEXV6

We looked at both, although both new, and the CRV is a very nice vehicle, but if you make the mistake of driving both, the RDX is way better. That said, if I had the choice between a new CRV and a used RDX, I would choosed the CRV, because it is new.

JCRDX11

Well RDX is full time awd once you start your CUV- 90% in the front and 10% in the rear until it slip and it can go up to 70% in the rear 30% in the front.
The SH-AWD is just a plus for the AWD - Power goes either left or right side.

Here is a sample video - The CRV is very similar to the Lexus AWD system but of course Lexus is better
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJZxVefta68

CRV is just front wheel drive until it detect slipping and it will send power to the back. (So it is 100% front wheel drive once you start up your CRV)
Real Time™ 4-Wheel Drive

RDX - FULL TIME AWD while CRV is not.
But I am sure you already knew this!~

crazyasiantl

iTrader: (7)

if you are dealing with snowy conditions, id take the RDX

aysertypes

i used to own crv it's very good car i loved it

pickler

my 07 rdx sh-awd is one of the sweetest rides i have had and i have driven plenty of cars. If you can stand the firm ride and mediocre gas mileage its a very fun and rewarding driving machine (sh-awd models). The amount of torque at modest 3000 rpm is extraordinary and its fun going fast into corners.

ParaSurfer1979

My mom was looking to trade her 07 MDX/ Tech for a smaller SUV that offered better gas mileage so she can drive the 185mi from Wilmington to Charlotte. I mentioned the CRV-EX/Navi and she screamed no that it must be an Acura. I always pick her cars so I had to figure out some way to get her into a Honda. So, I was at Honda/Acura dealer working out a deal which is no prob for me as i can name my price and ill get it so i emailed here interior pics of the EX-L/ Navi CR-V w/o the name anywhere. Shere was sold. She got a brand new 10' CR-V EX-L w/ Navi. The 360watt stereo was fine for her too... The leather is Acura soft to me...

mrgold35

My wife was hooked on a CR-V because she thought it looked so cute. She liked the size and styling of the CR-V. We did the old test drive and the basic Honda interior, underpowered 2.4L I4 engine, and lack of “wow” factor left her disappointed. It just felt like basic transportation to get you from A to B.

The RDX had its cons like premium fuel, lower mpgs, and stiffer ride. The wife was already driving the 06 TSX with A-spec suspension+Progress RSB; so the ride really wasn’t an issue. What she really loved about the RDX was the luxury touches like memory seats that adjust side mirrors, HID lights, ELS 5.1 stereo, Navi w/ traffic, extra large center console (perfect place to hide her purse), and the sporty/unique look of the RDX. What put it over the top was the sh-awd and the turbo engine (added hondata reflash+Eibach springs). She is gets complements on her RDX and she had two co-workers purchase a RDX because they liked hers so much. We average about 19.5 to 20.5 combined mgps with about 60% hwy. We can get about 21.5 mpg avg on straight hwy with the cruise control set between 80-83 mph. A CR-V at the same speed might get 2-4 mpg better.

If you want basic transportation from A to B; get the CR-V. If you want a CUV with a very high fun-to-drive factor; the RDX is the way to go.

Titanium2k2

iTrader: (2)

Thank you to all for the great feedback! It sounds like even though a fully loaded CR-V may have most of the creature comforts as an RDX (Navi, leather, heated seats, etc.), the RDX is in another class in many ways. It's tough because even though it's going to be her car, I'll drive it from time to time and going from driving my '07 TL-S to a RDX seems like a more desirable transition...

wrestrepo

CR-V concept

Titanium2k2

iTrader: (2)

^ sweet pic! I might have to check the 2012 model out before making a decision. One more thought I had was since which ever vehicle we end up going with is going to rack up the miles quickly (over 20k/year), will the RDX's turbo motor hold up to say 150k miles as long as normal maintenance is performed?

honda_nut

I'd rather take the Cr-v if the car is going to be for her. Financially it makes much more sense, since you are getting a new car vs used, 0 miles vs a few thousand miles, and much much better mileage on unleaded gas. The Cr-v will still be a great improvement over the old Sentra. And any good driver should be able to control a Cr-v in the snow. Also the RDX interior is nothing to get excited about; it's on par with the Cr-v and frankly a bit cheap for an Acura. Remember, the car is for her, not you. She will be driving it not you. Your quote: she is not a “car person” by any means so the extra ponies under the hood of the RDX won’t matter to her.

Wait for the 2012 Cr-v. Should be out in a couple months and will be better than current Cr-v and aging RDX. Plus she gets a new car that not everyone has for at least a little while.

wrestrepo

I think that there are people on this board that are over the 100K mark with their RDXs, and if you were to read through all posts on this board, you will notice that there haven't been any real issues/nightmares with the RDX.

MMike1981

absolutely nothing wrong with going for a new CRV. Loaded up, its a great vehicle, and a very solid value no matter what. If you dont care about the power nor the difference in the SHAWD, the CRV is a VERY capable SUV. Owned one from each generation, and my parents and sister own two. Performance aside, its one of the most reliable vehicles ive ever experienced, ever.

UNLESS you want a performance-sport driving experience, there is really nothing the RDX will give you that will WOW you in making a decision over a fully loaded w/nav CRV. It is not a significant step up. The EX-L with Nav is nicely appointed, the interior is actually quite attractive and at the end of the day, its quite a premium package and you will save thousands.

Titanium2k2

iTrader: (2)

Thanks for all the great responses everyone! This is exactly the kind of feedback I was looking for! When we finally make our purchase, I'll post up which direction we went.

JCRDX11

If having a used car was a issue; I would also take a look at the Toyota Rav4 AWD V6.

Same MPG but it offer 269hp - cost is around the same budget as the ops target.
You can get it around 30k Limited V6 4x4 with the navigation value package.
Also it takes regular gas - just an option to look into.

Nothing against the CRV but I just see there is better options for the same price.

Mileage estimates (city/highway) [5] 19/26

MMike1981

RAV4 is not nearly as comfy as the CRV in the front seat area. The very first SUV I considered buying was the RAV4 V6 Limited, I found it WAY overpriced, very underwhelming, and besides STRAIGHT LINE acceleration, everywhere else it is no sports-performer. However, it does deliver great MPG from a solid V6, but 5 minutes inside the cabin was enough for me to get out and never get back in. That said, it should certainly be cross shopped, especially due to its strong V6 performance compared to the power of the CRV.

MMike1981

...also a pretty important bit of info you may not come across but is important. The REAR seats/split fold of the CRV both recline and slide , the RDX DOES NOT. this is a great feature for back seat comfort or for tricky items in the cargo area that you may not want to fully stow a seat away for. fyi

Mr Marco

^ lol

Get the RDX, you wont look back.

JCRDX11

Way overpriced for a V6 4x4 CUV with leather/navi and 269hp that takes reg gas for around 30k?

Would you mind telling me what other CUV can come close to this price with this feature and reliability?

My first choice for the OP was the RDX because he advise between the CRV and RDX.
I am offering more options since he is willing to go to a certain budget and let him know there are other CUV that he should check out first.

Also the Subaru Forester ain't that too bad for around the same price range.
Their awd should do great in your area.

I personally chose the RDX because it has everything I wanted in a daily driver but I am always looking for more power.

Plus the 1.9 APR help me talk to my wifey that I do need a third car in the house!

XLR8R

You know, I was going to vote for the CR-V as well. Then I got to thinking; my wife was not a "car person" either until we got her the RDX.

Now we call her "Turbo-Mama"!

XIS

I would pick the RDX due to snow....

that and in 4-5 years, which do you think will have higher re-sale?

MMike1981

Yea, the base model RDX. the base limited is 31,500. You are at 32,500 w/navigation & same equipment as the CRV in the Toyota. Spend an extra 1k and get the highlander V6 w/nav. Or you can get a Murano. the Toyota may pack alot, but at 32,500 + tax, its in territory where it gets clearly outclassed even in its own brand. Its worth it at a cheaper level, not the Limited V6 w/nav level. Just the same as the RDX or TL, way more value WITHOUT the tech package. Adding navigation prices these models out of being a good value. Thats why the CRV w/nav remains attractive, keeps it under 31 and leaves breathing room between the RDX and other choices. I would never look at a RAV4 with a sticker of 32,500 no matter what engine it was packing, get something else.

I looked at the Limited V6 Rav4 as well initially, for the same reasons - what is there not to be gaga over it, V6 power, all options. well, took one look at the sticker, sat inside it, and walked off the lot. All I needed to know, at that point i knew I could buy something way nicer.

Titanium2k2

iTrader: (2)

The Rav4 Limited V6 is still one that we are considering, although, my wife HATES how the tail gate opens to the side. I've compared the CR-V vs. the Rav4 "on paper" pretty closely and to me the Rav4 has the edge, but the boss likes the CR-V better. As for the Terrain mentioned earlier, that's not happening. It's definitely a nice ride and I got to drive/ride in my cousin's '11 model a few times, but I'm a pretty big anti-GM product person; except for classic muscle of course.

Resale value is definitely important too down the road. We have one kid now (2 yr. old) and will hopefully have another within the next year. I'll probably be having the same questions 6 years from now about MDX/Pilot/Highlander/etc. but that's a thread for another day.

JCRDX11

What are you talking about - How is a RDX base 31,500?

RDX FWD - 32,895
RDX SH-AWD $34,895

We are talking about all CUV with the AWD or 4X4 option.

Do a car comparison on HONDA - you ain't getting any Highlander awd with navi ($40,505) or murano ( $42,755) even close to the price you are claiming.

I just build the Toyota RAV4 4x4 limited with Navigation option and it is $31,950MSRP*

The CRV is $30,905 with the same only options
One 1k more I would invest in the RAV4 V6 and same MPG as the CRV.

QUALITY & VALUE ANALYSIS
Overall Value








Model
2011 Honda CR-V 4WD EX-L with Honda Satellite-Linked Navigation System™ Automatic Transmission with Honda Satellite-Linked Navigation System ™
2011 Toyota RAV4 Limited I4 4X4
2011 Nissan Murano LE AWD
2011 Toyota Highlander Limited 4X4


Base Price MSRP $30,095 $26,855 $39,900 $37,045

Comparably Equipped Price $30,905 $29,795 + DPI $42,755 $40,505

Destination Charge $810 $810 $810 $810

ALG Residual Value % After 36 months 53% 45% 42% 44%

ALG Residual Value % After 60 months 41% 34% 30% 33%

5-year Maintenance & Repair Costs $2,288 $2,034 Not Listed $2,664

Ownership Cost Rating Above Average Excellent Not Listed Above Average

Fuel-Economy (City) 21 21 18 17

Fuel-Economy (Highway) 27 27 23 22

Combined Fuel-Economy (City/Highway) 23 24 20 19

honda_nut

umm, if one can't handle a CR-V in the snow, then they probably shouldn't be driving in the snow in the first place.

and the CR-V has one of the best resale value(%) of any vehicle period. just search the web. sure you might get more when you sell the rdx, but you also paid more to start with. and many people aren't willing to buy a cuv with poor gas mileage especially in these times. http://www.kbb.com/car-news/all-the-...e-value-awards

nothing against the rdx, just trying to save the op some money and get the best value

wrestrepo

did you consider (and this is a freaking wild card) the Juke?
call it a puke or whatever you want, the car is soooo ugly it's "cool" in my book, plus all the magazine reviews agree that the car is fun to drive. If I was going for the CR-V it's a car that I would definitely consider. It is however smaller and probably not as "practical" as the CR-V....
Just thinking out loud here....

MMike1981

LOL - THE TOYOTA LIMITED BASE.

MMike1981

and bro...im not picking a fight here, my main point is this. If you are going to BLOW 32k+ on a LIMITED RAV4 V6, GET SOMETHING ELSE!!!! Im not saying the FULLY LOADED DECKED OUT MURANO LOL, the midline murano is very close, and if you PRICE OUT A V6 HIGHLANDER 4x4 WITH NAV (33,620) and not check off every single option or upgrade, your money is worth a shit ton more than the Rav4.

jeeeesus.

MMike1981

Like another poster said, resale on the CRV is unbeatable.

XIS

Uh Nut - who said one couldn't handle a CR-V in the snow? Sure they can but now put your RDX in the snow...note the huge difference and you won't be talking about that any longer.

Yes - RDX cost a little more so it will get you more when you sell it, but the RDX should net a higher percentage retained. Neither is a looser there.

I would say the best value is a used RDX...

Titanium2k2

iTrader: (2)

The Juke is definitely unique, but it's a little too small for us.

Titanium2k2

iTrader: (2)

Considering all the vehicles and options available, if the last two standing are the used RDX or new CR-V at the end of the day, both are solid choices.

mav238

the hybrid technology is slowly coming along, unless you are leasing the new vehicle, financially it does not make sense to trade it a vehicle < 5 years old. Might be better off maintaining the RDX (which is really quite cheap to do so), then trade up to a new hybrid verison of the CUV. If Jaguar can make a supercar with hybrid technology, it will be the next wave of car technology... so why settle for the same old gasoline engine? The RDX turbo engine is a solid engine, and easy to maintain.

I just do my 3-4 oil/filter changes DIY every year, and it runs smoothly as ever.

JMHO.

pickler

RDX best cuv under 45k in my opinion. if you can pay more, audi q5 2.0t. crv would be somewhere in the bottom of my list.

dmavilia

I own a 2011 RDX SH-AWD Tech and my wife drives a 2011 CR-V EX-L Navi. This is her 3rd CR-V, so she is a big fan. Here are some observations:

1. If you're doing a lot of highway driving, the CR-V is a loud car, not a lot of insulation and loud tires. RDX is a much better highway car.

2. CRV is slightly bigger on the inside, especially in the cargo area. Both fit passengers and child car seats equally as well.

3. My wife will take my car occasionally, and like your wife, is not a car person at all. BUT, she is coming around to the idea of having some power. The CR-V is so ungodly slow, it's frustrating at times - especially on the highway when it needs to downshift to maintain speed up a slight grade. She also notes how much more comfortable and luxurious the RDX is compared to the more spartan CR-V.

4. Lastly, the tech package on the RDX is obviously superior to that of the CR-V, but it only matters if she likes a really nice sounding stereo and uses the navi a lot. The CR-V stereo is merely adequate in sound quality with decent base, and the navi is similar in functionality, but lacks the larger screen and higher resolution. The CR-V does have a touch screen which is nice and makes for quick inputs.

The AWD systems don't really matter in the snow unless you like to have some fun spirited snow driving. Both are adequate to safely get you home (I lived through Boston's bad winter with both cars). The continental tires on the CR-V are a huge improvement to the car's snow traction.

OK, that's enough. Good luck with your decision. Either way, can't go wrong. My vote would be for the CR-V for your wife.