Hi, I am a 06 TL owner myself, but my parents are strongly considering a new RDX. They stopped by the dealer the other day and they were told that when the new 2013 one comes out in a couple weeks, they could get the new remaining 2012 SH-AWD non-navi for around $32000 after discount. The new 2013 with similar options(AWD non-navi) would be around $37000.

I know the general rule is to avoid buying a first year model, but how good is Acura with first year models? Which one would you recommend?

 

I leased a first gen, first year model RDX back in 07'. I was very happy with it and had minimal issues with it. Your biggest concern should be options not included to be added for later model years...

 

I am considering the new 2013 RDX, but have not personally owned an Acura before. My son owns a TSX and it is a very good car.

The clearance price on the 2012 is quite a bit less than the 2013, but if you look at the 2013, it is quite different from the 2012, so you have to decide which one is more appealing to you. You also have one additional year of depreciation on the value of the 2012 model.

To me, the new model looks quite a bit better than the outgoing model on the inside and out. I also like idea of the Variable Cylinder Management V6 and the 6 speed auto. I can see a few areas that will likely be improved in later year models, like a rear a/c vent and LED running/brake lights.

You have to go with what sounds best to you though. Good luck.

 

I doubt the difference in price between the 2012 and 2013 will make up for the extra "1 model year" of depreciation + extra "old body style" depreciation + extra fuel costs of the 2012, so I'd go for the 2013.

 

Oh my. Yes, please turn off any cylinders I don't need, thank you.

What is the opposite of performance?

 

The fuel economy was a concern for us, but we couldn't be happier with our month-old 2012. And dealers are really dealing on the 2012's.

 

the 2013 will have similar or inferior fuel economy in the city. Variable Cylindar Manage (VCM) will only function under light engine loads 30-40 LOD. i currently average 23mpg city 25 highway. my lighter v6 FWD TL scores 29mpg highway, 18mpg city; i'm expecting the same from 2013 RDX FWD.

 

Just to give you guys an update, I convinced my parents to go with an Infiniti FX35. I love my Acura, but for my parents who want something "nice" I thought it would be a much better choice. They picked up an 2011 FX35 CPO with only 13000 miles for $39000 out the door. Pretty good deal because they cost about $50000 new with navigation package.

 

Please explain- how is the V6 with 30 more HP going to get better fuel economy than the 4 cyl?

 

Really depends on how you drive but that is always the case when talking about MPG. One person will get 23 MPG while another will get 17 MPG.

In this case if the turbo is used a lot it will suck a lot of gas. The V6 used in the 2013 RDX has VCM (variable cylinder management) so depending on your driving style you will in fact get better fuel economy. You will find that some hate VCM while others like it.

 

By being a better designed, more efficient engine.

Please explain why you think cylinder displacement and horsepower in a vacuum define fuel economy.

 

well typically a larger engine with more cylinders uses more gas, but I stand corrected- I looked it up and the V6 RDX is rated 20/28 for gas mileage while the 4-cyl turbo is rated 17/24.

Technology is a wonderful thing.

 

2012 SHAWD and decreased fuel economy (turbo) or 2013 basic AWD from the CRV and improved fuel economy...tough call. what's the deal breaker?

SHAWD system is amazing. how is compares to the basic AWD system???

the 2013 seems to have downgraded in some areas and upgraded in others...then of course the styling...personally i couldn't see myself driving a cute ute. acura should have kept the SHAWD thorughout the lineup, not that most people would even know the difference.

OP i know your parents have gone with an FX35 (bigger than the RDX and comparable more to the MDX)...still a nice choice.

 

Well, my (RWD) EX35 with V6 and 300 HP gets close to 20 in the city... 24 -25 hwy

soooo it is possible!

 

Interesting the AWD version only gets 1 mpg less than the FWD version of the 2013. If I decide to get the RDX, it'd be my first "SUV", so while the mileage isn't anything great, it's still pretty good. It's kinda goofy that there are no rear vents on this thing. Hell, my 2004 TL has them, so you would think an SUV like this would.

I'm interested in seeing what kind of real-world mileage early adopters get.

 

In the 1st gen, there are rear vents under the front seats. They are there, but not user visible or controllable from the back.

 

I just picked up a 2012 AWD TECH for a great discount. I had to decide between the 2012 and 2013 also. I even saw the new 2013 come off the dealer's truck and didn't think the styling was so dramatically different to sway me into paying an extra 4K-5K. If you are looking for the performance that the RDX provides, you shouldn't be concentrating on MPG (saving that 4-5K can buy a lot of gas!). I also own an MDX and get the same gas mileage...funny. I like the SH-AWD and that was a big factor also. There are some that don't like turbos, so that might push them to the 2013, but I think the RDX turbo has proven itself. Personally, I don't think you can touch another competing vehicle with the same options for the price that the 2012's are going for right now.

 

My local dealer's web site shows three new 2011 RDXs in stock. That's really shocking. I bet they're really giving good deals on those!

 

I totally agree with Thirsty. I just purchased a 2012 RDX SH-AWD Tech and got a discount on $4300. The dealer (who I have purchased 4 TL's from in the past several years) told me that they won't even come off list with the new 2013 RDX. Also, the current interest rate is 0.9% on the 2012. It won't be on the 2013.

 

I too just bought a 2012 RDX SH-AWD with Tech package for almost $5k off, the dealer threw in the roof rack, splash guards and wheel locks to sweeten the deal. I just couldn't get over paying more for a 2013 with a cheaper CRV AWD system. The 2013 RDX is definitely quieter and smoother, but not worth the extra, and the fact every dealers wanted MSRP for it kinda irk me, so they can all keep their 2013s and shove it.

 

Are there any advantages of the 2013's Electric Powered Steering over the 2012's Hydraulic steering ..?

 

A small child could steer the 2013 RDX around a parking lot. Steering is VERY light.

Through magical trickery it can mask torque steer.

Better gas mileage as it has less parasitic drag.

Maybe quieter?

 

My 2012 TL has electronic steering. My 2012 RDX does not. According to Acura, it helps increase gas milage since there is less power taken away from the engine. Other than that, there is not much difference. There is no doubt that the 2013 RDX has some nice upgrades over the 2012. But it wasn't worth the $4300 discount that I got plus the $1500 increase in MSRP = $5800 difference. Add 6% sales tax and I would have had to pay almost $6200 more.

Also, I read alot of comparison about the stiff ride of the 2012 RDX. I actually like it. But then again I also like the feel and handling of my BMW Z4 with run flat tires.

Different strokes...

 

I can understand your decision to go with the 2012 with those deals but I am taking possession of a 2013 at 0.25%, 1k off MSRP, cargo tray and 4 steel rims which is not bad at all. My garage will now have 2 Acuras...both Tech. One with SH-AWD (my 2012 TL) and one without (RDX)

 

Congrats..that seems to be a a really sweet deal..considering the 2013-Rdx has so recently been released

 

the electric steering according to my dealer is cheaper to fix than the hydrualic steering.

anyone else notice the "woosh" noise the eletric steering makes in parking lots if you turn the wheel fast enough?? i had a 2012 4G TL loaner and it made that noise at slow speeds and a hrad turn of the steering wheel (which yes, feels light). my dealer says its normal. they've tried to fix it but to now avail it makes noise (one of the SA's drives a 4G TL himself, he said you get used to it. yeah like the rattles too, right? ).

 

^^^^ I am not sure I have noticed anything particularly difference as far as my electric steering. I am extremely sensitive to noise that seem "odd" and for me, I have yet to have hear anything on my 2012 TL. I'll pay more attention next time I take it for a spin.

I am also under the impression that there are some fuel efficiency by using a non-hydraulic steering. To be franc with you, I doubt the problem with any electric steering is not an electric vs hydraulic but rather, the way the engineers design the feel/feedback from it.

I have driven some cars with electric steering (VW rabbit) and the feeling is incredibly responsive and as good as a hydraulic. I do admit that Acura tends to make the feel a bit numb which is disappointing but I assure you that you get used to it fairly quickly and won't even notice it after a while.

 

I didn't care for it on the test drive - definitely not the same feel as my TL - but it didn't bother my wife, so we ordered hers. We'll go from a Honda/Acura garage to Acura/Acura.

 

I see we are in a similar situation...I'll go from a Acura/Toyota garage to an Acura/Acura