Mattau

Hi, I am new. I am trying to decide between a 2010 RDX (with or without Tech) and a 2011 Forester XT Limited. The Forester has higher ground clearence (over 8" vs the RDX's 6"). The two cars appear to have similar gas mileage and performance. How do the two AWD systems compare? I currently drives a Subaru Impreza and it's amazing in the snow with snow tires. The RDX is more luxurious but it's also quite a bit more expensive than the Forester.

mrgold35

The Forester and RDX seem to be geared for two different lifestyles with very little overlap.

The 07-12 RDX is geared more toward luxury, performance and handling compared to other SUVs in the same price range. I configured my RDX with all season performance tires, lighter aftermarket rims, Hondata, and Eibach lowering springs. I am confident you can go anywhere the Forester can go with the same tires and driver’s skill. I’m willing to bet the Forester cannot follow the RDX when the road gets twisty, especially in the mountains with switch backs because the sh-awd works at any speed and condition.

My RDX is used 90% for commuter duties with 70% hwy driving at 65-90 mph. The occasional family vacation to Cali, Nevada, TX or Colorado where the utility and luxury makes for a comfortable ride. The extra power (hondata) and sh-awd make it fun when I hit the switchbacks in the mountains with or without snow.

Keep in mind you are on a Acura forum. I’m sure you will get the opposite answer on a Subaru forum.

Vividsi

I was looking at both of those cars when I was ready to buy, the subaru is a great car but the deciding factor was the luxury and sportiness offered by the RDX for me.

Crashore

I have both a 2010 RDX and a 2013 Forester non turbo. The RDX is certainly more luxurious, but the Forester has a much more comfortable ride. I drive both regularly and wish that I could combine the features of both to make the perfect vehicle. There is a large difference in the power for me, but I imagine that would be smaller with the turbo version of the Forester. I added a STI rear sway bar to the Forester, which inched the handling closer to the RDX. (A $100 mod)

Forester wins:
Sharp turning radius
Better vision from all the windows
More towing capacity
Larger storage space
Comfortable ride (like wearing your Levi Jeans)

RDX wins:
More comfortable cockpit
Stronger Engine
Slightly better handling
Classier (like wearing an Armani suit)

Crashore

I almost forgot...If you are looking for a chick magnet, I have never had any women stop and ask me about my RDX. On the other hand, I get stopped all the time by woman in the parking lot, asking me about my Forester...mostly blue haired grandma types.
Hope that helps

pickler

if you like the look and feel of entry luxury cars go with RDX. if you like offroading or driving in unforgiving terrain go with the Forester.

I also have to disagree with the above statement that RDX is stronger. The RDX is a good 650lbs heavier than the Subaru!! Forester's power to weight ratio is slightly better at 14.8lbs per HP vs. 16.6lbs per HP. Just like the Acura, Subaru's EJ255 engine is underrated. They both feel fast when turbo kicks in but on the subaru the transition to full boost is slower (lags) but top end power is better. With a good tune the subaru can do sub 6s 0-60s whereas on the RDX its low 6 seconds at best. The forester has the detuned 265hp WRX engine, so a tune is very easy and cheap just like the RDX.

I have driven and shortly owned the forester. The forester feels smaller and the steering is much heavier but it feels connected to the road. I find the steering on the RDX vague. However there is noticeable turbo lag on the forester and it is overall much less refined than the RDX. The Subaru VTD symetrical all wheel drive system however is just as good as honda's SH-AWD; i didn't feel any difference to be honest. It did just as well as my RDX in snow if not better with its smaller wheels. The biggest difference was in ride and handling. The RDX handles like a sports car where the forester handles like a premium crossover should. The ride on the RDX is rough where as on the Subaru it is silky smooth. So it's up to you; do you want refinement, luxury and handling OR practicality, simplicity and offroading fun? If you want the latter go with the Subaru.

in terms of chick magnetism I actually met my wife when i had my RDX back in 2007, she found the RDX to be 'nice' when she first saw it and complimented it. However that's 2007 and my wife is not a blue haired grandma if that's what you're after

Vividsi

In my personal research in finding a really good AWD system I found that the only brands that offer the best is Acura, Subaru and BMW. Everything else is a lesser system.

CreoUCLA

Another point to consider beyond luxury vs. utility, is do you want to modify your car at all? If so, the Subaru Forester XT has a much more extensive aftermarket following.

On my 2008 Forester Sport 2.5XT, I was able to use a lot of parts made for the WRX or WRX STI;



If you prefer a more luxurious vehicle, the RDX wins hands-down.

I met my wife when I was driving a 2009 STI, and later on when she found out I had a Forester before, she wished I had kept it... But only because she didn't want to be the one who had to trade in her car (Lexus IS250) for an SUV (RDX).

Disagree. Quattro > xDrive, having driven both. I prefer the direct/intuitive feel of Audi's Quattro over BMW's xDrive or Mercedes' 4Matic.

Last Acura

I think the Forester is ugly, so it is a no contest choice of RDX.

dcmodels

Because of the differences in the operation of the two AWD systems, if one (single) tire is damaged and requires replacement:

1) RDX will require replacement of two tires, on the same axle

2) Forrester will require replacement of all 4 tires, otherwise damage to the AWD system can occur, unless the 3 undamaged tires have only about 1/32 inch of wear (from new).

You may wish to confirm the above comments for the Forrester with both the Owner's Manual, and a dealership service department.

I can only tell you that most tire shops will insist on replacing all four tires, if only one tire is damaged, for most vehicle AWD systems, regardless of vehicle manufacturer.

But the RDX Owner's Manual, the Acura national service contact phone number, and both my local Acura dealers, clearly state that only 2-tires on the same axle need replacement when one tire is damaged (and requires replacement), regardless of the amount of wear on the 3-undamaged tires. Obviously, if the 3-undamaged tires are almost worn out, then replacement of all 4 tires is recommended.

This is because of the fact that normally, with the SH-AWD system, the rear tires are not powered (simplistic explanation), as well as the actual operation of the SH-AWD system (electromagnetic carbon clutches).

dcmodels

FOR TIRE REPLACEMENT:

Further, the Tire Rack article says: “Here are recommendations from some of the manufactures that the Tire Rack currently serves for matching the tires used on their four-wheel drive and all-wheel drive vehicles.”

Audi
As published in their vehicle owner's manual, "rolling radius of all 4 tires must remain the same" or within 4/32-inch of each other in remaining tread depth.

Porsche Cayenne
within 30% of the other tire on the same axle's remaining treadwear.

Subaru
Within 1/4-inch of tire circumference or about 2/32-inch of each other in remaining tread depth

Honda CR-V
Difference of 1/8 to 3/8 (0.375) inch circumference can cause RT-AWD problems. Can cause the two pumps (front/rear) in rear diff to activate, overheating the rear diff.

Please NOTE: the Honda CR-V AWD is completely different from the RDX SH-AWD system. This is why only two tires can be replaced on an RDX, so long as the 2 tires on each axle are the same diameter.

And finally: the Tire Rack suggests that it is financially advantageous to shave one new tire to the tread depth of the other three, if the other three tires are less than half worn. This allows replacing only one tire rather than four. Shaving is a process that car racers use commonly, to remove tread from a new tire to a required depth. Tire Rack provides this service, if you purchase a new tire from them. Then you must find a local tire dealer to mount and balance the tire for you.

mrgold35

I had to purchase a second new tire to match tread depth when I got a flat that destroyed my other rear tire on my RDX. Discount Tire refused to sell me one new tire to match the flat because they thought I needed to have 3 new tires because of the sh-awd. I had to show the service manager in the RDX manual it is A-OK to purchase two tires as long as they have the same tread depth and remain on the same axel.

Here is a link to a pdf. for a 2008 RDX if someone else has this issue (on pg 363):
http://techinfo.honda.com/rjanisis/p.../BTK0808OM.pdf

Mr Marco

This^

I wasn't going to chime in here, but the only Subaru I like is the Impreza. The Forester gets my vote for second ugliest SUV, right behind GM's finest fuck-up, the AzteK.

pickler

I don't think the forester is ugly at all, specially the new one. but yea it's not as pretty as an RDX.

2013

mrgold35

It seems like North American's have an aversion to station wagons? The North American love affair with the station wagons seemed to end with Chevy Chase movie “Vacation” around the mid 80s. To me, a SUV is just a taller version of a station wagon with worst gas mileage. Mini vans can’t handle like a station wagon and they can’t go where an awd SUV can go. Mini vans have the worst functionality of the wagon and SUV put into one vehicle to just have space as its only attribute.

Something about the size, shape, mpg, and utility of the Forester is what I need; but, the Acura RDX is what I want. The rise in gas prices to European prices will move North America toward more crossover shaped (wagon) vehicles for utility and mpgs +10 years down the road.

Mattau

Thanks for all of your input. There is no question that the RDX is more luxurious. It has a nicer interior. Having said that, it doesn't have the same practicality/utility as the Forester. For example, I find the 2013 Forester roomier (passenger and cargo) than the RDX, and the 2014 Forester I saw the other day appears even more roomier. One thing I want to get a better feel for is the RDX's ride. I test drove it last week for only a short while and it seems to be very harsh. I have owned sport cars and sport sedans and none of them are as harsh. Granted, none of them weigh as much either. The other thing I am still researching is the RDX's performance in slippery and snowy condition. My 11 yrs old Impreza Outback Sport is absolutely amazing and I assume the 11 yrs newer Subaru awd technology is even better. I am fully aware of the importance of proper snow tires and ample ground clearance but I must have something as good or better than my current Impreza. How does the RDX compare?