As my sales person explained it when I brought up the lack of auto-dimming mirror, memory seats, and power passenger seat, Acura is trying to keep the cost down.

They're taking technology components from a near $50k car and stuffing them into a $38k vehicle. Do you think the turbo engine, the real time traffic, the sophisicated all wheel drive, and the surround sound speakers are cheap? I would like to see how much the dealerships are paying for the RDX with the tech package.

Sure, I'd like to have all the extras I mentioned above and a less gas-guzzling engine. But like some of the other posters, I'm an Acura guy (Integra then a CL Type-S and an occasional MDX driver). I'm not interested in dealing with a long list of optional components from Lexus or another brand, I just want the top of the line and make it affordable.

On the other hand, I'll probably be doing a 36 month lease so that when my lease is up I can trade it in for the new RDX which by then should have all the standard features I want and hopefully a more refined gas-sipping engine.

 

I'm kind of sick of the "turbo" engine being pushed as a feature. It's not. A car this heavy, with five adults inside and a 1500-lb trailer behind it, needs serious torque. A four-cylinder engine simply can't deliver enough power unless you turbocharge it. Acura decided, whether for cost- or space-saving reasons, to use a turbocharged four instead of a six. However, many other cars that will be cross-shopped with the RDX have a six-cylinder engine that is just as fast or faster than the turbocharged four. And don't give me the "economy of a four-cylinder" argument -- it's BS. 19/23 is well below many six-cylinder mileage numbers. Okay, okay, it has all-wheel-drive, I can forgive the low mileage a little bit. But at best, it's on part with a six-cylinder, not better.

The fact of the matter is, this thing is basically a CUV version of the TSX, with added AWD and turbo. But it also costs a good 20% more. And at forty grand out the door, the RDX shouldn't make me manually dim my mirror or my significant other manually adjust her seat. Charge me an extra $500 and throw those things in there. I'm all about paying a few extra percentage points to avoid cutting corners. If I'm going to be paying for this thing for the next five years, I'd like to be comfortable knowing that it's not missing features that have been on competing brands for a decade.

I was excited for this car, but I don't think it's quite time to buy yet. I'm holding out for the '08.

 

I am holding out as well. It is just really sad to see Acura trying to cut corners on RDX. I am thinking about CX-7 now. Those technology components don't cost $50K. Mazda can make one (less advanced) starting $25K.

 

Yeah, good thing Mazda didn't cut any corners on the CX-7

 

They may have also cut corners, but at least they cut the price to match.

Also, I don't see Mazda pretending to be a luxury brand.

 

Yeah, nobody is going to complain the manual seat and manual mirror when you paid $25K. Cut corner cut price. I am happy.

 

Acura is trying to promote their luxury image. I don’t see RDX is a home run for Acura, may be more like a RL to me. A car sold for $42K with $50K MSRP. Why? You get what you want and more with RL. No V8 or no RWD kill the RL.

Throw in a turbo into RDX and does not outrun or better fuel economy than a V6 Rav4. More expensive than a TL and does not get power seat, auto-dimming mirror or memory seat. We are talking the same auto company. What is the point? Think big please. With the CX-7 on sight, expect some discounts on RDX until they fix it in 08.

 

They also skimped on sound deadening, engine refinement, and interior finish. You get what you pay for.

 

Yeah, i agree you get what you paid for in CX-7 but you don't get what you paid for in RDX.

 

Yeah, time will tell. In my test drive of the CX-7, I found the car to be unrefined, on the whole. I expect the RDX to address many of these issues, with a superior interior, improved ride quality, and more refined engine and transmission. So, if a loaded 32k CX-7 is of "good value," I have no qualms about a 37k RDX that holds the promise of outdoing the CX-7 in a number of areas.

 

Hey that's okay a ton of CX-7s are at the bottom of the Pacific ocean now.

http://www.motoring.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=3359182

Hey if you want a Mazda go buy one! I was reading my Consumer Reports the other night and saw nothing but black marks all over Mazda's products as far as reliability goes.

How people can look at what the RDX costs and judge how much this is 'worth' is funny. Look at BMW and Audi and what they charge.

 

I see your point, but it's also hard to argue that the German cars aren't worth the additional asking price. . . to some degree. There's an inherent quality in their construction and driveability that allows them to compete. . . even at a higher price and with less content. Sometimes we get so hung up on ridiculing BMW buyers for overpaying, but as with Mazda, BMW, and even dear old Acura, you get what you pay for - for better, worse, or indifferent.

 

You are making a 'soft point' on that. I mean, in Europe Mercedes is a taxi and has cloth seats. BMW sells cheapie 1-Series there. They don't want to 'devalue' the brand. I think Acura has not successfully waged a PR war the way Lexus has, for example, but on a qualitative level BMWs and Mercedes are just not up to par with even a Honda Fit.

Looking at these German cars and seeing them arrive as trade-ins from customers and hearing from them about how their cars have aged I have little respect for Audi, VW, BMW, or Mercedes. The Audi A4 is worthless because it has lousy quality. Same with any VW. The BMWs aren't much better nor are the Mercedes. It's all documented in Consumer Reports and a variety of other sources.

Honda has the right to ask for a profit on their cars. Sure, they could probably drop the RDX price by $1,000 and still make money, but they build a car better than most so I believe they deserve to charge dealers what they do for them. If Mazda was up there in quality they'd ask for more, too. The German brands just have good marketing and, when their cars work, a nice drive.

 

I can't help but agree with your statements about quality. My family's driveway has been graced with everything from an A3 to an SL55, and there were plentiful problems with all of them. When they're working, though, it's tough to beat their driving dynamics.

And yes, I'm more than happy to pay what Honda and Acura ask for every car in their lineups. . . they have nearly perfected the balance of build quality and driving enjoyment that has evaded car companies for so many years.

 

I currently have a BMW 328i and while there was high maintenance, it was the perfect car for that period of my life. I was thrilled to hear about the RDX and love all the features, but I cannot help but be disappointed with the engine. I am very turned off by the 4 cyl turbo and at parity gas mileage. To me, reliability is established through time and proven. Although Acura made reliable cars in the past, I think it is baseless to say the RDX will be reliable since it is using a new unproven engine. It would be a different story if the RDX was using a proven Acura engine. Although I am anxious to buy, I have to wait a few years and see how the RDX turns out.

 

Well the engine itself is hardly unproven. That has been around for a long time in fact. Most of the components of the RDX (stereo, engine, SH-AWD, switches, transmission) have come from many different Honda and Acura products. The turbo is what is new. Granted, this is a major part of the RDX but Honda has been working on this for a long time.

I believe that the least reliable Acura is still better than the most reliable German car. Still, first year models always have some bugs in them but, to be fair, the RL seems to have had remarkably few.

 

It's about time honda gets integrated key fob!

 

I'm going to assume you were at a ride and drive...very similar to the one i was at on monday.

 

Yeah but to me it feel cheap and will probably break. How much could it cost to use real metal buttons and coat the thing in rubber so it is more like the Audi?

 

I am glad it is not the soft-rubber like the Audi/VW. It looks drab and most importantly starts peeling off 3-4 years down the lane. 5 years later your vehicle's interior looks like shit.

 

What are your thoughts for the RDX on a long road trip with hills to climb? I can imagine it being high strain on a 4-cyl turbo engine or will we be turning off the AC and hanging out with the mini vans and truckers on the right side lane?

I figure a 4-cyl turbo would be fine for city driving, but I would be a little disappointed if the RDX cannot long haul through the hills.

 

I can't see that as a problem, Turbos love a load on the engine

 

As opposed to the paint rubbing off after a year on the regular fob? The Audi peeling off is bad and they are expensive to replace. I had just hoped Acura would have had the thing made out of something nicer. I like BMW's keys a lot.