Don't get me wrong, I really like what I see in the RDX...............but

90% of the power goes to the front wheels..................WHY!!!!!!!!!!!
If this were the opposite, I'd be in love!
just my

 

What's your bit%$?
90% of power goes to front wheels when cruising, where front wheel drive is optimal.
Torque is distributed to rear wheels when necessary up to 70%, such as acceleration, cornering or when VSA is active.

 

There's no need for more torque to the rear wheels when you're just cruising along in a straight line. SHAWD only sends torque to the back when it's useful, that's all... in addition to acceleration & cornering, it also sends more torque (up to 45%, i believe) to the rear when going uphill.

 

As C&D says, it feels VERY much like a FWD car while cornering. I see this as a result of the 90% going to the front.
TO ME, feeling like a FWD car in the corners in not a good thing.

 

You have yet to drive one, and if you read other reviews, such as the one in Motortrend, you'd have realized that Acura benchmarked the X3 and aimed to beat it in every category possible. Motortrend (and other magazines) said it handled like a champ in the corners.

Please don't judge a vehicle without properly reading the reviews or understanding how SH-AWD or for that matter many other AWD systems work.

 

I actually thought one of the mags (don't remember which) said that it handled "neutral" like a RWD car due to the SH-AWD...up until the limits of handling where it started to understeer.

 

Thanks for the great advise, champ!

 

I hope this is true!

 

Pete,

I'm sure that the feeling of FWD has more to to the the weight distribution than that drivetrain. Due to Acura's chassis platforms, we need to place the engine above and slightly ahead of the front wheel centerline, BMW for example places the engine behind the front wheels.

For SH-AWD to function at its best, you need to keep the throttle pinned though the corner. This allows the car to send that engine torque to the outside rear wheel to reduce understeer. If you "chicken lift" through the corner there is no torqe to transfer, and the car will naturally understeer.

 

Hmmm... I'll have to check the article again when I get home. I don't remember that statement.

 

I will quote it for you:
".....the RDX behaves like a front-drive vehicle and understeer is its defining characteristic."

 

Well, there you go. I agree, that doesn't sound very flattering.

 

well motortrend says that the turning is the best thing about the RDX and it "walks all over the X3". So that is something to consider on topic of steering. and found the grip of the tires "almost scary" that it was gripping so well...

so really the steering of the RDX could go either way, so dont think its lacking in that department by any means...

 

Simple way to end this debate: wait for the RDX to come out and drive one a few times for yourself. Get an open-minded salesperson who will let you "really drive" the demonstator and you will see for yourself that the Car and Driver article is classic reporting of preconceived notions instead of the truth. The same garbage was spewed about the RL and I can tell you for a fact that the RL handles nothing like a FWD car (I should know, I drove a Legend coupe for 8 years prior to getting my RL). Bottom line: Trust the seat of your pants on these matters and not some possibly biased car mag reporter.

 

True enough. In the end, all the matters is your own opinion of the car (and this doesn't just apply to handling, but everything: acceleration, smoothness of the engine, ergonomics, noise, styling, etc.). That's what will determine if you'll be happy with it, not what a magazine says.

 

I had the opportunity to drive the X3 with pro drivers on an autoX course with several of it's rivals. The X3 killed, let me say that again, KILLED all of them. However, I hate the X3 everywhere else. Loud (not in a good way) exhaust, cheap looking interior, and no luxury. But handle it does!
With what I see in the RDX, I believe even if it can't hang with the X3 while being driven 90-100%, it is still a far better car. Also, I have been waiting for Honda to do a Turbo. Maybe an S2000 turbo is next!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I will make final judgment after I drive it, but I do fear understeer!

 

Another thing to look at...according to C&D, the weight distribution will be 52/48 f/r (Acura's numbers). To me, that is RWD territory and very significant for a FWD based car, 90% torque to the front or not.

With most cars, RWD included, understeer will be the the defining characteristic and this is due mostly to safety (when a car understeers, people are more likely to let off the gas which would dial back the understeer). So with a very good weight distribution and SH-AWD, I think Acura has a pretty good handler in their corner and the understeer may be due to different "tuning" of the SH-AWD system...Acura/Honda staying on the safe side.

But then again, enough of the mag racing...we'll know for sure when they release this car and test drives are done.

 

Just wanted to add that I know understeer is engineered into 99% of cars, but a RWD and a "good" AWD car should be able to overcome this understeer with ones right foot(in certain driving conditions). A poor AWD car will understeer more with added throttle. This is what the Honda Pilot does, and I hope the RDX does not.

*when I refer to the Pilot's AWD as poor, I mean in performance, not quality. and I know that the Pilot was not designed to be sporty.

 

The RL system can distribute up to 100% of the available torque on the rear axle to either side. A planetary gearset multiplies this to acellerate the outside wheel in a corner. This creates a yaw effect to negate understeer. If the RDX system works the same way, you won't have understeer unless you lift the throttle in the middle of the turn.

 

Another thing to realize is that the Pilot is probably a lot more front-heavy than the RDX, which I would not consider front-heavy at all, not to mention the pilot probably has more "comfort" oriented rims/tires and suspension and lack of SH-AWD.

Front heaviness will also contribute to understeer more than a balanced setup because the weight up front will have more of an effect on inertia forcing the car to keep going forward when the front wheels are turned...ie understeer.

 

Pete you only read the first half of the sentence??? Maybe you should get checked for A.D.D? Here is the full quote:

"In normal operation, 90 percentof the power goes to the front wheels, but this can vary up to 70 percent to the rear. At the rearaxle, the SH-AWD can send as much as 100 percent of available torque to one wheel, which Acura says improves handling by overdriving the outside rear wheel in a corner."

 

He's apparently never read anything I've posted either....

 

Can anyone clarify something for me. I haven't re-read the C&D article yet... did they actually drive it? The article is tagged as a "Preview", and from what I remember of their descriptions, it didn't sound to me like they actually drove it.

Thoughts?

 

WOW!?!........................what an a**hole!


It is nice to see that SOME people can debate without personal attacks.

 

Yes, the press previews are for driving but not measured tests. These cars are pre-production models, built on the assembly line, but not at full speed. Some of these early cars will make their way to our Ride and Drive intros, some will be crash tested.

 

I happen to "think" that the understeer that was felt was due to less aggressive throttle being applied during cornering than required to really get SH-AWD to do its work.

Again, mag racing's fine and all, but it's actually not.

 

Oh but that's not a personal attack??

Funny I thought the same of you for starting a thread based on half a quote.
p.s. I wasn't debating you I was correcting you. Welcome to the forum by the way, stick around and actually read some posts and you might learn something.

 

A personal attack on a car? What did I quote in the opening post? I gave what I called my .

Grow the F#$% up.

 

Hopefully you see the amazing contradiction in telling someone to grow up, then emphasizing it with emoticons and profanity? Whatever Dude, back at you!

 

Jeez, lighten up, everybody. This discussion is going nowhere fast and will be locked if you can't keep it on topic.

Totally true, sir. Who drives their car, especially a typical small SUV buyer (e.g. potentially me) at 9/10?

 

The MDX is a mostly FWD vehicle. The RL is a mostly FWD vehicle. Having driven both models hundreds of times I don't see much problem with them. The whole point of Honda's AWD/SH-AWD system is you get FWD fuel economy when you are doing things like driving straight down the road. How does RWD or AWD help you in those situations? The SH-AWD will adapt itself to wheel and throttle input.

The objections here to 'understeer bias' are only coming up, it seems, because someone wrote it in an article. In the real world, where driving actually happens, I doubt many people would even notice. Besides, in an SUV one shouldn't be driving it as hard as a sports car anyway cause the thing is gonna flip over one day.

 

.....Couple years back, all the car magazines said things like "library quiet", "as quiet as a tomb" etc. etc. etc. and all the other suplatives they could use when talking about the "new" LEXUS RX 330. Then, when I test drove the vehicle I was SHELL SHOCKED at how noisy the engine was (this is an extremely poor showing for Lexus, not only because this is a V6, but it is a Lexus, whose main selling point is it's refinement, smoothness and above all it's quietness ) .....and mind you I test drove it several times to be sure I wasn't imagining things. Not only that, but since then I've driven loaner RX 330s for weeks at a time, when my LS 400 was in for extended service and maintenance.....To be fair, The 330 is pretty quiet when cruising on the highway, but when accelerating the engine sounds like a chain saw (thrashy, unrefined, loud noise from the engine)

 

Questions about the RDX are fine. But the OP "pistolpete17" didn't bother to read the full article or the quote and instead is ready to go ahead and comment on the RDX's "biggest downfall" even though he's never driven it, and it isn't in dealerships yet.

I'm eager to see a head to head comparo of the RDX, X3, and CX-7. I really love the smooth styling of the CX-7 and its a good amount cheaper than the RDX. This new "CUV" market should be interesting.

 

Allow me to quote the Road and Track first drive, "Where you would normally expect an SUV weighing nearly 4000 lb. to understeer, the RDX has grip all the way to the exit. Only in very tight cormers did the RDX "push" the laws of physics."
I agree with Mr. Deeno that the Car and Driver reporter probably didn't push the car through the corners hard enough to let the SH-AWD do it's thing.

 

Uh.. Hello, it's an SUV! If you want something to carve up the twisties you're looking at the wrong vehicle.

 

Having driven a new generation RL with SHAWD for over a year now, the trick to make the car stick is in manual shift mode, as Colin said, "keep your foot in it" and it will amaze you on how well it sticks. So to keep the speed down keep the car in manual shift mode and 3rd or 4th gear will work wonders for you in the turns. In fact the car will beg for more speed in the clover leafs (sp?) and on ramps. Have Fun!

 

sh-awd is great but the biggest downfall as w/ the cl and tl automatic is the shitty ass gear ratio.

2.697
1.606
1.071
0.766
0.612
final 1.889

WHAT THE HELL is up w/ 4th and 5th. if they built this against the x3 damn can't they get the gear ratio right? power will be completely cut once it hits 4th gear.

 

Because, above all else, it's a Honda.

And if it's a Honda, you can be sure they will sacrifice performance for that extra bit of fuel economy.

I get 17mpg on premium with 60% highway driving from my M45...if I'm lucky. No way in hell a company like Honda would have the balls to pull such an act in regards to fuel economy.

 

i always find it funny, when a person gripes about a car, saying this sucks this is bad, when people havent even test driven the vehicle yet. go drive it, then make a opinion man!

 

Actually, the TSX was criticized for 6th gear being too tall. My revs are at 3500 at 80mph. I'd prefer they be lower. Still, it gets 29mph highway, so I guess I can't complain.