pickler

When i took my Acura for service, to my surprise i got a new V6 RDX 4WD as a loaner.


2013 V6 4WD Acura RDX

John at the service desk claimed i might like the ride and i would "trade in my turbo gas guzzler for a new lease on the 2013 RDX"....We'll see about that. Anyway I could not wait to do a comparison. Firstly i have to say that despite the fact that this car was new it already had its first oil change and it had done about 7000 miles. So its probably almost broken in.

For 2013 we all know Acura dropped the turbocharger and went with the V6 from the Honda accord (this is not the v6 from the Acura TSX, the latter is a different machine designed for power while this one is more eco friendly). Before i get to economy i would like to briefly comment on power and handling, something i find very important in cars.

Powerwise the new 2013 RDX feels fine. off the line and redline performance is impressive with the V6 2013 model, But it lacks midrange power. Midrange is important when you are trying to pass someone on the highway. Specially for an automatic vehicle. In a few 0-60 tests i did with both cars the Turbo RDX a full second faster to 60mph, that's a considerable lead. For more details see below with actual dynolicous timed runs posted. Also the 6 speed automatic is overall disappointing in the 2013 RDX. It literally pauses a full second before downshifting when you stab the gas and its overall less responsive than the outgoing 5 speed. But the 6AT is smoother in shifting and well matched gearing wise to the V6 engine. I noticed that cruising on the highway is easier with the 2013 RDX. You have to apply Less throttle and the engine feels torquey overall. So i sort of agree with the V6 for refinement and the overall benefits of low end torque. However this V6 engine has adverse effects on the front end of the car. Whenever you are cornering or braking hard you can feel how heavy the nose is and it really LOVES to understeer. On the other hand there is literally no weight in the rear end of the car. Despite the all wheel drive version it was much easier to fishtail with this car than my own 2007 SH-AWD RDX. I do not know if the 2013 model had a torque distribution gauge like the SH-AWD Acuras, i could not find one but it really felt like a FWD vehicle. I drove on dry asphalt, wet roads and a bit of hard pack powder snow. The level of confidence i have with the SH-AWD RDX was not there with the 2013 model. Isn't Acura about the reliability, safety AND fun? i mean if there is no fun why would i Not choose the Lexus or the Volvo?

Now fuel economy figures for the 2013 V6 all wheel drive RDX are 19 city 27 highway. That's better than any other car i own at the highway, including a 1000lbs lighter sedan. This is a 4mpg improvement over the outgoing turbo RDX. Back in 2006 when the all new RDX came out, Acura claimed it was powerful as a v6 yet more efficient. So i decided to test this out. I followed the exact same route i go through during my commute to work which involves lots of city driving -> traffic, red lights, stop signs and some cruising at 55mph. The biggest problem with the V6 engine was it consumed too much fuel during idle times compared to the engine in the turbo RDX. The turbo 4 consumes around 1 liter per hour at red lights while the V6 model was burning about twice that. During cruising at 55mph i noticed that the V6 engine was more efficient consuming about ~10% less fuel. Overall during my 2 day commute i averaged 19.6mpg with the 2013 RDX using premium gasoline. This was much less (2.4 mpg less) than the advertised city mileage and it was around what i was expecting from a 3.5L engine. But it was not worst than my Turbo RDX, which always manages low 19s, still very close. So mileage wise don't expect any improvement in the new RDX for city driving. Now getting to highway cruising for a 10km 65mph cruising with no stops or slowdowns i averaged 9.1 liters/100km or 25.8 mpg according to the 2013 trip computer. With my older turbocharged 2007 RDX i averaged about 9.2L/100km or 25.5 MPG over a 200km trip:


2007 Acura turbo SH-AWD scoring 25.5mpg on the highway

thinking that perhaps it had something to do with the weather i tried the same 10km that i did with 2013 RDX with my turbo RDX and managed an even better 8.9L/100km or 26mpg. This was all at 55mph average speed according to the trip computer. However i noticed that at +70mph the v6 engine quickly took the lead in fuel economy. So if you drive fast then the v6 might help you, but not by much.

Overall the V6 RDX is more refined and the powertrain feels more coherent with the car. But its not all that better in the fuel economy department. If you do think about it though, Acura has managed to design a V6 3.5L engine (J35) that gives you the same or better mileage than a 2.3L 4 cylinder turbo (K23). I think that's impressive considering that the K23 had a lot of gizmos to help improve efficiency (ie. Atkinson cycle engine, variable geometry turbo, variable exhaust and intake valve timing, variable lift timing and etc.). Even still the 07-12 RDX models are a more engaging drive similar to their European competitors while the 2013 model feels like a Lexus with an Acura badge on it.

So no thank you John, the mileage and performance gains are not enough to win me over yet. I think I will be keeping my 2007 turbocharged RDX for a few more years.

tests and observations:

2013 Acura RDX 4WD
Notes: Torquey, Refined, Good Highway Cruiser
city: 19.5mpg
highway: 25.7mpg
0-60 MPH: 7.4s


2007 Acura RDX SH-AWD:
Notes: Powerfull, Good handling, SH-AWD, Mild Street Fun
2007 Acura RDX SH-AWD
City: 19mpg
highway: 25.5mpg
0-60MPH: 6.25s

docboy

Great thread, thanks for posting!

How did you find the ride of the 2013 RDX compared to your 2007 RDX? Is the 2013 RDX ride less stiff or more "floaty feeling?"

I had a 2010 RDX AWD as a loaner a few times; I enjoyed the turbo and nimbleness, the ability to "dart in and dart out," and the utility of the 1G RDX, but found the ride a bit stiff and was worried about the less than stellar fuel economy.

I've been tempted to trade in my TL 6MT for the 1G RDX b/c of the TL's lack of utility and b/c my wife is constantly complaining of me having to shift in my vehicle and that she can't drive it ... I've seen the 2013 RDX in person, but to be honest it appears to have "mommy-fied" IMHO.

Mr Marco

0-60 @ 7.4sec?
Sad.

On another note, the RDX lost weight over-all with the new redesign, yet gained half a person's pounds under the hood.
Can't imagine what that must have done to the handling of what was a fun little CUV.

pickler

the car rides softer than the previous RDX but its still honda like. no floating. by the way i found that the sh-awd tl rides rougher than any acura ever made perhaps with the exception of RSX-S. so i think any ride will be an improvement for you. Don't expect anything from the handling department though. Its basically a Lexus RX with an Acura badge. The interior/cargo space is just as good as before though it feels less durable but more handsome. Fuel economy wise its not enough savings to buy you a boat say. If you are a faithful TL driver consider BMW X3 turbo with 8 speed auto.

yep it's over a second slower to 60mph but its almost as fast to 1/4 mile, i think my best 1/4 run was 15.2 second with the turbo.

Szwed

Awesome thread and good comparison, I felt the same way about the weight of the engine... in my 08 it feels just right but when I drove the 2g I had a ton of understeer in faster corners. The second gen definitely feels more soccer mom-ish.

prongATO

Thank you for this comparison. I was stunned to see what they have done with the engine and "options" on the 2013 RDX. I am SO glad I got my 2007 when I got HID and SH-AWD standard. Mine is paid off so I concentrate on keeping it in tip top condition.

Vividsi

07-12 RDX for the win. Better standard equipment, less $$$, faster, better looking.

flyv65

I test drove the 2013 a few months ago when my 2011 was in for service: softer, more mature ride, more room, less thrust (we're in Denver and a turbo is the way to go). Better electronics, less response from both suspension and the AWD.
I'd say it's an Acura version of the Lexus RX350: a good, dependable upscale ride, but it's not as much fun anymore. If I wanted a Lexus, I'd have bought one...

DEVO

I believe the RDX AWD system is no longer the SH-AWD but the RealTime system of the CRV...which means it's predominantly a FWD system that only engages the rear when slippage is detected. So that probably explains why it felt like a FWD vehicle.

Try2BWise

I was given a 2014 RDX as a loaner when my 2007 RDX was in for maintenance. I understand why Acura chose to keep the RDX name, but the 2nd generation RDX bears so little in common with the 1st generation that giving it an entirely new name would be more appropriate.

Don't get me wrong, I liked the 2014 RDX. It was a nice and stable smaller SUV. It drove wonderfully. Problem is, it felt "vanilla". I could have been in any number of new SUVs.

Mr Marco

I think we all know now, this was strickly a marketing ploy.