Mr Marco

Unfortunately, my wife would,
like I said;

"looks like an offspring of the love fest that occurred in the parking lot of a Nickleback show between an FX-35 and a CX-7."

XLR8R

For me the K-23 timing chain was a big RDX selling point over other CUVs we looked at. I grow weary of changing timing belts -- it's most of the day under the car, and longer if things don't go well.

The Honda J35 in the 2nd gen RDX is an interference engine, and has always had a timing belt, with a change interval (I think) between 80 to 105k.

Most car owners discover the existence of the shy, reclusive timing belt in of two ways:

A. When the dealer tells them it's due, and wants $1400 to replace it.

B. When it breaks, taking the valves with it, and they want $3000 to fix it.

jcl78

It is things like this that most people overlook, but are extremely important. Timing chains are awesome, and it is one of things I consider when looking at cars. The first gen RDX was Acura's take on a WRX / STi, but for grownups, the new RDX is for soccer moms to pick up their kids and snub their neighbor with the Lexus RX350 in their driveway.

03JamesCLS

Eh, it's not so bad, I prefer my '09 though. As stated multiple times I'm bummed Acura is scraping the SH and Turbo setup. Rims are hideous as well. We'll see what the final production model looks like...

hotbryan333

now the fun turbo is no longer offered, might as well just buy the kia sorento. I dont see anything that rdx is any superior over the sorento. Well the RDX has HID and higher sticker price thats about it. This RDX is a disaapointment.

MMike1981

hmm, let me think.....WORSE lol

03JamesCLS

True... True... haha

mrgold35

No matter how much we bitch about the new RDX, Acura will more than likely double or maybe triple sales of the new vehicle. Acura will cater to demographics willing to plunk down money to buy/lease the 2013 RDX. If Acura made the 2013 RDX with all the tech and performance this forum requested, their sales would drop to ZDX levels. None of us would want to pay $45,000 -$55,000 this Acurazine RDX. Audi Q5, BMW X3, Land Rover and the Porsche Cayenne all have the tech, gas mileage, tow rating and performance we want out of the RDX. All of us think it is absolutely crazy to pay $45,000-$90,000 to get it. The 2013 RDX is the 90% solution for what I need in a CUV (it would be 95% if it had cooled seats).

I’m starting to change my mind and I think we get what we pay for. The 07-12 RDX and the 2013 RDX is one hell of a package compared to any other CUV for the exact same money. I’m changing my vote to a “thumb up” for the 2013 RDX and look forward to the all MDX.

MMike1981

its never been a secret....many ppl on here want to rationalize the RDX as to why its a better product than its competition and why a different manufacturer was not purchased, reality is...it was mainly price that those rationalizations ring true. Couldnt get the things you wanted under 40k unless you got an RDX. Same arguments can be made as to why people are starting to veer from Honda's models to less expensive alternatives. If we removed the RDX from the equation of entry level or small lux utes - what would any of us be driving? This is the RDX niche.

Acura's strongest position has always been price. Is been the hyundai of mid line luxury or even entry level (hell - even Hyundai has breached the low price barrier). Acura knows its market well enough that price is at the top of the list, to keep that low, there must be mandatory restraints. The RDX may become the CRV of this segment with the 2nd gen, but just cant see it winning any comparisons. Acura had the chance to make something not only compelling, but relevant across the board to both its mundane audience and enthusiasts. Instead, it chose a midline for broader appeal ie sales. lol

i bet the 2nd gen RDX will do everything well just like all of Acuras models. But they dont stand out in any category (except the MDX). Whats exciting about the 2nd gen RDX? anyone? anyone? I DO think that the 2013 will breach 40k in its highest trim. Seeing the prototype, I do NOT think 40k represents a strong value in this segment - id either buy an MDX, or buy another Q5 turbo. The best value for an RDX will continue to be a base model in either FWD or AWD, unless Acura has actually added more worthy content to their +/- 3k tech package.

XLR8R

Hey, 40k will get you Chevy Volt

R*D*X*

Looks like honda odyssey to me!!!!

Type34

They're keeping those wheels for production



BUT I will say that while I really liked the '07-09, I think Acura jacked up the '10-12 quite a bit (the beak ruined it).

The 2013 is going straight after the Lexus RX with V6 power and more contemporary design. Which should lead to more sales and also an easier transition from an RDX to an MDX.

Joe Las Vegas

Like many said, they went backwards, went from 4 turbo to V6 when everybody else is going the other way around. Next step should have been a 4 cyl hybrid, that would have been the right choice, they might have gotten 25/35 mpg, without having to stretch the hood, like they did to fit a V6.
Body-wise, they should have made it look like a small MDX, which is a beauty, if I needed a vehicle bigger than a crossover, I would definitely get an MDX.
We'll have to wait and see how they sell, if they sell like crap, they might change their mind and get it right in 2014.
Kia got it right when they did the 2012 sportage, it looks great and they added a turbo, even though the 0-60 time sucks compared to the current rdx turbo 4.

Boostin'

Looks like Acura has now copied to a Tee the Ford Edge. So the RDX has lost it's scrappy, fringe character based on handling and performance - rarities in a world of softly sprung, lackluster transportation appliances. They'll probably sell all they can make. I, however, won't be a repeat buyer.

corduroygt

No chance in hell for that happening. We are a fringe group on this board, most RDX owners I see on the road are middle aged women and they'll love the 2013 model.
As far as the Sportage is concerned, I'd buy the budget Range Rover Evoque called the Ford Escape before that car...

catnippants

I'll echo this. I actually like the new RDX, but it just fell in line with every other CUV out there. Would I buy it? Probably not - not without more tech or more luxury. Not that it's a competitor in any sense of the word, but I saw an ad on TV for the Hyundai Veloster the other day, so I looked it up. I was blown away to see even more features than the 2013 RDX - for $22K. When I bought my RDX, very few 'non-upscale' vehicles had the same level of tech. Now even the 2012 is behind - and the 2013 just barely catches up.

Unfortunately, unless Acura makes some significant leaps in the next few years, I'm going to be considering other brands when I'm ready to get rid of my '07.

VietNinjaJ30A1

I like the interior redesign...it's pretty inline with the rest of Acura's current lineup.

The exterior, I have to disagree with. From some angles it looks like a Lexus RX350. The headlights remind me of a Volvo SUV/CUV. And overall I think it looks MUCH less aggressive than the existing 2 body styles, which I think is a look the RDX should keep because of it's targeted crowd.

Side-note: the NSX Concept, on the other hand, had me drooling...

Carbon2008RDX

To tell the truth, a used ZDX is sounding pretty good right about now. Advanced SH-AWD, powerful engine, and superior interior quality. And, I've barely seen any on the road so it would be pretty unique!

If you could get a used ZDX with low miles vs. the new 2013 RDX for the same price which one would you go for? I'd say ZDX.

Wongway

I guess I'm a bit of an oddball...
The only thing that kept me from getting an RDX was that there was NO possibility of a manual transmission. I loved everything about the RDX except for that. I didn't care if the '10-'12 had ugly beaks, I sit inside and DRIVE more than I stood around looking at my vehicle.

I got an X3 instead, hoping one day an RDX might be had with a manual...

Fast forward to today and now I can't even get a manual on ANY BMW suv *sigh*

Now I look at the landscape and in the small suv segment, even the more fun manufacturers are doing away with manuals (BMW, Mazda, etc)

I always thought all the pre '13 RDXs would have been perfect with 6 gears in a choice of manual or auto. It would have helped bump the MPG up to a bit more respectable level (mpg is my only real knock on the last generation X3, and at 140,000 miles, it's becoming harder to find a suitable replacement) while keeping everything else people liked about the RDX.

I did always wonder if the turbos on these RDXs would stand the test of time. (I had 2.8 A4 once, but knew a lot of people with that generation's 1.8T that had their engines go long before I even got an oil leak) Turbos tend to worry me since I keep my vehicles well over 110,000 miles plus.

If I could sum up the 2013 RDX in one word? It would be "pedestrian"
It's now nothing more than a fancy CRV to me if the SH-AWD is gone. I feel sorry for all you people that liked your RDXs and hope your current models last you a VERY long time.

All that I have left to look forward to is MAYBE an X1 might make it to the US with AWD+manual, or maybe Mazda will introduce the CX-5 next year with an AWD+manual option in either the skyactiv-g or skyactiv-d, because at the moment, the only 'SUV' out there that's left in my eyes that's fun to drive with AWD+manual and gets decent mpg out there would be a MINI Countryman.

Good luck to you RDX fans out there...

ikkoku

if you are ok with the interior now, don't think you'll feel that much different with the new one

mic43

The 2013 ford escape is available in 240hp turbo 4, 6 speed transmission, torque + brake vectoring, direct injection, and a lot of tech you can't get in the acura. Sounds to me like the perfect RDX replacement if only it wasn't so ugly (maybe a lincoln version, since they made the MKC which is a pretty ford focus)

Mr Marco

Hench your poor choice of forum names.

MMike1981

no offense but really, the FORD ESCAPE? i realize it may represent much new technology or whatever, but the Escape is no where near the class of the RDX or its competitors. Not to mention, its ugly as sin.

http://www.ford.com/suvs/escape/2013/

corduroygt

I think it's a good looking crossover, but that's subjective and at least it doesn't look like a venza like the 2013 RDX.

What's not subjective is that an Acura doesn't have many of the features that this lowly Ford Escape has, such as the panoramic sunroof, in-car electronic toys/apps/etc, automatic parking, run your foot under the bumper to open the trunk, etc. That's really pathetic that they didn't add enough features for a brand new model.

XIS

I think it looks a little nicer than the new RDX... Sad and I can't believe it. Ford. Nicer design.

The wheels look nicer for sure! A bit less expensive (for the best 'value' folks).

MMike1981

To compete, Acura must have a relevant product. Even as a new model, the RDX is somewhat irrelevant. You can get the same or better stuff in almost ANY manufacturers' car, not just a luxury car. but that does NOT mean that the sum of the parts equals a better vehicle.

Lower companies are throwing everything AND the kitchen sink into their new models, I still wouldn't buy a Ford, because the whole product has to be good as well. For example, Honda cant compete with the new Civic, theres not enough there to get it over the line. It will still be the most reliable thing ever, but it doesnt have the tools necessary to compete today. That said - Acura needs to match features with whatever it thinks its competition will be, not match features because a car costing 10k less has them. That is the reason WHY most people bought an RDX, because they could not afford the CUV they wanted that cost 5-10k MORE than the RDX and the RDX always came CLOSE with content ("i dont have to spend 800 on HID headlights or real leather etc). We took a hit on options & content, but Acura wins on price every time. Will they win with the 2013 RDX? Most likely, but its pretty standard fare for ANY vehicle on the road now, and, already dated. This RDX is not going to run with the big boys, but what it will do is exactly what its been doing - it WILL be the cheaper, value buy between those folks who wont go over 40k, buy german, or want something more than a CRV. Acuras greatest tool is that the RDX is its own niche, when cross shopped, the most important relevant factor is $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. it doesnt have any bells & whistles, which in 06 may have been awesome, but standard bluetooth or a 6 speed is like saying the car comes with 4 tires in this segment.

catnippants

This was my point exactly - and why I brought up the Hyundai. Acura - a supposedly forward thinking, higher end, luxury brand - should have MORE features, not fewer.

corduroygt

See, that's the negative brand image domestics have to fight these days. The Focus/Escape/Fusion are all from Ford Europe, where they're highly regarded as good cars. You say you wouldn't buy a Ford, but the Focus is better than the Civic in pretty much everything, and I'd definitely buy one over a Civic. That's why I'm seriously considering the focus-based Escape as the replacement for the RDX, since if I can't have SH-AWD, might as well get something that's lighter and turbocharged and has more toys. They are quite fun to drive too.

It also has rear HVAC vents, which we don't have and it's not likely that even the 2013 model will have it either...

MMike1981

A fully loaded Ford Escape AWD carries with it a sticker that puts it against not only MUCH BETTER competition, but any other brand that carries any cachet alone - a 35k + Escape is an utter JOKE. Get an Edge, get a Murano, a pathfinder, a pilot, anything. If it looked the part maybe, if it drives the part (doubt it) and if it carried some luxurious notions, even then maybe - but Ford is none of those. Im sorry - a base model may be a good value, but the Titanium trim w/nav, "all" leather, etc is astronomically priced considering the OTHER vehicles you can get in that territory. Id buy a MURANO any day over the Escape, or even a Pilot or CRV. I am also not a fan of Ford's technology, at all. Ford sync sucks, the touch interface is awful and the stuff isnt there yet. imo.

This is not a foreign allegiance thing - its a DOMESTIC has to prove themselves thing and until that happens, fully, id buy one. Their resale value is awful, and for buyers, such as myself - thats not good. Granted, some of their models have made strides, but i am not willing to go BALLS OUT on something like a Ford Escape. Cadillac is there, if they made a little bit different of a CUV, id buy one in a second.

MMike1981

its no mystery acura sucks with options and content. ive created, hammered, and made many come and go enemies touting those notions over the many years ive been on this board. Seeming that Acuras 2013 models intend to blatantly ignore any advancement in those areas, the battle is lost. Ya gotta either take it, or goto another brand.

Ive just stopped bitching about it, especially after seeing the 2013....lol Its just not gonna happen with Acura. I really hopes the RDX would be a premium offering, with relevant (by today's standards) luxury equipment. Instead, its just another juicy honda.

MMike1981

The thing is tho - there comes a point where there needs to be balance. Hyundai packs content that at times, doesnt exist till price points, at 40k, 50k - but the thing is, the car on the whole, the drive quality, the way it all comes together - the features, at least for me, are not enough to look past the whole product. When Hyundai "revolutionized" their cars, i spent a few weeks and went out and test drove all of them. I thought i was missing something - yea they are great on paper, but for the most part, they drove pretty unimpressively, they have yet to get some bread and butter in tuning their suspension, steering and engines - they are a FEW years away from blasting Honda overall, but they are not there yet, Honda's vehicles still drive better, feel better even tho they def DEF lack features.

corduroygt

Fully loaded Kia Sportage Turbo is 33K MSRP, paying a bit more for more content isn't that bad.

All of those are 4000-4500 lb trucks with 45K fully loaded MSRP's. Fully loaded Escape is 3700 lbs for 36K. It'll get better mpg than all of them due to its weight.

Bias against Ford, nothing else. It will drive the part since it's lighter than the RDX and is based on the Focus, which is a very good handling car.

Fully loaded Murano's aren't cheap and I'm not even going go near Hondas that don't even have HID's as an option. Besides, the market will take care of the pricing, you'll at least get 5K off, considering most people got that much off on an RDX, which is a more prestigious brand.


Different tastes based on styling. I would not even consider owning a Murano, a Pilot, or any Cadillac for a second, as they're downright hideous. Cadillac, or pretty much all GM cars are at least 500 lb overweight for their classes anyway, and this negatively affects performance, handling, and fuel economy.

Plus, I think the Escape has better rear seats than the RDX, and they'll fix all the bugs in Sync by the time I'm ready to buy one anyway.

corduroygt

By the way, I've confirmed that there are no rear HVAC vents on the 2013 RDX, unlike even the lowly Escape...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQzSoRdvdDM

MMike1981

I would say, wholly off topic & completely irrelevant, the ford escape will not be a competitor to the RDX or any other upper tier brand lux CUV. end of story and its not even worth backing that up, again.

FORD BIAS MUCH ? lol. and u hit the nail right on the head - this things competition is Kia & Hyundai. maybe even that AWFUL buick small CUV. let it stick to that, and lets get back to the RDX. and...33k for a Kia is another joke as well. never in my lifetime.

im not so sure how you can claim that caddys are hideous yet like the escape. but i guess it makes sense from an Acura shopper - still shopping "features" for the money, completely oblivious to cachet, quality, feel, and suave that you, at least I, expect when I lay down 35k for any vehicle. Kia, Hyundai, Ford, or any of those brands will never grab 35k from me. Anyone could easily dump a couple thousand into any car, add the best gear, sound system and all that crap - but that doesnt change the whole package. I expect more from Acura and the RDX relative to their competition, NOT relative to ANY car on the planet. Ford NEEDS to include idiotic garbage to help take them out of the dumps and actually compete against perennial best sellers in all their segments.

and btw....I owned 3 explorers during the 90's and 2000s, 2 sport tracks (till the Ridge Line owned it) and the last being a V8 Eddie Bauer trim ($40k+) and i have never owned greater pieces of shit in my life. Thats when I went exclusively to japan & germany. Maybe Ford is making a comeback - so be it, but - till their cars, if they even make any that compete with upper tier brands, compete favorably, I think ill stick with a premium brand that at least for me, has some value picking up biz associates, execs and nights on the town. Leave the escape to my 7 year old son to play in a sandbox.

MMike1981

forgot to add to my Ford list - 2002 Mustang GT Convertible. POS. 2006 Mazda CX-7 GT, 35k, bigger POS & lasted 1800 miles.(many ford parts & integral components - ironically, the parts that failed were Ford parts)

MMike1981

and for reinforcement of why I will still never pay 35k to FORD




In recent years, Ford has been a model of American reliability. The brand ranked 10th in our predicted reliability ranking last year and competed well with Japanese makes. This year, however, the Ford brand has slipped 10 spots, to 20th out of 28 makes. That was the biggest drop for any major nameplate, according to our 2011 Annual Auto Survey, which is based on subscribers' experiences with 1.3 million vehicles.

What changed? Three new or redesigned models-the Explorer, Fiesta, and Focus-had below-average reliability in their first year. We have often found that new or revamped models have more problems in their first year than in subsequent model years. Ford's problems underscore our advice to hold off buying a new car in its first year.

Ford's drop can also be attributed to problems with new technologies: the new MyFord Touch infotainment system and the new automated-manual transmission used in the Fiesta and Focus. Lincoln finished above Ford, although the freshened MKX, a cousin of the Edge, suffered from the MyLincoln Touch system. On the bright side, the Ford Fusion Hybrid sedan remained outstanding, and other Fusion versions were above average.

-Consumer Reports.

corduroygt

You're right, it competes with the CR-V and completely obliterates it


Don't like big heavy American iron, they're junk, just like all the US designed Fords too. Cadillacs are some of the ugliest vehicles on the road today, that's why they can't sell anywhere but the US, unlike the new Focus,Fiesta,Fusion, ans Escape, with their European design and success in their markets.

Care about sporty driving dynamics + features, otherwise why would I buy an RDX? New Escape is very light for its class and it's based on the best driving compact car today, which is the Focus. I fail to see how my current RDX has more "quality", "feel", and "cachet" than the 2013 Escape. Its only advantage is the SH-AWD, which the new RDX is losing anyway. It never bothered me, since I accept that to get that you have to go German, but I'd rather save some money for something that I spend less than an hour in. I'd rather pay big for a bed that I sleep on for 6 hours a day.

You know the Focus was the best compact in its segment based on C&D comparison test, that included the new Civic, right?


American designed fords in the 90's are not representative of the new Escape. That survey is also rubbish since its judging the sync system, not the reliability of the cars. Having buggy software that can be updated is no big deal compared to having faulty transmissions or head gaskets.

MMike1981

CR reliability data is rubbish? LOL it takes into account YEARS of thorough history on all attributes of all vehicles, INCLUDING their technology. Not sure how you can be so set on a car or think a car has proven itself that has not even been driven yet.

But, since you are telling me a great example is the Focus, lets focus on the Focus...

DID YOU READ CR's additional comments???? LOL - they also include the Focus being one of Fords least reliable vehicles (not just sync) but BECAUSE OF ITS TRANSMISSION LOL - which according to you may be a big deal.

your comments are a collective heap of contradictions.

You seem to have your heart set on the new Escape, thats great, enjoy it.

btw, this aint Europe, its America. And a bad brand image isnt a historical stigma, its reality.

im done.

corduroygt

Transmission wasn't breaking down or anything, it was just clunky. It was fixed with a reflash, and the same is true for Sync:

http://www.motortrend.com/features/a...much_improved/

Besides, my heart is not set on an Escape. It's either that or spend more money and get an X3. If the SUV doesn't have a turbo or torque vectoring, it better be cheap or I'm not interested. RDX was perfect for that.

Plus, having driven the 300hp TL SH-AWD for a day as a loaner, I don't like the way that you have to rev it up past 5k rpm to get power. The RDX has awesome torque after 2K rpm.

ParaSurfer1979

The J35 also isn't true 3 lobe VTEC. It should be called VTEC-E because this motor doesn't switch cam profiles middle of the rev range like true VTEC Honda motors. i-VTEC in v6's only controls the valves and spark plugs via ecu. That all said this motor should run on 87 octane as the hp/tq numbers are the same as the Accord. This motor also has substntially less low/mid-range power compared to the J35 in the 6spd Accord/3rd Gen TL-S motor. This explains why the Accord V6 sedan is slower than the 258hp Base 3rd Gen TL.