2013 Pics
01-19-2012, 02:57 PM
#121
mrgold35
The 3.5L TL engine runs on premium and there is a 99.9% chance the 3.5L RDX will also. Acura will make changes to the engine to broaden the TQ curve and lower peak TQ to the 4500 rpm range like the MDX and ZDX.
01-19-2012, 03:04 PM
#122
Nose heavy. Good luck on getting that to turn on the twistier roads. Drive it into the river, reminds me of a Top Gear episode...
01-19-2012, 03:39 PM
#123
Intermediate
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Garden Grove CA
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
btw I like the 07 rdx from the get go.
01-19-2012, 04:31 PM
#124
Banned
The 3.5l TL engine doesnt have cylinder management i-vtec either. Its a different engine. This RDX is all about getting the most mpg's It's def the Accord Automatic V6 going in the RDX it gains 2hp on the Accord due to efficiencies honda has been doing as of late to all their engines.
01-19-2012, 05:22 PM
#125
Intermediate
The 3.5l TL engine doesnt have cylinder management i-vtec either. Its a different engine. This RDX is all about getting the most mpg's It's def the Accord Automatic V6 going in the RDX it gains 2hp on the Accord due to efficiencies honda has been doing as of late to all their engines.
i actually do like the new design and the fact that is has a V6.
the 2013 RDX will be on my short list to replace my BMW when the time comes.
i hope you are right about the V6 taking regular gas. but are you referring to an older honda accord V6?
because the new one seems to have more HP.
http://automobiles.honda.com/accord-...re=ivtec-271hp
01-19-2012, 05:54 PM
#126
I posted this in another thread, but will re-post again
"From Four To Six
Despite sharing roots with Honda's latest small SUV, the RDX again boasts a driveline of its own. For 2013, the turbocharged I-4 is no more, but the RDX isn't adopting the CR-V's 2.4-liter I-4. Instead, the 2013 RDX gains the 3.5-liter V-6 used in the TSX V-6 and base TL models. Acura says this engine cranks out 273 hp, about 33 more than the old turbo-four. A six-speed automatic is the only transmission offered, and a key part in improving fuel economy. Figures for the 2013 RDX are still being finalized, but front-wheel-drive models are expected to return 20 mpg in the city, and 28 in the highway - a mild improvement compared to the 19/24 mpg (city/highway) rating earned by its predecessor."
Read more: http://www.automobilemag.com/auto_sh...#ixzz1jx3KOESO
"From Four To Six
Despite sharing roots with Honda's latest small SUV, the RDX again boasts a driveline of its own. For 2013, the turbocharged I-4 is no more, but the RDX isn't adopting the CR-V's 2.4-liter I-4. Instead, the 2013 RDX gains the 3.5-liter V-6 used in the TSX V-6 and base TL models. Acura says this engine cranks out 273 hp, about 33 more than the old turbo-four. A six-speed automatic is the only transmission offered, and a key part in improving fuel economy. Figures for the 2013 RDX are still being finalized, but front-wheel-drive models are expected to return 20 mpg in the city, and 28 in the highway - a mild improvement compared to the 19/24 mpg (city/highway) rating earned by its predecessor."
Read more: http://www.automobilemag.com/auto_sh...#ixzz1jx3KOESO
01-20-2012, 05:25 PM
#129
Carbon Bronze Pearl 2008
01-21-2012, 02:43 AM
#130
Drifting
The 2013 RDX Prototype at the Montreal show now has different rims:
01-21-2012, 10:42 AM
#132
With more angles, videos and "looks", the design is growing on me to the point where I think we will be surprised in person - like the ZDX.
still, acura remains incapable of making good rims, these people blind? is it that hard?
still, acura remains incapable of making good rims, these people blind? is it that hard?
01-21-2012, 11:35 AM
#133
I know I'm getting to this party late, but I love the new design! I have a 2011, and ANYTHING would be an improvement, but on top of that, I definitely like the new look. Since I have only had mine one year I don't see one of these new ones in my future, but I would much prefer that look to my current 'ugly beak' look.
01-21-2012, 10:07 PM
#134
You were surprised by the looks of the ZDX? It looks just as butt ugly in real life as in pictures. The 2013 RDX looks fine and I'd have no problem with it if they kept the SH-AWD...
01-23-2012, 03:47 PM
#135
Another question, after this 2013 model year change, the biggest reason to go for the RDX instead of the MDX becomes cost. Then I'm asking, why go for the RDX instead of a Venza or CX-9?
01-23-2012, 10:33 PM
#136
Drifting
To me, the Venza does not drive well. I was looking at it at one point but once I took a test drive, it quick disappeared from my shopping list. I am expecting the RDX to be much better at this.
The CX-9 looks nice on the outside, but the interior materials were rather sub-standard. I am also expecting the RDX to do much better here.
Also, neither Toyota nor Mazda dealers would give you the premium car dealership experience, if that is important to you.
01-24-2012, 03:14 PM
#137
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...
01-24-2012, 05:18 PM
#139
2007 RDX Tech
Why buy it when you can pay a couple thousand dollars more (depending on your package), and get an MDX with more room and almost the same mileage....
Mistake!?
01-24-2012, 07:51 PM
#140
Only hope the RDX drives well - if it doesnt, I feel like its going to be flogged in the press. And, just be a premium CRV
also, I have seen a bunch of new CRV's on the road and I have to say, its quite nice. Great creases, great angles, has great presence.
also, I have seen a bunch of new CRV's on the road and I have to say, its quite nice. Great creases, great angles, has great presence.
01-24-2012, 08:45 PM
#141
Drifting
01-25-2012, 08:12 AM
#142
Looking at the video I see parts I like and don't like.
They flattened the rib in center of the hatch, an improvement. +1
Chrome strip there - crap. 0
The D pillar curve looks just like the CR-V,
what is the opposite of improvement? -1
The plastic rocker panels are gone -improvement. 0
Not sure about the door cove and crease treatment,
must been present to win. (got to see it in person)
SH-AWD gone. -1
Turbo gone. -2
So for those keeping score at home -
'12 RDX vs '13 RDX
WINNER
'12 RDX by two points.
I'm sure they will sell lots of them though.
They flattened the rib in center of the hatch, an improvement. +1
Chrome strip there - crap. 0
The D pillar curve looks just like the CR-V,
what is the opposite of improvement? -1
The plastic rocker panels are gone -improvement. 0
Not sure about the door cove and crease treatment,
must been present to win. (got to see it in person)
SH-AWD gone. -1
Turbo gone. -2
So for those keeping score at home -
'12 RDX vs '13 RDX
WINNER
'12 RDX by two points.
I'm sure they will sell lots of them though.
The following users liked this post:
Mr Marco (01-25-2012)
01-25-2012, 11:38 AM
#143
Oh and BTW it can't be production rims, RDX rims HAVE TO BE at least 2" INSIDE the fender line, to give a you a reason to upgrade to optional rims that ARE 1" INSIDE the finder line.
01-25-2012, 02:33 PM
#145
Looks like someone raided Acura warehouse and stole all decent looking rims, I don't see any other explanation for this horrible wheel selection.
Oh and BTW it can't be production rims, RDX rims HAVE TO BE at least 2" INSIDE the fender line, to give a you a reason to upgrade to optional rims that ARE 1" INSIDE the finder line.
Oh and BTW it can't be production rims, RDX rims HAVE TO BE at least 2" INSIDE the fender line, to give a you a reason to upgrade to optional rims that ARE 1" INSIDE the finder line.
Liking these rims though.
01-25-2012, 05:59 PM
#146
Three Wheelin'
wow what a mess, so much cleaning up to do in this thread, so much wrong info...ppl need to get their facts straight or separate fiction from facts.
NO! its an accord engine read quote below by para. also a good idea to read this thread over. The K23 has more torque and it peaks at lower rpm ~3000rpm, go look at some dyno charts. None of the honda V6 engines give as much torque at such low rpms.
true, regular gas.
again wrong, it is the accord V6 not the TSX V6. The J35Z3 to be exact. The tsx utilizes the J35Z6 with higher compression. 271 vs 280hp.
Partially true, the CSX is not available in United States but the tsx is not the civic in America. It uses a 155hp k20 engine available on the RDX, the civic has a 1.8l engine. also the CSX uses acura Sequential 5AT gearbox with paddle shifters. This will all be present on the ILX.
here is a summary of 2013 RDX:
based on the CRV
271hp 3.5L SOHC V6
6 speed automatic
NO sh-awd, just part-time AWD from the CR-V
Regular Gas
28mpg highway (FWD)
21mpg city (FWD)
25mpg highway (AWD)??
18mpg city (AWD)??
softer ride
electric steering
6.9s 0-60 vs 6.8s with prev gen, despite 30hp gain
The 3.5l TL engine doesnt have cylinder management i-vtec either. Its a different engine. This RDX is all about getting the most mpg's It's def the Accord Automatic V6 going in the RDX it gains 2hp on the Accord due to efficiencies honda has been doing as of late to all their engines.
I posted this in another thread, but will re-post again
"From Four To Six
Despite sharing roots with Honda's latest small SUV, the RDX again boasts a driveline of its own. For 2013, the turbocharged I-4 is no more, but the RDX isn't adopting the CR-V's 2.4-liter I-4. Instead, the 2013 RDX gains the 3.5-liter V-6 used in the TSX V-6 and base TL models. Acura says this engine cranks out 273 hp, about 33 more than the old turbo-four. A six-speed automatic is the only transmission offered, and a key part in improving fuel economy. Figures for the 2013 RDX are still being finalized, but front-wheel-drive models are expected to return 20 mpg in the city, and 28 in the highway - a mild improvement compared to the 19/24 mpg (city/highway) rating earned by its predecessor."
Read more: http://www.automobilemag.com/auto_sh...#ixzz1jx3KOESO
"From Four To Six
Despite sharing roots with Honda's latest small SUV, the RDX again boasts a driveline of its own. For 2013, the turbocharged I-4 is no more, but the RDX isn't adopting the CR-V's 2.4-liter I-4. Instead, the 2013 RDX gains the 3.5-liter V-6 used in the TSX V-6 and base TL models. Acura says this engine cranks out 273 hp, about 33 more than the old turbo-four. A six-speed automatic is the only transmission offered, and a key part in improving fuel economy. Figures for the 2013 RDX are still being finalized, but front-wheel-drive models are expected to return 20 mpg in the city, and 28 in the highway - a mild improvement compared to the 19/24 mpg (city/highway) rating earned by its predecessor."
Read more: http://www.automobilemag.com/auto_sh...#ixzz1jx3KOESO
Partially true, the CSX is not available in United States but the tsx is not the civic in America. It uses a 155hp k20 engine available on the RDX, the civic has a 1.8l engine. also the CSX uses acura Sequential 5AT gearbox with paddle shifters. This will all be present on the ILX.
here is a summary of 2013 RDX:
based on the CRV
271hp 3.5L SOHC V6
6 speed automatic
NO sh-awd, just part-time AWD from the CR-V
Regular Gas
28mpg highway (FWD)
21mpg city (FWD)
25mpg highway (AWD)??
18mpg city (AWD)??
softer ride
electric steering
6.9s 0-60 vs 6.8s with prev gen, despite 30hp gain
Last edited by pickler; 01-25-2012 at 06:08 PM.
01-25-2012, 06:19 PM
#147
Three Wheelin'
accord v6 dyno, torque (blue is stock):
acura rdx turbo 4, torque (dotted is stock), notice amount of torque at low rpm vs accord's:
the v6 on the tsx is a different machine than the one on the accord. the slight bump in compression ratio allows it to take advantage of higher 91 octane gas proving 280hp at the crank. however dyno charts show that the tsx v6 is more on the lines of ~290horses. It is very close in performance vs the 3.7l on the TLSHAWD. One reason why acura is ditching the 3.7.
TSX V6 J35Z6 Dyno:
in summary:
RDX turbo 240ft-lb torque at ~3000rpm
Accord/RDX V6 180ft-lb torque at ~5000rpm
TSX V6 ~200ft-lb torque at ~4500rpm
so roughly 50ft-lb less torque on the 2013 RDX compared to the turbo and you lose sh-awd. this car is in lines of rav4 v6 now. however the GR v6 on the toyota has slightly more torque specially at mid range, it has also more overall power due to it being a DOHC vs SOHC on the honda v6 engines. So i would say the rav4 v6 is probably more fun in a straight line race vs the '13 rdx.
acura rdx turbo 4, torque (dotted is stock), notice amount of torque at low rpm vs accord's:
the v6 on the tsx is a different machine than the one on the accord. the slight bump in compression ratio allows it to take advantage of higher 91 octane gas proving 280hp at the crank. however dyno charts show that the tsx v6 is more on the lines of ~290horses. It is very close in performance vs the 3.7l on the TLSHAWD. One reason why acura is ditching the 3.7.
TSX V6 J35Z6 Dyno:
in summary:
RDX turbo 240ft-lb torque at ~3000rpm
Accord/RDX V6 180ft-lb torque at ~5000rpm
TSX V6 ~200ft-lb torque at ~4500rpm
so roughly 50ft-lb less torque on the 2013 RDX compared to the turbo and you lose sh-awd. this car is in lines of rav4 v6 now. however the GR v6 on the toyota has slightly more torque specially at mid range, it has also more overall power due to it being a DOHC vs SOHC on the honda v6 engines. So i would say the rav4 v6 is probably more fun in a straight line race vs the '13 rdx.
Last edited by pickler; 01-25-2012 at 06:32 PM.
01-26-2012, 10:01 AM
#148
Intermediate
hello pickler,
just want to confirm that you believe the 2013 RDX will receive the honda accord v6 which is rated at 271hp.
also, you list the torque at 180ft-lbs, but i assume that is at the wheels. while the engine is rated at 254ft-lbs?
sounds good to me.
just want to confirm that you believe the 2013 RDX will receive the honda accord v6 which is rated at 271hp.
also, you list the torque at 180ft-lbs, but i assume that is at the wheels. while the engine is rated at 254ft-lbs?
sounds good to me.
01-26-2012, 12:00 PM
#149
accord v6 dyno, torque (blue is stock):
acura rdx turbo 4, torque (dotted is stock), notice amount of torque at low rpm vs accord's:
the v6 on the tsx is a different machine than the one on the accord. the slight bump in compression ratio allows it to take advantage of higher 91 octane gas proving 280hp at the crank. however dyno charts show that the tsx v6 is more on the lines of ~290horses. It is very close in performance vs the 3.7l on the TLSHAWD. One reason why acura is ditching the 3.7.
TSX V6 J35Z6 Dyno:
in summary:
RDX turbo 240ft-lb torque at ~3000rpm
Accord/RDX V6 180ft-lb torque at ~5000rpm
TSX V6 ~200ft-lb torque at ~4500rpm
so roughly 50ft-lb less torque on the 2013 RDX compared to the turbo and you lose sh-awd. this car is in lines of rav4 v6 now. however the GR v6 on the toyota has slightly more torque specially at mid range, it has also more overall power due to it being a DOHC vs SOHC on the honda v6 engines. So i would say the rav4 v6 is probably more fun in a straight line race vs the '13 rdx.
acura rdx turbo 4, torque (dotted is stock), notice amount of torque at low rpm vs accord's:
the v6 on the tsx is a different machine than the one on the accord. the slight bump in compression ratio allows it to take advantage of higher 91 octane gas proving 280hp at the crank. however dyno charts show that the tsx v6 is more on the lines of ~290horses. It is very close in performance vs the 3.7l on the TLSHAWD. One reason why acura is ditching the 3.7.
TSX V6 J35Z6 Dyno:
in summary:
RDX turbo 240ft-lb torque at ~3000rpm
Accord/RDX V6 180ft-lb torque at ~5000rpm
TSX V6 ~200ft-lb torque at ~4500rpm
so roughly 50ft-lb less torque on the 2013 RDX compared to the turbo and you lose sh-awd. this car is in lines of rav4 v6 now. however the GR v6 on the toyota has slightly more torque specially at mid range, it has also more overall power due to it being a DOHC vs SOHC on the honda v6 engines. So i would say the rav4 v6 is probably more fun in a straight line race vs the '13 rdx.
01-26-2012, 02:47 PM
#150
wow what a mess, so much cleaning up to do in this thread, so much wrong info...ppl need to get their facts straight or separate fiction from facts.
here is a summary of 2013 RDX:
based on the CRV
271hp 3.5L SOHC V6
6 speed automatic
NO sh-awd, just part-time AWD from the CR-V
Regular Gas
28mpg highway (FWD)
21mpg city (FWD)
25mpg highway (AWD)??
18mpg city (AWD)??
softer ride
electric steering
6.9s 0-60 vs 6.8s with prev gen, despite 30hp gain
here is a summary of 2013 RDX:
based on the CRV
271hp 3.5L SOHC V6
6 speed automatic
NO sh-awd, just part-time AWD from the CR-V
Regular Gas
28mpg highway (FWD)
21mpg city (FWD)
25mpg highway (AWD)??
18mpg city (AWD)??
softer ride
electric steering
6.9s 0-60 vs 6.8s with prev gen, despite 30hp gain
summary of the 2013 RDX? u need to clean THAT up and look at your own quote from above.
regarding the CSX - my post remains 100% true and ONLY relative to an AMERICAN ACURA comparison. I do not know anything about Canadian variants. All i know is that in AMERICA, its PREMIUM GAS and thats it.
1. absolutely NO confirmation or report about GAS RATING
2. WRONG on the HP - 273
3. ACURA RATES IT AT 28/20
4. NO IDEA ABOUT SOFTER RIDE
5. who or where has tested the 2013 RDX yet? please post info or a link regarding testing times.
your summary is absolute conjecture as well, i respect your thoughts, but they are FAR from fact. UNTIL ACURA confirms absolute specs, EVERYTHING WE SAY IS SPECULATION AND almost inherently "wrong".
please post links or articles regarding the 2013 ACURA RDX and information that you speak of. Again, INFORMATION ON THE ACURA, not a honda model - BUT FACT. The only facts that ANY of us have still remain true and accurate. http://www.acura.com/future/RDX#5
Last edited by MMike1981; 01-26-2012 at 02:55 PM.
01-26-2012, 04:57 PM
#152
[/b]
summary of the 2013 RDX? u need to clean THAT up and look at your own quote from above.
regarding the CSX - my post remains 100% true and ONLY relative to an AMERICAN ACURA comparison. I do not know anything about Canadian variants. All i know is that in AMERICA, its PREMIUM GAS and thats it.
1. absolutely NO confirmation or report about GAS RATING
2. WRONG on the HP - 273
3. ACURA RATES IT AT 28/20
4. NO IDEA ABOUT SOFTER RIDE
5. who or where has tested the 2013 RDX yet? please post info or a link regarding testing times.
your summary is absolute conjecture as well, i respect your thoughts, but they are FAR from fact. UNTIL ACURA confirms absolute specs, EVERYTHING WE SAY IS SPECULATION AND almost inherently "wrong".
please post links or articles regarding the 2013 ACURA RDX and information that you speak of. Again, INFORMATION ON THE ACURA, not a honda model - BUT FACT. The only facts that ANY of us have still remain true and accurate. http://www.acura.com/future/RDX#5
summary of the 2013 RDX? u need to clean THAT up and look at your own quote from above.
regarding the CSX - my post remains 100% true and ONLY relative to an AMERICAN ACURA comparison. I do not know anything about Canadian variants. All i know is that in AMERICA, its PREMIUM GAS and thats it.
1. absolutely NO confirmation or report about GAS RATING
2. WRONG on the HP - 273
3. ACURA RATES IT AT 28/20
4. NO IDEA ABOUT SOFTER RIDE
5. who or where has tested the 2013 RDX yet? please post info or a link regarding testing times.
your summary is absolute conjecture as well, i respect your thoughts, but they are FAR from fact. UNTIL ACURA confirms absolute specs, EVERYTHING WE SAY IS SPECULATION AND almost inherently "wrong".
please post links or articles regarding the 2013 ACURA RDX and information that you speak of. Again, INFORMATION ON THE ACURA, not a honda model - BUT FACT. The only facts that ANY of us have still remain true and accurate. http://www.acura.com/future/RDX#5
01-26-2012, 08:21 PM
#153
Pro
Acura did release the official numbers during the Detroit auto show, so unless they change after more testing, it's ok to correct someone that posts wrong numbers.
I can't wait to see the first drive of the 2013 model on Motorweektv.
I can't wait to see the first drive of the 2013 model on Motorweektv.
01-26-2012, 09:04 PM
#154
Three Wheelin'
yes that's correct 180 ft-lb at the wheels and roughly 254ft-lb at the crank. Um yep its about 271-273hp as well. it is the same v6 from the accord/pilot. it should have plenty of pickup specially with the 6 speed auto, but dont expect to beat the turbo models. regular gas should make it 15% cheaper/easier to own. this should make it a much more refined machine,,, if that's your thing lol.
Last edited by pickler; 01-26-2012 at 09:08 PM.
01-26-2012, 09:12 PM
#155
Three Wheelin'
It's a shame that we achieve such good numbers with the RDX right now. Why add all that weight? I guess people really are short sighted. "Oh, V-6 sounds good." Last time my lady drove the RDX after being in the TL her comment was, "I forgot how much power this thing had."
01-27-2012, 01:50 PM
#156
Advanced
Thanks for posting the charts showing torque comparisons for the J35 to the turbo K23. I had no idea there was such a large disparity on low-end torque. I own a K24 powered TSX and I think it has pretty good low-end torque compared to previous hondas I have owned. My wife got a loaner TL one time while the TSX was in for a state inspection and she said it had "much more" power then her TSX. Maybe I should see if she can get a RDX next time for comparison.
As for the premium vs. regular debate. It all depends on the engine they use, in the press release it said the RDX would use the TL/TSX V6 engine thus needing premium but the only current engine in the Honda family that has VCM is used in teh Pilot/Accord/Ody and it takes regular? I could see them using the basic accord engine but possibily tuning it to require premium to uphold the Acura Branding prestige of requiring premium.
We will be in the market for a SUV in the next 2 or 3 years and this updated RDX as well as a redesigned MDX will be on our radar, I am crossing my fingures for regular fuel and direct injection. I'd love a 25+mpg MDX with direct injection that could run on regular fuel, maybe I'm just daydreaming....
As for the premium vs. regular debate. It all depends on the engine they use, in the press release it said the RDX would use the TL/TSX V6 engine thus needing premium but the only current engine in the Honda family that has VCM is used in teh Pilot/Accord/Ody and it takes regular? I could see them using the basic accord engine but possibily tuning it to require premium to uphold the Acura Branding prestige of requiring premium.
We will be in the market for a SUV in the next 2 or 3 years and this updated RDX as well as a redesigned MDX will be on our radar, I am crossing my fingures for regular fuel and direct injection. I'd love a 25+mpg MDX with direct injection that could run on regular fuel, maybe I'm just daydreaming....
01-27-2012, 09:43 PM
#157
StayAtHomeDad
yes that's correct 180 ft-lb at the wheels and roughly 254ft-lb at the crank. Um yep its about 271-273hp as well. it is the same v6 from the accord/pilot. it should have plenty of pickup specially with the 6 speed auto, but dont expect to beat the turbo models. regular gas should make it 15% cheaper/easier to own. this should make it a much more refined machine,,, if that's your thing lol.
01-28-2012, 04:28 AM
#159
StayAtHomeDad
From the Lexus site:
Ratings achieved using the required premium unleaded gasoline with an octane rating of 91 or higher. If premium fuel is not used, performance will decrease.
01-29-2012, 07:27 PM
#160
I guess that you could put regular gas in my vehicle and it should run. I used regular in a turbo Saab, but that was not the recommended gas or what the power and mpgs were rated for.
From the Lexus site:
Ratings achieved using the required premium unleaded gasoline with an octane rating of 91 or higher. If premium fuel is not used, performance will decrease.
From the Lexus site:
Ratings achieved using the required premium unleaded gasoline with an octane rating of 91 or higher. If premium fuel is not used, performance will decrease.
http://www.lexus.com/models/RX/featu...v6_engine.html