When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
That's all theoretical stuff. I'm talking practical, real world situations. For example, driving at night on a dark rural road and having the LEDs light up the road with very white light. The lights really make the lines on the road and the signs stand out.
wait.. what the flying fuck are you talking about
Since when did facts such as color temperature (rated in Kelvins by the way) become 'theoretical'??!?
"practical real world situations" you mean like actual ratings of things using ACTUAL scientific instruments like light meters?!
are you also under the same notion that the universe revolves around the Earth and the Earth is also flat?
rocky, mommy's calling you to go wash up for dinner and clean your room, get off the Internet.
You don't really need exact colour temp measurements to know how good the lights are. You can compare with your own eyes in a vehicle with jewel eye LEDs and ones without.
Originally Posted by thoiboi
wait.. what the flying fuck are you talking about
Since when did facts such as color temperature (rated in Kelvins by the way) become 'theoretical'??!?
"practical real world situations" you mean like actual ratings of things using ACTUAL scientific instruments like light meters?!
are you also under the same notion that the universe revolves around the Earth and the Earth is also flat?
rocky, mommy's calling you to go wash up for dinner and clean your room, get off the Internet.
You don't really need exact colour temp measurements to know how good the lights are. You can compare with your own eyes in a vehicle with jewel eye LEDs and ones without.
You don't really need exact colour temp measurements to know how good the lights are. You can compare with your own eyes in a vehicle with jewel eye LEDs and ones without.
You don't really need exact colour temp measurements to know how good the lights are. You can compare with your own eyes in a vehicle with jewel eye LEDs and ones without.
Wow, your 2016 RDX hotwheels came with WORKING Jewel eye LEDs?!?!
A certain quote comes to mind....
Don’t argue with idiots because they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience
That's all theoretical stuff. I'm talking practical, real world situations. For example, driving at night on a dark rural road and having the LEDs light up the road with very white light. The lights really make the lines on the road and the signs stand out.
So in other words, you have no clue, but can regurgitate the sales brochures and other fanboi materials.
You prove over and over that you are a thirteen year old school boy reading car brochures but understanding squat.
You don't really need exact colour temp measurements to know how good the lights are. You can compare with your own eyes in a vehicle with jewel eye LEDs and ones without.
Well, there is a certain logic here...
One *could* get all scientific and use physics to figure out which is the better lighting. Or, they could go off of what they see and think *looks* better.
And that also explains the plethora of crapcan cars driving around with Vatozone green or purple retrofit headlights. Sure looks good ( ), so it doesn't matter if the light output is garbage.
From his comments about lighting and the great sound of satellite radio, it is obvious that rocky has never even seen a full size RDX and has certainly never sat in one.
I am convinced that Rockyboy is the CEO of the Acura division who is trying to hype the RDX to increase sales. No one in their right mind would gush like this about a car unless they were trying to hype it for some reason.
I suggest that the moderator needs to review the Profanity here as well as the crap disturber Rockyboy is. This thread is getting stupid, about a stupid as the RDX being a chick magnet, that said my 52 year old wife like's it, but it's not what attracts her to me. Let's keep it civil here.
I am convinced that Rockyboy is the CEO of the Acura division who is trying to hype the RDX to increase sales. No one in their right mind would gush like this about a car unless they were trying to hype it for some reason.
I see you're relatively new here so you've probably never come across SSFTSX.
Maybe Rockyboy is related to SSFTSX somehow. Younger sibling? Troll in training?
If I remember correctly, SSFTSX is in Canada. Rockyboy is in Canada.
I am convinced that Rockyboy is the CEO of the Acura division who is trying to hype the RDX to increase sales. No one in their right mind would gush like this about a car unless they were trying to hype it for some reason.
Or may be it's the other way around. He is a stooge from another automaker (may be Hyundai?). He is posing as an immature Acura fanboy so as to generate a visceral negative reaction to the brand Acura.
Either way all I can say is, Rockyboy's posts provide a free lighthearted entertainment in this otherwise not so exciting part of the forum.
End of July just leased a 2016 Base RDX AWD. I looked at leasing the following other cars: Lexus NX200T, BMW X1, Lincoln MKC, Honda CRV Touring, and a Mazda CX-3.
While leasing is a different animal than buying, leasing wise the RDX was the best deal for the money considering the features and performance.
When I first got the car my brother kept saying it was a nicer CRV since he knows Honda makes Acura, but I kept reassuring him the 3.5 V6 alone kills a CRV. He drove my car on the way to Maine and was fully impressed. With that said yes an RDX is a CRV but for me the 3.5 just changes the whole car, which is something you can't get on even the most top of the line CRV Touring.
There are things about the RDX that are a little of a letdown compared to a Lexus or even a Lincoln, and that would be it's plain exterior and interior styling. The 2016 refresh refined the engine, put some brighter headlights, and barely changed anything on the panels, so basically it looks like a 2015 RDX. With that said a the 2015 RDX was never an exciting car and pails in comparison to the dramatic styling of a Lexus NX200T. Even the upper trims with perforated high end leather are still really boring for overall style. The inside is way too plain and reminds me of a CRV. The RDX lacks the high end real wood inserts of an MKC and also it's detailed stitching on the leather. While the RDX is filled with soft touch materials the console lacks a certain je ne sais quoi and the armrest lacks any padding. Last but not least I hate to say it on an Acura forum but Acura lacks the cache of Lexus and BMW, so there is just some snob factory there.
What makes the RDX great is it's value. Jewel LED headlights standard, better fuel economy than a RX350, rear view camera standard, leather standard, moon roof standard, power lift gate standard. The RDX has one power plant a 3.5 liter V6 that has a better 0-60 than a base X1, NX200T, 2.3 MKC, and defiantly any Honda or Mazda product. You think the RDX wind noise is bad check out the CRV. My mom's 2014 EX-L is horrid with wind and road noise and I hate the whiny CVT. The RDX has a really refined ride, not as soft as an RX but not that far off. The front seats are also pillow soft compared to the CRV's. Plus for it's segment it has some of the best legroom and cargo.
Overall yes there are cars with better features, better MPG, better styling, and ect but the RDX does everything well enough and does it at thousands of dollars less than cars in its segment.
There is soft touch padding on the armrests. I find the exterior styling to be superior than those other cars you mentionned. The Lexus NX is a weak 4 cylinder vehicle with a grill that looks like a fish with the mouth wide opened. In fact, the 2016 RDX is the best looking car in its class with the best headlights. The 3D grill with Batman Acura symbol is also a huge improvement.
You made the right choice. Acura is a brand that is on the way up. Lexus is on the way down (much of it due to ugly design).
Originally Posted by jrasero
End of July just leased a 2016 Base RDX AWD. I looked at leasing the following other cars: Lexus NX200T, BMW X1, Lincoln MKC, Honda CRV Touring, and a Mazda CX-3.
While leasing is a different animal than buying, leasing wise the RDX was the best deal for the money considering the features and performance.
When I first got the car my brother kept saying it was a nicer CRV since he knows Honda makes Acura, but I kept reassuring him the 3.5 V6 alone kills a CRV. He drove my car on the way to Maine and was fully impressed. With that said yes an RDX is a CRV but for me the 3.5 just changes the whole car, which is something you can't get on even the most top of the line CRV Touring.
There are things about the RDX that are a little of a letdown compared to a Lexus or even a Lincoln, and that would be it's plain exterior and interior styling. The 2016 refresh refined the engine, put some brighter headlights, and barely changed anything on the panels, so basically it looks like a 2015 RDX. With that said a the 2015 RDX was never an exciting car and pails in comparison to the dramatic styling of a Lexus NX200T. Even the upper trims with perforated high end leather are still really boring for overall style. The inside is way too plain and reminds me of a CRV. The RDX lacks the high end real wood inserts of an MKC and also it's detailed stitching on the leather. While the RDX is filled with soft touch materials the console lacks a certain je ne sais quoi and the armrest lacks any padding. Last but not least I hate to say it on an Acura forum but Acura lacks the cache of Lexus and BMW, so there is just some snob factory there.
What makes the RDX great is it's value. Jewel LED headlights standard, better fuel economy than a RX350, rear view camera standard, leather standard, moon roof standard, power lift gate standard. The RDX has one power plant a 3.5 liter V6 that has a better 0-60 than a base X1, NX200T, 2.3 MKC, and defiantly any Honda or Mazda product. You think the RDX wind noise is bad check out the CRV. My mom's 2014 EX-L is horrid with wind and road noise and I hate the whiny CVT. The RDX has a really refined ride, not as soft as an RX but not that far off. The front seats are also pillow soft compared to the CRV's. Plus for it's segment it has some of the best legroom and cargo.
Overall yes there are cars with better features, better MPG, better styling, and ect but the RDX does everything well enough and does it at thousands of dollars less than cars in its segment.
There is soft touch padding on the armrests. I find the exterior styling to be superior than those other cars you mentionned. The Lexus NX is a weak 4 cylinder vehicle with a grill that looks like a fish with the mouth wide opened. In fact, the 2016 RDX is the best looking car in its class with the best headlights. The 3D grill with Batman Acura symbol is also a huge improvement.
You made the right choice. Acura is a brand that is on the way up. Lexus is on the way down (much of it due to ugly design).
Yahoo is not exactly the authorative authority (for lack of a better word) on cars. Those 4 companies--Lexus, Mazda, Toyota, Honda--can you name one compact SUV they make that is better than the 2016 RDX? They don't make a better one.
Originally Posted by snorf
Just yesterday, there was an article on yahoo rating cars - mostly on quality. #1 Lexus, #2 Mazda, #3 Toyota #8 Honda #12 Acura.
It was a consumer reports article I read on yahoo. It wasn't written by yahoo. And, of course, they did not send it to you for your approval prior to printing the article, but if you could just be tolerant of one of the most respected consumer magazines (like them or not) that uses the input of hundreds of thousands of subscribers to come up with their assessments, you can read the article yourself. It addresses manufacturers. (BTW - acura was #11, not #12) I suppose if they were to rate individual vehicles you would probably have them rated 1) RDX 2) Bentley 3) Rolls Royce 4) Lamborghini 5) Ferrari etc. Consumer Reports best and worst car brands in 2015 include Lexus, Mazda and Toyota | Newsday
The Consumer Reports 2015 Car Brand Report Cards ranks automakers across the world by reliability, road test performance and other factors. For the second year in a row, Lexus topped the list, nearly matched by Mazda, and followed by Toyota and Audi. The bottom of the list included Ford, Dodge, Mini, Jeep and Fiat.
The publication ranked the carmakers with an overall score, which was a combination of each brand's road test score and average reliability score. The road test score factored in the average results from Consumer Reports' many tests on the cars, and a reliability rating provides a guide on how likely the cars from each brand are likely to hold up on average.
Not all automakers were factored into Consumer Reports' study. Jaguar, Land Rover, Maserati, Mitsubishi, Ram, Smart and Tesla did "not have sufficient data" to be reviewed by the publication. If you're shopping for a used car, check out the best and the worst used cars to buy, according to Consumer Reports.
1) Lexus 2) Mazda 3) Toyota 4) Audi 5) Subaru 6) Porsche 7) Buick 8) Honda 9) Kia 10) BMW 11) Acura
Yahoo is not exactly the authorative authority (for lack of a better word) on cars. Those 4 companies--Lexus, Mazda, Toyota, Honda--can you name one compact SUV they make that is better than the 2016 RDX? They don't make a better one.
Most car magazines and reviewers rate the Mazda CX-5 as the top rated compact SUV.
Yahoo is not exactly the authorative authority (for lack of a better word) on cars. Those 4 companies--Lexus, Mazda, Toyota, Honda--can you name one compact SUV they make that is better than the 2016 RDX? They don't make a better one.
U.S. News ranks the 2016 Acura RDX as the 8th best compact luxury SUV in American. Perhaps you can google them and see what the other 7 are.
U.S. News ranks the 2016 Acura RDX as the 8th best compact luxury SUV in American. Perhaps you can google them and see what the other 7 are.
I'd take their rankings with a grain of salt. #1 is Porsche Macan. Not much argument there if money isn't a factor. But then I see Infiniti QX50 ranked as #2. Have you seen one of these one the road? Yeah, me neither.
I do agree that the CX-5 is a great bang-for-the-buck for its price range. I'd purchase this one if my budget were more limited.
09-28-2015 | 10:07 AM
for cursing sir....
