Narrowing down to 2017 CRV Touring and 2017 RDX base.
Runner up: 2017 Toyota Highlander LE Plus.
Disqualified: RAV4(interior/engine/noisy), Mazda5 (reliability), Lexus NX200t ($$$/ride). Had Germans cars and don't care much for them.

2017 CRV Touring FWD:
Pros:
Hand-free foot operated power lift gate
Engine remote start
Apple/Android Car Play
1.5 turbo Torque/Mileage

Cons:
CVT transmission/Turbo (as in current Civic)
Noisy (?)
1st year make - Beta testing

2017 RDX Base FWD:
Pros:
V6

Cons:
Out dated info system
NHV / suspension/brake squeak/ torque converter
6 speeds transmission
Price ( > +3k over CRV)

2017 Highlander LE Plus FWD:
Pros:
new V6
8 speeds transmission
space
quietness

Cons:
No Apple/Android Car Play
No LEDS Headlights
Price (must get XLE trim to be comparable to RDX features) more than 1k-2k over CRV

would you still pick 2017 RDX? Can't justify price difference over 2017 CRV. Thanks

 

Drive them all....get what you like. We bought our '17 RDX as we loved the power of the V6 and the reliability, including the 6 spd trans. Not sold on a turbo with a CVT, personally. Also, wife loved the looks. It's all personal. Recently, Toyota, for us, has been junk, so I won't be buying one for a while after owning 8 in a row...last two were junk.

Again, personal decision. If you like one more than the others, that's what you buy.

 

Prioritize what you actually want to get out of the car. I debated between the 2016 crv as well but figured that in the end, the drive of the rdx felt much better than the crv. Also, I was not comparing a touring crv vs. base rdx, that's almost not fair.

if you value the drive and feel of the car, go with the rdx
if you wanna have all the latest tech features and most updated cabin, go crv
the highlander...not even an option

 

Based on features, I like the CR-V.

 

I'd be interested in your driving impressions of the new CRV. The RDX is nice, but is in the 5th year of this current iteration, other than a facelift and some tech upgrades.

 

IMHO the RDX and CRV are aimed at different markets. I have no experience with the new CRV but I do with the new RDX and I think you need to test drive both before deciding.

The CVt/Turbo combo in the CRV scares the hell out of me honestly. I do however think it looks pretty good (though haven't seen in person yet). If it were me, the RDX would have my vote based on the V6 and 6 speed auto combo.

 

Have you looked at the new Tucson?

 

Exactly! Awesome car which I would have picked over the RDX if it wasn't my girlfriends decision. The Tuscon with Ultimate package is a great deal(much cheaper than even a base RDXl. It also has a 7sp- DSG transmission which works well with the 1.6T motor. The Tuscon has many features not even available on the RDX(rear heated seats/panoramic roof/newer infotainment interface). I suspect the OP would discount the Tuscon based solely on the fact it is Hyundai, which would be a mistake.

 

If you are looking for the latest in technology and gadgets the RDX is not what you'd be interested in. It lags the industry by perhaps 5 years. If you are looking for a 6 cylinder engine (albeit an old one with a sohc) that has decent power (not much low end, but good high end power), some technology, relatively quiet (aside from wind noise that has been a characteristic of Honda products for many years), a stiff ride and high seating (something women like) then the RDX would be a good choice for you. Expect to have some brake squealing (it's been there for both generations of the RDX) and minor issues that other vehicles may have. If you want to buy "a badge" then the RDX would be a good fit. It's an okay car, but pretty much has been relegated to the "also ran" category. If you are looking for up-to-date technology (engine and electronics) and an updated interior you would do better to look elsewhere. It's all in what you're looking for.

 

This is an AWESOME suggestion. I was surpirised with how nice it is and the 7 speed dsg is pretty damn cool as well.

 

I like the kick start power tailgate too

 

I dont get why everyone is scared of the turbo/CVT combo.....test drive it properly, I bet it's good. If anything the CVT would smooth out the power delivery and with a turbo that would be a good thing. We're not dealing with Ferarri's here

 

if I was buying a car like a CR-V, I wouldn't be bothered by a CVT. Plus, I've heard Honda's version isn't too shabby to drive.

 

0-60 in 7.5s for the awd version of the crv with the turbo is not bad at all. Very impressive actually.

 

I don't know why many seem to be bothered with CVT. I drove my wife's 16 Corolla CVT and not bothered by it at all. I know geared transmissions have some advantages but how many % of driving does it affect us? We're not driving a manual car and we often hear someone say "will definitely avoid CVT" and so we follow.

If the power is there and it still feels fun to drive for you, I think you will be happy with the car. And cash is king, keep the portion of the cash and use it towards a future vehicle if you want.

 

Only thing is the engine is small as hell, would probably be slow as hell in summer with the heat. They got a great trans (on paper anyway) but they downsized the engine big time.

I think 2018 will be better to get a new car, by then all the new goodies will be in most new cars, like Apple carplay, Android Auto, 360° cameras, collision avoidance...
​​​

 

I agree completely. I would never buy a vehicle with that size engine ever. My previous RDX had a 2.3l and I felt it was too small. Currently loving my 3.7. I did however agree with it because he's looking at the crv with a slightly smaller 1.5l so it sounds better to me (on paper).

 

If you like driving, get the RDX. Best engine/transmission combination of the bunch with good handling and performance and decent gas mileage for its class. It's also QUIET! Yeah, it's behind on some of the amenities, and we complain a lot about those details. That's not what it's about for me, though. It's a great vehicle. I looked at the CR-V and found it lacking in all those things. It's not bad - it's just not an Acura.

 

@Kaputnik: Although you deleted your post, I can at least respond with my personal opinion (since I got the email from acurazine with your post): CVT's, in their current iteration, are just not enjoyable for me to drive. They are getting better; however, nothing yet that compares to a regular geared A/T.....At this point of develpment, I would say no to any vehicle with a CVT, and I owned an Avalon Hybrid with a CVT and drove it over 60k miles.... It was OK, but....JMHO.

 

What are "those things" you are talking about? Yes, it offers the outdated 6 cylinder that isn't even used anymore in the accord while the CR-V offers a new 4 cyl turbo that isn't offered in the RDX. Quiet? They have plenty of wind noise, but are quieter than the CR-V. Behind on "some of the amenities"? The "amenities" are what distinguishes a luxury car from a non-luxury car. I can't think of much the RDX offers that the CR-V doesn't other than the outdated drivetrain. (FWIW, Toyota's 6 cylinder has used the super smooth, power distributed evenly across the entire RPM band not just high RPM, DOHC in their 6 cylinder engines for about 20 years but Honda sticks with the SOHC engine that limits its power to the high RPM band). In addition to having basically every amenity offered in the RDX, the CRV offers a digital dashboard (like the civic), auto high beams, android auto and apple carplay, 2 rear USB ports...... these "amenities" aren't even offered on the RDX.

 

FWIW the CRV is a commuter car in its first year of redesign. It is unfair to compare it with the RDX in its probably last year before a redesign. Yes it is lacking in some technological geeky stuff which many people care about, but it has got several key things right ( at least for many of us). I don't find much wrong with its six cylinder engine. In fact that's one of the reasons I bought it. Any 4 pot engine for that matter doesn't cut above it in terms of power, smoothness, noise and general refinement.
For all its techy / geeky stuff and loads of plastics in the dash , the CRV is perfect for a lot of people. There are some who still cherish a smooth and uncluttered interior, prefer soft touch leather surfaces, knobs and buttons to touchscreens and displays. Talking about the CRV display which is pretty much useless in bright sunlight as compared to a well recessed and perfectly integrated in the RDX.
There is a level of refinement in the RDX which simply isn't existing in the CRV. Many of them are intangibles like a plush interior and sound dampening. The RDX is only going to get significantly better with the redesign.
I'm not bashing CRV for anything. It's a good car but simply not what I'm looking for at this time. It gives me the kicks every time I drive it and that's what I care about. If the CRV does that for you then well and good. Just keep in mind that the software and tech stuff will be there in all regular cars in no time (including the RDX) and then CRV won't feel any special. I simply hope that they keep some knobs and buttons available in the RDX.

 

Not sure where all this "outdated" talk is coming from. You can keep the turbo-4. The V6 is quicker and better coupled to the rest of the drive train. And yeah...the digital dash is like the wife's Civic - which is exactly what I don't like about it. I wouldn't mind Android Auto. Everyone should give up on their Navi systems and use it, as far as I'm concerned. They didn't have that in 2016 when I bought the Advance.

 

I've never owned a CR-V. We have a 2016 RDX Advance. People refer to the 6 cyl as "old" because it is the engine that WAS used in the accord for a long time. (Toyota and Nissan have used the DOHC in their V-6 engines for 20 years or more, but Honda doesn't offer that.) The accord now uses the dreamworks V-6, but that is not available in the RDX. Technology? We don't use much of the technology in the RDX, but I am aware of what the CR-V (and other manufacturers) offer (that the RDX doesn't) and if it was available on the RDX it wouldn't mean anything to me. But I do have a friend with a 2015 civic and it has the digital dash and I wouldn't mind having that. (Having USB outlets for the back seat is nice in other vehicles, but we don't even use the one in the front of the car.). We use the nav on our cell phone as we have come not to trust the nav in the acura. And I personally couldn't give a hoot one way or another about apple carplay or Android auto, but it is technology that's offered by many manufacturers in far lower priced cars. The RDX is an okay car, but nothing special. And certainly not up-to-date with technology. As to the plush interior.... cough cough.... I don't think of it as plush at all.

 

Has anyone asked the all important regular versus premium gas question???

 

Good question.....so, it it critical to run premium in the CRV with the small turbo? Inquiring minds want to know!

 

No its rated for regular.

 

personally I would get an outback... but that's me

one BIG BIG BIG advantage of the V6 in the RDX is that it is NOT direct injected.. DI engines that are not of the hybrid design will get very spendy when they get up there in mileage as carbon buildup will become an issue.. YT DI carbon buildup...

 

I bought a 2016 RDX w/Tech 2 weeks ago. It's interesting reading this old thread now that we know the CRV had oil dilution issues. My RDX has a clean engine and goes like heck when you punch it.

 

Definitely keep a close eye on your RDX and keep up with maintainence. These cars can get oil burning issues when you slack off. Definitely keep getting the transmission fluid drained + filled every 30k-50k miles too. Otherwise they're awesome to drive.

 

If you get a 4 cylinder turbo change oil 4-5k miles max.

Listen to The Car Care Nut on YouTube (Toyota mechanic), he has a recent talk on 4 cylinder turbos.

 

It’s ironic that someone claimed the V6 was outdated and the R4-turbo was “modern,” when in fact the V6 surpasses the R4-T in nearly every measurable way except emissions compliance)))

 

I thought it would be correct to say - If you get a 4 cylinder Honda 1.5 turbo engine, then change head gasket every 50-100k miles.