TSX69

The Soccer Mom-Mobile Comparo

Projected to be 1 of the largest growth segments in the auto industry, Acura is looking to go from a back marker to a major player with the launch of its 2nd-generation RDX. A solid offering, how does it stack up against stalwart German competition like the Audi Q5?

Always 1 of the sporty players in the segment, the RDX was perhaps too athletic for its own good, with not enough focus on luxury and too much on sporty driving dynamics. It’s now quite the opposite and is completely reengineered, starting under the hood.

THE BREAKDOWN

Powering the new Acura is a 3.5-liter V6 which delivers 23-hp more than the old turbocharged 4-cylinder at 273-hp, though is down 29 lb-ft of torque for a new total of 251.

Audi offers a choice of a turbocharged 4-cylinder or a V6 engine and while the 3.2-liter 6 might seem like the obvious choice for a fair match-up, it’s not. Instead it’s prohibitively priced, with the 2.0T is a closer competitor, though it is down on power at 211-hp but with superior torque at 258 lb-ft.

Formerly a fuel-thirsty machine, the RDX is now more efficient, due in part to a 6-speed automatic transmission, with fuel economy officially rated at 20-mpg city and 28-mpg highway for a combined 23-mpg. Our test model being equipped with AWD, however, the numbers read: 19/27/22.

Audi has followed the same philosophy of adding gears, and has taken it to the next-level, offering 2 more than the Acura. The 8-speed auto-box helps the German crossover earn a nearly identical 20/27/22 rating. Had we opted for the V6, the fuel economy section of this comparo would have been a no contest win for the Acura.

Similarly, V6-equipped Q5’s are spendy at $43,000 while 2.0T models begin at a vastly more reasonable $35,600 while our Premium Plus tester clocks in at $39,900.

Base RDX models begin at $34,320 while to be fair (considering all Q5 models come standard with Quattro AWD) an AWD RDX retails for $1,500 more at $35,720. Our test car with the tech package and AWD was nearly identical to the Audi at $39,420.

Note: for 2013 Audi is introducing a Q5 with a 3.0-liter supercharged V6 with 272-hp and 295 lb-ft of torque. Starting at $43,900 no EPA fuel economy numbers have been released yet.

You Tube

!

DRAMATIC OR RESERVED

Recently revamped, the Q5 is looking somewhat dated in the segment. While its bulbous look can be less than appealing, its massive chrome grille is certainly the opposite. Bold, masculine and luxurious it’s proud to be German. Plus there are Audi’s trademark LED eyebrows, an increasingly common sight in the right neighborhoods across America.

Conversely the Acura is progressive and handsome, though not exactly dramatic with little in the way of a visual touch point. Mimicking the larger and vastly more popular MDX, it’s also now nearly indistinguishable from it.

Style criticisms of the Q5 exterior don’t carry through to the cabin thanks to Audi’s commitment to interior refinement and materials. The leather isn’t top grade, however, and looks slightly less luxurious than that in the RDX.

The 2nd-generation RDX manages to be elegant and yet rather busy, with an excessive number of buttons on the dash. Overall, it’s a close match to the Audi, something that never could have been said of the previous generation model’s finishing.

Compare Specs

2013 Acura RDX AWD
vs
2012 Audi Q5 2.0 TFSI
Vehicle 2013 Acura RDX AWD Advantage 2012 Audi Q5 2.0 TFSI
Engine 3.5L V6 - 2.0L Turbo 4-Cyl
Transmission 6-Speed Auto - 8-Speed Auto
Horsepower 273 RDX 211
Max. Torque 251 Q5 258
Fuel Economy 19 MPG city / 27 MPG hwy Q5 20 MPG city / 27 MPG hwy
Cargo Room 26 cu-ft Q5 29 cu-ft
Total Cargo Room 61 cu-ft RDX 57 cu-ft
Second Row Leg Room 38.3 in. RDX 37.4 in.
Starting Price $35,720 Q5 $35,600

USEABLE SPACE

In terms of useable space, the rear seat legroom is slightly better in the Acura with an extra inch for your knees while trunk space is down slightly. Total room behind the 2nd row is rated at 26 cu-ft in the RDX compared to 29 cu-ft in the Audi. Flip the seats, however, and the larger second row space in the Acura factors in to give it the advantage when comparing total cargo room at 61 cu-ft compared to 57 cu-ft. What’s important to note, however, is that the RDX gets a 60/40 split rear, while the Audi gets a 40/20/40 meaning you can slide your skis through and still have room for 4 passengers.

A QUESTION OF CONTENT

Pricing on the 2 crossovers can’t be taken at face value, as feature content plays a major role and the Acura is the clear leader. Not only does it come standard with keyless access and a push-button ignition (an $550 option on the Q5), but it also gets bluetooth standard and an iPod interface – an absolute necessity for a premium model. The RDX easily wins the content war by adding a standard back-up camera with 3-view modes, while a single-view unit is, again, an optional extra on the Q5. Both cars have an available power liftgate

RDX models also have a standard 8-inch Multi Information Display while the Q5 gets an optional 7-inch screen with Audi’s MMI interface. Unfortunately it’s a $3,000 upgrade.

Both Acura and Audi take very different approaches to their vehicle interface systems as well, with Audi locating its control knob next to the shifter while Acura places theirs on the dash. Familiar in location to anyone who has used BMW’s iDrive control, the MMI dial sits directly in front of your right hand when resting, while the Acura requires you to reach out each time.

While weak on standard content Audi offers more, if you’re ready to pay for it. There’s an optional adaptive cruise control system as well as a 3 mode drive selector to control different vehicle settings like steering and throttle responsiveness, though these can only be had if you opt for the V6.

SMOOTH VS. SPORTY

Hitting the road the character of each car quickly becomes evident. While the past RDX was more in line with the Q5 in terms of a focus on driving dynamics, it’s now tailored more at the luxury crowd, from the powertrain to the steering. To put it another way, it’s now more Lexus RX than BMW X3.

The Acura’s V6 is smooth and quiet with consistent power delivery. The Audi’s turbocharged 4-cylinder delivers surprisingly good thrust considering the significantly lower horsepower rating, with hefty torque making the difference. It’s noticeably less refined, however, and at idle clacks away like a diesel.

The Q5 easily out-handles the Acura, and lets the driver know as much. Steering is more heavily weighted though not always consistent in its action and feedback. The RDX on the other hand has far lighter steering with more input required. Less engaging it is, however, consistent.

Fuel economy for both cars is nearly identical – another reason to compare the larger V6 Acura against the 4-cylinder Audi, which is minutely more efficient with a 20/27-mpg (city/highway) rating compared to 19/27-mpg for the RDX.

To achieve the victory Audi employs an extra 2 gears in its transmission, though with a drawback as well. With 8 different cogs to choose from it’s often moving about to pick exactly the right 1, again detracting somewhat from the overall feel of driving refinement.

THE VERDICT

New this year we expected the RDX to be a clear winner, though the Q5 still brings with it many enjoyable qualities that made our comparison much closer than we expected and, to be honest, much closer than it probably should be.

A remarkable change from the first generation model, with the 2013 RDX Acura has opted to no longer compete directly with the performance crossovers of Europe but rather focus on the luxury you’re more likely to use and enjoy.

While Q5 is perhaps a better car for the few who demand something particular in their premium compact crossover and who don’t mind paying extra to get it, for nearly everyone else the RDX delivers a package focused more on luxury, content and value.

Acura RDX

LOVE IT

Excellent standard features
Priced right
Refined cabin and ride


LEAVE IT

Not sporty enough
Display screen control knob too far away
Blend-in looks

Audi Q5

LOVE IT

Audi grille
Engaging Drive


LEAVE IT

Poor standard features
Unrefined powertrain
Expensive for what you get

hawkeye62

I think the Audi front view is butt ugly! It looks like a big mouth fish scooping up mud from a lake bottom.

LOL jim

Sculldog3

Gotta love that one of two upticks for the Audi is the grill....really?!?

HotRodW

I'm not sure when this test was completed, but I find it interesting that they tested a '12 Q5 when the updated '13's are hitting dealer lots now. While there was lots of time spent comparing prices and features, I find it odd that the reviewers failed to mention some obvious content issues such as rear HVAC, passenger seat adjustment, and more importantly the vastly different AWD systems. If utility/practicality is your primary motivation, the RDX is hands down the clear winner. If you look at driving as something more than a means to get from A to B, then the decision becomes far more difficult as the you attempt to define value in terms of driving satisfaction.

Comparison tests are great tools for comparing technical specs, features and options, but subjective conclusions mean little if your wants and needs are dramatically different than that of the tester(s). There are lots of great vehicles in this category - Acura, Audi, BMW, Volvo, etc, etc, etc. It really is hard to pick a bad one. But nobody should base their decision purely on comparison tests.

weather

HotRodW....I agree with you on the value of these reviews. These are mostly for entertainment value for me, especially that we all know that most reviewers are biased. For me, I like reviews because it can highlights some of the facts about the vehicles for comparo purposes. When it comes to making up my mind as to what I will get, I follow my own research and my preference. I will do my own test drives etc... I would never use the advice of these reviewers to make my purchase....Its just entertainment and thats about it.

My 2 cents....

HotRodW

@ Weather - that's exactly how I feel. And this one is especially disappointing because they talk a lot but don't say much. The same message keeps getting repeated. At the very least they could discuss braking performance, steering feel, acceleration, etc? Zero credibility.