Calfred

I live in Texas. Snow & ice in my area occurs only a few days per year. Aside from the obvious advantage of AWD in snow, ice or rain, are there any technical reasons to get the AWD over the FWD? Any technical reasons not to get AWD?

Does the AWD have better reliability or is the vehicle just set up better for AWD? I assume resale would be better.

Last question: after warranty expiration, is the AWD going to cost more to fix & maintain?

Domm

Generally, if you don't need it, don't get it. AWD requires more maintenance and you add more risk with another part that can fail. Although resale value may be higher, it's unlikely you'll get your money back with the increased resale value. Gas mileage also takes a hit.

However, if you feel safer with AWD during rainy weather or just want more grip for sportiness, by all means.

saxman48

And, with AWD, when you do decide to hit the slopes, or take a road trip to some wintery location, you're set.

KeithL

Unfortunately the AWD is not as good as SH-AWD. That said if you encounter any of the conditions where it can be a benefit and feel it is worth the slight hit in MPG and some extra maintenance then I am a big fan of AWD. I have a very steep driveway and when the gf had her old RDX it would always spin the tires going up the hill even in dry weather because of the top heavy weight shift to the rear of the vehicle. According to the RDX AWD info going up a hill the RDX will shift some torque to the rear wheels even without the front wheels spinning. Add to that the benefit in heavy rain and the 1 a year icy rain/slush we get here in Georgia and I am leaning toward getting the AWD, especially since it adds so little to the cost and has only a 1MPG hit to fuel economy.

TBC787

I'll AWD over any FWD system out there today. I live in a town that averages around 300+ inches of snow a year so my perspective is certainly not the same as yours might be but even if it keeps you going once or twice a year, it's well worth the additional cost.I suspect that the used car market will be better regarding the AWD as that's what most people are looking for when they buy a SUV. FWIW, front wheel drive Hondas are all over the side of the roads in my neck of the woods after any significan snow fall.

hand-filer

We had 8'' of snow during the night and it's still snowing. The AWD and the Michelin Primacy tires performed admirably on the way to work.

CoachRick

I'm sorry?
We're expected to tie the record high of 88F today. We're all the way back into the sixties later this week. No wonder Austin is one of the fastest growing metro areas in the country.

Back on topic, the front wheel spin of the FWD RDX on wet pavement is an eye opener. It's nearly as touchy as our Volvo C70--well known for breaking the front grip loose at the drop of a hat. If you're in a part of Texas where it actually rains , AWD might be appreciated for travel through wet conditions as much as snow or off-road driving.

Having said all that, we swapped our AWD XC60(and previous XC70 AWD) for the FWD RDX and 'enjoy' the lack of extraneous weight, mechanical complexity, and fuel consumption--small as it might be. The up-front cost will be 'returned' upon future sale or trade, but probably on the order of half the original cost(or less).

Vividsi

The wheels spinned? Could it be she had bald tires and possibly never changed the diff fluid.

KeithL

No even when new it did it, we blamed it on the uneven torque of the 10 RDX Turbo FWD, we tried a FWD 13 RDX last week, same thing. I believe it is that the driveway is so steep that the weight shifts to the back because the RDX is more top heavy and higher center of gravity so the front wheels have very little weight on then so when you accelerate to go up the hill the torque is great enough that the tires break free for a few revolutions. I have on rare occasion had it happen to my M37 when I crest the hill as the front wheels hit the street and carry the weight of the engine that the rear wheels now have less weight on them so when I accelerate after checking for traffic the rear wheel may slip on rare occasion. I figure if she gets the AWD RDX then she will be fine since the AWD in that is supposed to use all 4 wheels when climbing a hill.

geocord

If I lived in Texas I would not get the AWD. I would pay less for the vehicle, get better mileage and pay less in maint over the ownership period. AWD is not the big draw in sunbelt states like it is up north so you really shouldn't worry about resale or think that having AWD will help resale that much in your neck of the woods.

I live in the Chicago area and have had 3 vehicles for the past 10 years. The AWD/4WD vehicle I had was one that you had to turn a dial to put it into AWD/4WD mode. Very rarely used as I left it in RWD mode to save gas. My other two vehicles are a V8 RWD P/U and a 4cyl, FWD midsize sedan. Never had a problem getting around in any of them even in the snow. Sure the p/u will spin on water and spin and slip in snow. The FWD car is a lot better and almost as good as the AWD vehicle in the snow unless it's 8" or more which is very rare. You just drive a little differently when conditions warrant.

A lot of people that live up north automatically think they can't get around without AWD but I grew up in Michigan with nothing but RWD cars for my first 20 years of driving and had very few times that I needed a push to get out of deep snow or a tow. The tow was stupidity on my part and even AWD wouldn't have helped me.

So, bottom line, if you have money to burn get the AWD. If you want to save some money you really don't need AWD in Texas.

Mike_TX

^ Words of wisdom here. I'm in the DFW area of TX, and my dealer doesn't even recommend the AWD for this area in spite of the additional margin. And I doubt the resale would be any better than the FWD, for the same reasons as cited above.

For the occasional snow and ice we get here, the FWD is more than adequate. Don't pay extra for something you don't need.

weather

While I am a big fan of the AWD, I can see the appeal of going to a FWD for the extreme southern states if you know you won't be traveling in the northern States during the winter months. Now if this was the SH-AWD, I would say go with it, but the conventional AWD will not provide the extra corning grip the SH-AWD. Don't get wrong, the AWD would still be good to have in wet weather conditions but looking at the extra cost (and maintenance cost), it is not as much of a selling feature.

Hand-filer....If its any consolation, after losing pretty much ALL of our snow, we are watching a coastal redevelopment bringing about 15 cm (or 7 inches) of snow to our area Tuesday night and early Wednesday morning

Calfred

Thanks for the help. I am in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area. Probably won't go with the AWD. Never had that or 4WD on anything in the past and have never had a problem here. Now to pick a dealership and go shopping. Thinking about a MDX as well but it's certainly a lot more $$$.

geocord

They are just getting ready to reveal the 2014 MDX at the New York auto show. Completely redesigned and a new engine. FWD or AWD. Should get better MPG etc. What that means is that the current MDX will be discounted heavily. Since the RDX has become so popular I have heard of huge discounts the MDX. This will add to those discounts. You may be able to get a current MDX for similar price to RDX. w/Tech.

hand-filer

And thanks to global warming, Texans will one day be flocking up here to find relief from the summer inferno.

hand-filer

I just got done blowing the snow. Now I'll place an order for some sand bags for the inevitable Red River spring flood. Ah the joys of living on a flood plain!

KeithL

Problem with MDX is that the fuel economy will kill you compared to an RDX. MDX on its best day probably gets what an RDX gets on its worst day.

geocord

Yeah, I like my RDX because of the fuel economy but he said he was also looking at the MDX. I think he is probably aware that is sucks a lot more gas but it also has a lot more storage space. He has to make the decision as to which is more important to him.

Calfred

For me that would be worth waiting a few months for. I really like the MDX but even the discounted base model with no Tech comes out to about 40K from what I have read. If the MDX gets discounted down to 35 or so that would be great. Might be dreaming on that figure though.

GoHawks

Isn't the AWD RDX pretty much a front driver unless it detects wheel spin? If so, the fuel mileage hit should be minimal. It's not like SH-AWD which is always active.

geocord

No, it's not a big hit and nobody said you would get much better MPG, just better. It's rated EPA 1 mpg difference in both city and hwy. The main thing is the upfront cost and then the ongoing maint over time. Again, not huge but add them to the gas savings and they constitute a decent amount of money. Again, if you don't need something and have gotten along for years without it just fine, why buy it unless you just want to spend the money. Nice to have is much different than a necessity.

Mike_TX

You know, AWD has kind of become blurred with 4WD over the years. And SH-AWD and Audi's Quattro added a further twist.

4WD is equated with ruggedness and manliness and the ability to go almost anywhere, anytime. Of course, to do that you need more than just 4WD - you need a different kind of vehicle (think Jeep or Land Rover or monster truck).

The SH-AWD and Quattro-type systems are marketed as fair-weather handling aids as much as foul-weather traction aids, and are aimed at low-slung sedans more than high-altitude off-road vehicles.

Through it all, many people have come to think of any kind of AWD or 4WD as a good thing for everyone. In truth, though, these systems are great for those in cold climates where snow and ice is a problem, but not so good for us in the sunny Southwest unless we're off-roaders and have the vehicle to match.

FWD is far better for light snow and ice than RWD, and for most of us in the warmer climes it's all we need. For us, the added weight, complexity and upkeep required for 4WD/AWD systems actually makes them a liability.

I'm probably not saying anything we all don't know, but lots of people still fork over extra money every day for 4WD and AWD systems they never really use.

geocord

Exactly. I had an Infiniti QX4 that I traded in on the RDX. Had it for 10 years exactly, almost to the day. It had settings for RWD, AWD, 4WDhi and 4WDlo. I never once even put the vehicle into either of the 4WD settings in the ten years. I would use AWD on extremely snow covered roads. They do a pretty good job in the Chicago area cleaning up the roads and I probably put it into AWD maybe two to three times a winter. Did I have to? No, my wife made it around in her front wheel drive car just fine. But I did it just for some added traction and a little less spinning at lights etc. I could have made it without it but with RWD it was a little dicier on those few days.

I actually seriously considered just getting FWD on the RDX but "up here" if you have a SUV it's kind of expected to AWD or 4WD for resale. I keep vehicles for a long time so prorating the cost of AWD over the years and the convenience of it made fiscal sense to me. Plus, the selection of color, tech, etc without AWD was pitiful here in Chicago area as well.

jshaw

It's similar to the current Haldex Gen5 designs, which from a pure architectural standpoint, mean a modicum of torque is always transferred to the rear wheels.

At any rate, the old RT-AWD was a purely mechanical setup. No wheelspin = no power on the rear wheels... ever. The new RT-AWD ("Intelligent Control System" in both Honda and Acura-speak) uses a computer controlled variation of the old setup (it's actually simpler than the old system), and is setup to always give torque to the rear axle under any sort of acceleration. From a dead stop, flooring it on the highway, etc. That is primarily how the system, "anticipates and prevents wheelspin," by always splitting more power to the rear when the throttle is opened up.

From the CR-V info videos, it seems to be F/R 75/25 off the line, decreasing to a theoretical 100/0 (realistically 95/5) as speed increases, and increasing based on throttle application.

Al Bundy

"Gentlemen, in the history of mankind, there have only been a few truly good scams. The Loch Ness Monster. Canada. But now, the tax-free church of NO MA'AM..." - Al Bundy.

Nuff said. J/K.