please don't use the cliche such as turbo won't last, German cars not as reliable, etc... those belonged to the '90s and early 2000s. i would say German cars nowadays are just as reliable if not more than the American/Canadian built Japanese brand cars. a similarly equipped Q5 2.0T Premium Plus with navigation runs about 41k (after negotiation) which is not that much over a RDX Tech AWD. so back to the question, for those who cross shopped RDX with Q5, why did you end up with the RDX?

 

Price aside..although when you option out the Q5, you really end up 5-10k more which is also an extra 500-1000 tax in CA so it adds up... where the Q5 fell short for me were:

1. It's not really a good car for 5 adults. The rear hump is huge.
2. The panoramic sunroof is see through so it won't fully shade a baby or someone who is sensitive to sunlight.
3. The RDX looks better to my eyes...I would describe the RDX as more "rugged" looking and more like a sporty SUV instead of the Q5 which looks like a tall station wagon. The RDX also feels like your are riding higher.
4. I'm not sold on the 2.0T. Having a 3.5 V6 if you have the option just sounds better. I know the Q5 has better torque and towing capacity and probably kicks butt, but the RDX engine is pretty comporable in power, sounds refined and has no turbo lag.
5. Yeah the Q5 is more fun to drive, but that's not what I really care for in a family SUV. The Q5 didn't incite enough desire to want to make me shell out an extra 5-10 grand to get the same set of value as the RDX...Guess i dont really value driving around curves in an SUV. will def look at Audi when I look at sports sedans or coupes in the future.

 

Why is the RDX compared to the Q5 when similarly equipped it cost 5-10k different?

 

I looked at the Q5. To get a similarly equipped Q5, you're definitely talking about a 10k-ish price increase unless you go used.

Aside from price, I just didn't like the interior of the Q5 at all. It's purely subjective, but I didn't like the hard lines and flat dashboard. It made me feel uncomfortable, haha. I ruled out the Lexus RX because of the interior also. I felt like I had to be 174 years old to appreciate the RX interior - especially the gear selector halfway up the dashboard (barf).

In the end, I decided if I really wanted to spend another $10k I would have gone for an MDX, which would have further blown the Q5 and RX out of the water.

 

My $0.02............

To me Q5 looked like a girly vehicle (apologies to the ladies on the forum. I am not trying to be a sexist).

If I wanted to spend in mid 40Ks, I would spring for MDX and Q5 stands no chance against MDX.

I know OP does not want to hear the reliability comment, but cost of maintenance is definitely a factor. Audi is much more expensive to maintain. I like to keep my cars for 10 years. I suspect in that time horizon, I would spend significantly higher on a Q5 than the RDX.

I'd flip the question on OP. Why would you buy an Q5 or a X3 or an RX in place of 2nd gen RDX??

 

In addition to the higher price, the lack of legroom in the back seat was a deal breaker for me for the Q5. I drive the RDX with the seat all the way back and there is still adequate room in the back seat for a tall person. With a 5'10" driver in the Q5, there is NO room in the back seat.

 

I looked and my reasons:
Try to find one that isn't fully loaded.
Try to find one that isn't black, silver or white.
Despite what you imply - dealers won't negotiate much (see above for why)
IMO, even the latest German cars are a money pit once you get past about 90k miles. I keep cars to 140k+ if possible. Based on personal experience (mine and close family members) you reach a point more quickly with German cars where the value of the car only slightly exceeds the potential repair bill from any of several possible major failures (tranny, cylinder head, turbo, ECU et al).
Nice car - just not for me. BTW - I wanted and got an RDX base so my comparison is to the least expensive Q5.

 

I don't like the front grill.

 

For me, it boiled down to service cost and the hump on the back floor for the legroom. You can really just sit 4 people not 5. Price difference too.

 

google FSI audi carbon build up. huge issue they ignoring which will cost you an arm and a leg in maintenance

 

I have owned a couple of Audi's and not only the car's reliability but the dealers service was simply lousy. For those in the Salt lake City area, stay away from Dave Strong Audi and save yourself a lot of grief.

 

Reasons?

- Price difference (and lease terms)
- Nav screen
- Price difference
- Don't like the gaping grille
- Price difference

I like the looks of the current crop of Audis, with the exception of the yawning chasm of a grille, but I just didn't want to pay the high price to lease one.

 

KevTL888...I did cross shop the Q5 and the RDX. Here are some of the reasons I ended up with the RDX:

1. Price
2. Overall look of the vehicle (which is subjective)
3. Dealer experience
4. Interior space of the Q5 felt a bit too small
5. LOVED the steering feel of the Q5 but didn't like the turbo engine as much as Honda's!

Its all subjective and at the end of the day, you have to make the decision yourself. Any of the reasons we give here may be applicable to you so yes, you can use our feedback to confirm what you thought but you can't be your decision solely on what any one of us says...its between you and your spouse (if you have one).

 

Oh, yeah! I forgot to add the V6 engine. The RDX is one of the only vehicles in its class to still offer a V6. I know the Audi's 2.0 is pretty spunky, but if I can get the same performance from a a naturally-aspirated engine I'd prefer to do that - especially since the VCM lets me play 3- or 4-cyl when I don't need all 6.

 

...I fundamentally, completely, and unequivacably disagree that Audi and Acura have similar reliability!

 

I crossed shopped the RDX and I couldn't get the Q5 Premium Plus anywhere near $40k

Premium Plus is already 40k
Navigation is 3,500 more
Keyless ignition is 550
Premium sports interior 500 (lumbar support, 3 spoke wheel, paddle shift)

So now you are hitting +45k with the 895 with the distination charge.
They wouldn't budge much from that (got them down to $43k + tag/misc fees)

I don't see snow much and if I do it's very well kept roads so I went for a FWD w/tech. for 36k OTD (they threw in spash guard, rubber cargo mat, and cargo cover).

So even with AWD (1,400 more MSRP for the RDX) you are looking at about +6k difference from my local area. I would LOOOVE to have a Q5, but I don't think it's worth 45k. BTW the 3.0T is 50k in my area. I like the nav and the rear vents and all. The panorama sunroof is a $0 delete option. I like how the car drives and all but in the end the $$$ killed it. Looked for a used one but they were about $35k for 30k miles or so and 2010-2011's.

I own a 2000 Audi S4 and it's been great but when crap breaks on it, it's NOT cheap.

 

qft.

 

a similarily equipped A5 2.0T does not cost 5k-10k more than a fully loaded RDX. i was quoted $42,000 before tax and fees for a '13 Q5 Premium Plus with navigation, that setup covers all the amenities that come with the fully loaded RDX. of course if you opt for the Q5's Prestige Package that's another story, but that's apple to orange, since a lot of stuff in Q5's Prestige Package not even available in RDX. as for the 2.0T motor, it has been out since 2005, and as far as i know it's rock solid, no recalls, no complaints. like i posted, the style is subjective, so i get it some of you prefer Acura's understated, more mature appearance. i'm not here to bashing the RDX, far from it, i just want to hear from those who cross shopped the two and ended up chose RDX.

 

thank you, this reply is exactly what i was looking for. the interior space of the Q5 may very well be the deal breaker for us as well.

 

I got quoted 35,600 for a FWD w/tech before tax and fees.
If you add the 1,400 @ MSRP for AWD that's only $37,000 so it's $5k less than the Q5.

I do like the Q5 and if it was only about 2k more I probably would have been in one, but for $40k I can almost get into a MDX size car.

Not bashing Audi at all. In fact I'll probably get an A6 down the road at one point.

So in the end, the $5k is what made me get a RDX over a Q5. Even the Premium non-navi bare bones ones was a hair more expensive than the RDX. For all the features I wanted the RDX was the best value.
Back seat was not very spacious and trunk was about as big as an RDX. RDX rear seats felt more comfortable to me, but i'm not riding in back so I guess it's no biggie.
I think also the Q5 had the hard cargo cover no?

I also tested lower brands as well and given our budget of mid $30k we felt comfortable going up to an RDX instead of settling for a CX5 or a Santa Fe. Both of those cars had their strengths over and RDX, but he RDX offered the best combination + way more comfort.

 

What's the MSRP for the Q5 model you were quoted on?

I think you also have to take into account that you can negotiate the RDX price down as well to make an accurate comparison on price difference.

Also, does the 42K give you the color you want? This may not make a difference, but one thing I didn't like when looking at the Q5 was my local Audi dealer was only willing to discount certain models and they didn't have my first pick for color.

 

I got an RDX AWD Tech for $36k before taxes and fees. So, unless you're really bad at math, the Q5 is $6k more than a maxed-out RDX and easily $10k more if you want a 3.0T to get a V6. There's no way I'd buy a 4-cylinder vehicle - turbo charger or not.

 

Still comparing the two is like apples and oranges.

The RDX and Acura for that matter is mid lux. I would choose the Acura over the Q mainly because of price.

More not all Lux models are leased. People are out by 30-45k miles. Acura is on the edge of most people buying. Most lux cars take a hit after 50k not 90k miles because no one wants to be caught with having to pay for repair bills.

 

Although I did not directly cross-shop the Q5 and the RDX, we do own a '12 Q5 (wife's daily driver), and I shopped the RDX extensively when I was looking to replace my own daily driver last year. (I ultimately went with the X1 instead of the RDX. In hindsight I should have bought an allroad.)

The RDX is more comfortable and with a larger cargo hold offers more utility, so it is arguably a more sensible daily driver. The Q5 is more fun to drive with a firmer Euro-tuned ride, better steering feel and better handling. Quattro AWD is vastly superior to the RDX's much less sophisticated AWD system. Acceleration is comparable between Acura's V6 and the 2.0T, but spring for the 3.0T and the Q5 will easily walk away from the RDX. (The upcoming SQ5 with the higher tuned 3.0T will be in a different league, both in terms of price and performance. The V6 TDI will likely hit the sweet spot between performance and fuel efficiency.) While VCM allows the RDX to maximize fuel efficiency, I would expect most people to do better with the Audi 2.0T. Closing in on 30,000 miles we're averaging 25.5 mpg overall. That's nearly as good as my X1 which is rated at 33 mpg highway. We have had zero mechanical issues to date, and Audicare covers maintenance costs for the first 45,000 miles ($750 msrp but we received it free of charge). Despite rumors to the contrary, carbon build-up in the 2.0T is virtually non-existent. Only the now defunct 3.2 V6 had carbon build-up problems in the Q5. And while subjective, I personally find the Q5 to be better looking. I will also mention that the Audi interior materials are of a higher quality look and feel, and you do get more features in the Audi. Is it worth the extra coin? Only you can decide that. But my wife LOVES her Q5. For the record, we have purchased Japanese vehicles almost exclusively for the last 20 years, and the Q5 is the first European vehicle we've ever owned.

 

It's already been said but the Q5 isn't remotely close when it comes to interior space. The RDX was quite literally the only vehicle in this class we were able to come across that managed to allow a 6 foot tall adult to sit behind a 6 foot tall adult. Or in my case, I could drive (at 6'5") and any of my golf buddies could sit behind me (they are all around 6 feet as well).

 

I also tested out the Q5 2.0T. Handling and driving was great, but it is definitely a much smaller car and was priced considerably higher. To get navigation and most of the similar stuff in the RDX, it would have costed me around $43k (Premium Plus w/ Nav). It was also almost impossible to find one in stock with just the NAV upgrade. The dealerships have already piled on a bunch of other upgrades that jack the price up considerably more.

In comparison, I got the RDX AWD w/Tech for $37k. Huge difference in price with only a minor (in my opinion) difference in quality. I also have a buddy who has a 2011 A4. He constantly has to add an extra quart of oil in between changes. Based on the internet forums, this is a "feature" that Audi technicians don't tell you about until after your purchase.

 

I had a Q5 for an entire week-end for a test drive, we have another Audi, they were happy to let me have it. Our other Audi has been completely trouble free in 7 years of ownership, only out of pocket expense was a thermostat. The 2.0T felt under powered in the Q5, in our A3, it's fine. The Audi 3.0 was too expensive, I bought a 2014 RDX. I look forward to many years of trouble free use.

 

My budget is only $40K and I can't find any dealer wants to give my the Q5 with NAV with Quarttro for the cash in my pocket so it is a matter of economic.

Standing around the corner of the street asking folks to help out by donating extra funds toward the Q5 did not pan out so RDX seems to be my only choice between the two.

I do like the Q5 by the way... but short of cash.

Thanks.

 

I purchased an RDX, and wish I had purchased the Q5.The RDX tech package is awful and the Q5 handles much better at highway speeds. The navigation can only be programmed when the vehicle is stopped. The voice commands, graphics, and traffic download is weak. Phone tags are obsolete. Mechanically the car is ok, not great. It handles decently as long as the speed is kept down. If I need to emergency maneuver at highway speeds, I would feel much more confident in the Audi. I think the RDX is a decent value for the features (sans tech package), but not at the level of the Audi. The comparable Audi is about 5-8k more, however, I still wish I kicked in the extra dough for the Audi. Live and learn. ..with more space I would also venture into the German fit and finish advantage, but that's for another day.

 

I have a twin turbo V6 S4 with 136,000 miles and nothing MAJOR has happened to it. I would say I budgeted about <1k per year on average in maintenance and repairs (oil changes included). Mine is upgraded a bit and laying down about 280 AWHP.

I'm probably going to end up getting an A6 down the road

 

The overall price was about the same for me since I know someone who works at Audi and he was able to get me a discount. The thing that really jumped out at me though was the lease prices. The Audi was $100 more a month and that says a lot about their long term durability and resale value.

Also, I thought the RDX was faster, had a sunroof (which didn't cost $2k extra), and seemed like it was faster but still got decent gas mileage. And with the options I wanted I was only able to get the Q5 i one color...black, which I didn't really like. I liked the looks of the Q5 a little better and thought it was a little more fun to drive, but I don't regret my decision for a second.

The AWD on the RDX has been great for me, and I don't use it often enough to really care or notice if the Quattro is that much better.

 

So, I think this is where we differ. My previous car was a 2002 Lexus IS300 w/ 145k miles. Not including new tires, I probably averaged less than $200 a year maintaining it and it still ran fine until I decided to get the RDX. I'm hoping for the same level of cost and dependability out of the RDX.

Budgeting $1,000 for maintenance is not acceptable for me.

 

I should have specified that my maintenance budget included any extra toys and tires. 2 oil changes a year puts me right at about $100 bucks anyway (6 quarts synth+filter).

I'm also saying it was less than $1k. I think in the 6 years I owned it the biggest ticket items were timing belt maintenance and tires. I budgeted $1k but usually spent WAY less than that. The budget was more for in case something bonked out I had it there. Some years I just did oil and that's all.

Biggest thing I bought because I wanted to upgrade (and it might be considered somewhat maitenance) were new bigger turbos and coilovers. Each were over $1k. ECU remap was $300 and valve cover gaskets were $180. So in 6 years I probably put in $3-4k in "mods/maintenance" but I had a car with an extra +50whp. Drove it from Miami to Boston twice and never had issues.

I understand $1k sounds like a lot, but I had the car paid off and basically had about a <$85/month car budget. That sure was less than what I'm paying now for the RDX...

 

Did consider Q5 and really loved the look but the main reason I dropped it was the seating capacity. X3 and Q5 both can only seat 4 (people who own it love to say its comforatable for 5 but its not, experienced myself).

 

So wait... you're asking for people's opinions, but you don't want to hear it if it's an opinion you don't agree with??

Audi / VW are always ranked lower on reliability and resale reports as compared to Honda / Acura, even if you would say otherwise. Research it - it's still true. My cousin has been a VW tech for over a decade, and he drives an Accord, if that tells you anything.

A 2013 Q5 Premium with V6, NAV, sport interior and sound options is $50k+ - please explain how that's not ~$10k more than a loaded AWD / NAV RDX? You're pricing out a Q5 Premium Plus line which is only available in a 2.0T with 60 less HP. So you're comparing apples to oranges.

Anyway... those are the reasons I bought an RDX

 

The reliability of Honda/Acura is hard to beat, toss in high resale value, it's easily a "best buy" in it's class, I test drove BMW, Audi, and Infinity, I test drove the Acura last and bought one on the spot.

 

You are very correct.

 

To be fair, the RDX is really only for 4 people (adults) too, on longer drives or a continual daily basis. If you are going to constantly have 5 people you will want a bigger MDX. I've done 3 across in an RDX and it's ok.. but not too comfortable.

 

True. But, case in point...I previously owned the Infiniti EX35 which drove better/ better steering feel than the RDX. More fun to toss around than the RDX. The problem.. the EX35 is way too cramped in the backseat, rear legroom is less than 2 door coupe cars I have. The EX35 got about 3mpg to 4mpg less. 17 vs 21 in my everyday commuting.

 

Only 280 AWHP? LOL! That is still good.. I'm used to 450 rwhp, Modified GTO.