Colorado Guy AF Ret.

KeithL.......I don't agree with Weather on this one exactly. Acura did not make a mistake not keeping the SHawd system for the '13 RDX. The new RDX is not the "boy racer" that the Gen 1 RDX was. The AWD system on the '13 RDX does very well is heavy snow, icy conditions etc. I know, I've been through a couple bad storms here in Colorado. For steep hills with a non-dry surface I feel this system will be very helpful. I would get the AWD and feel good about having it when you need it.

There were many reasons for Acura dropping SHawd on the Gen 2 RDX. For that matter virtually everything is new and better.....just look at the sales reports compared to the Gen 1.
Again....no vehicle is perfect, but, the Gen 2 is a great value for the money. If you feel you have to have SHawd and can afford the MDX then buy it. One of the biggest buyers issues for choosing the Gen 2 RDX is what you get for the $$ spent. If they would have kept the previous awd system, plus other "things" that some folks want, then the price would be way up there....closing in on the MDX.

Virtually most all who have owned the Gen 2 RDX for a few months or longer have no regrets. I have approx. 5,500 miles on mine and for sure....no regrets with my AWD Tech. model here in snow country. Love driving it each time I get a chance. My wife has it 5 days a week....and she loves this RDX!!

weather

KeithL....I agree for the most part with ColoradoGuy as well...if you re-read my second last post, I say it that I would not omit the AWD if I were you, in other words, go for it! The AWD is really good and will be well worth it....will it be as good as the SH-AWD for cornering etc, probably not, but as ColoradoGuy stated, the RDX is not a boy racer but I would make the argument that neither is the MDX. The SH-AWD is a fantastic AWD system and if you can make an argument that it is worth it on the MDX, you would be easily justified in making the same case for the RDX. Now do you need the SH-AWD, absolutely not, it just makes the vehicle a little better and sexier by being equipped with on of the finest AWD system developed.....that is where I was going.

Bottom line, you will be regretting if you do not proceed with the AWD in your application, in my opinion anyway. Especially if you can afford it...

Colorado Guy AF Ret.

Yes, most know that the SHawd is a great all wheel drive system....and no, the MDX and TL are not "boy racers" but, they seem to inspire those that have them to want to be one! LOL!
Main point is this....that system is VERY expensive. In developing the new RDX into a great small SUV that was affordable, yet what most owners were wanting....since the Gen 1's were not selling well....they had to cut costs or folks would be buying elsewhere. Using the already existing CRV's AWD system saved lots....and as many here have attested to....it works great in bad weather conditions. And, on it's own, with a new suspension set up, the Gen 2 models handle very well.

Not meant to be LIKE the Gen 1...never was. Don't need it...IMHO. I know you have it on your TL and love it.....so maybe you should have bought an MDX instead of the RDX..? Then you would have had a great SUV with your beloved SHawd. Funny how you've never experienced something and find that you don't miss it...or need it....like me and the RDX. It does everything I need and want it to do, and so it seems for most of the other's who bought one.

Now we just need an answer to the rear shock problem. I hear mine most every time I drive it.

Vividsi

We might as well label the ZDX as a "boy racer" since it can only comfortably occupy 2 adults. I'm sure all the "boy racers" are buying 40K and up Acuras.

SilverJ

I just drove a 2013 RDX and my wife owns an 07 RDX. I have to say the lack of SH-AWD makes a huge difference to me. Previously I felt the RDX was a truck with the handling/performance of a semi sports car. Now---just another truck.
It looks nicer and the interior is nicer but it no longer feels sporty in any way shape or form.

weather

^^^ Until you drive it more than 15-30 minutes on a test drive. There is a perceived difference that the RDX (2G) handling is not precise but once you drive it and get to "feel" it, you will see this is capable of 90% of what the 1G was capable of doing.

HotRodW

And therein lies my biggest issue with the new RDX. More comfortable? Check. More efficient? Check. More sophisticated? Um, no. Acura eliminated the expensive AWD system and the expensive turbocharged engine, and somehow the price increased substantially anyway. I contend that SH-AWD in conjunction with the more efficient V6 would have been an ideal combination. I certainly would have found it more compelling. But Acura made the decision that I am no longer their target demographic. The more refined engine and updated styling are clearly big hits. The strategy has obviously brought in more customers, and likely more profits. But we will never know how many more might have come aboard if they had kept the SH-AWD. I'd like to say I'm hoping for a Type S, but sadly I don't think that is reality.

hand-filer

The AWD system is more than adequate for what 90% of RDX owners will need it for and that would be increased traction in adverse weather conditions.
Why someone would want an SUV for canyon carving is beyond me.
If you want a vehicle that handles like a sports car, buy a sports car.

KeithL

I agree, I understand why Acura did what it did, but this is again the sign of a wandering company looking for an identity. They were headed down the SH-AWD path and should have stayed and marketed it better. Look at Audio, Quattro, yes they have 2 versions now, standard and torque vectoring, and you can get FWD on their cars, but I believe people that follow Audi understand Quattro. Audio stand for handling AWD based sports flavored vehicles. They have their A line and S line, etc. BMW to some degree, similar, 3 Series or M3, etc. Acura is becoming so scared of itself it does not know what to do. Unfortunately I think they are headed to be a niche brand, basically sticking to the value luxury like vehicle class, not know for anything else other than a decent value product not wandering too much from center as to not be too sporty, too soft too luxurious, etc.

Now there is really nothing wrong with that, but I believe it limits them and will eventually alienate their base loyal owners that will get bored as they watch Hyundai and Kia march right up to them and maybe pass them since they both are going to be offering some very nicely styled sedans that will also be a great similar value proposition. Again, my opinion only and I am far from an Acura hater, as you see form my sig I have had more Acuras than any other brand as well as the GF has a TSX, had an RDX and a CR-V before that. So in 9 years we have owned 9 Honda products. Only my current M37 since 2004 has been a non-Honda product.

masterrdx

I drove my AWD on 2-3 inches of snow once and took a little sharper turn at a corner with a bit more speed, the car slipped to a side making me think that I would hit the curb but i didn't. I am not sure if any of the so called "great" AWD would slip like this - my guess would be Yes if purely driven on 'all season' tires
What I also wonder why Acura would cut down on few things that they could have put in this car - like heated steering wheel, sensors, passgr seat adjustment (upwards), keyless entry using all door handles, compass in rearview mirror, LED light for DRLs (distinct shape for Acura),rear HVAC, and rear footwell lighting - this would have added a more premium value to the car and probably for fraction of cost of the car - yes they could have added another $500.
DO you folks think that these additions would not matter for an average buyer?

HotRodW

A sports car may very well be the answer if canyon carving is priority one. But it's not very practical, is it? Vacations, shopping, soccer games, foul weather driving, etc all create problems. So if life has to come first, and for most of us it does, sometimes a compromise is in order. A screwdriver is a handy tool to have, but a Leatherman is far more versatile.

KeithL

If Acura is going to keep with all the cost cutting then at least offer and Advance model for the RDX that should have some of this stuff. And Acura is going to be last to have LED DRLs at this rate. I am beginning tho wonder how Acura is going to stay a premium brand when they do not offer features showing up in non luxury brands, including their own Hondas.

musty hustla

daytime LED DRLs suck

I never understood why people think using headlights in the daytime looks good.

weather

I sort of agree with Musty Hustla on the LED daytime running light. When Audi came out with them, they symbolized sexiness, luxury and uniqueness (to an extent). When Kia has them on their Rio, then in my opinion, they lost their "sexiness" and "luxury" appeal and where I think Acura will stand out with their Jewel eyes....love them or not, they are not mainstream. For me, heated seats, cruise control, navigation etc ... all those do not have the "luxury" appeal it once had because they have become part of the mainstream vehicles. It must be extremely challenging for car companies to come up with something new that makes their brand as offering something truly luxurious. I think the quality of the material will continue to be one (which I know is not new) but then offering things like PAWS, or SH-SH-AWD will help a brand....My 2 cents anyway

KeithL

It is a safety thing, there were studies and stats that show DRLs and headlights on all the time makes you visible to other drivers more easily and reduces chance of accidents, also lighter color cars are less likely to get hit as they are more visible than darker cars. And if I have to have DRLs to me LEDs are nicer than bulbs run at have wattage.

weather

^^ Being a Canadian, I will say that I agree that DRL are great to have. I do see the advantage and would agree 150% that they help prevent head on collisions. The only part where I am not fully on board is the LED strip that most car companies now put on and has devalue their sexiness. I see people putting after market LED strip on Toyota Corolla ... Totally absurd!

See for me, I tend to like to do the opposite of the masses....and maybe why I love Acura so much. Where I live, they are so rare...people don't seem to know much about them. The hotshots drive BMW and Mercedes here....and the typical Honda, Toyota, Hyundai etc. I think there is 3 or 4 Acura where I live (besides the 2 I drive)

masterrdx

I am confused as to why '13 accord touring will have features that this '13 RDX awd/tech does not have !!!. It is shameful for Acura or is it some honda management pulling a fast one on Acura management
Honestly this has been very puzzling to me....

weather

^^ Could be that Acura realized it missed the boat on the LED and rather than implementing it on their line, they will keep the LED to the Honda products (as its more mainstream) and introduce the Jewel eyes on their Acura products...so the RDX and ILX could get this on the MMC. Just a thought....

Busy Livin'

Enough with the LEDs already. I get so tired of the "Me Too!!!!" attitude. Cars are becoming too similar as it is and besides, LEDs have jumped the shark already. When they are coming on economy brands entry level offering, they are no longer unique or interesting. I actually agree that the jewel eye headlights that Acura has been developing are nice if for no other reason than they are different...Acura is leading the styling pack with this feature instead of following.

As far as SH-AWD goes, I think Acura got away from it on the RDX for fuel efficiency reasons. It is a heavy and full-time active system that sucks down fuel. I have a 2012 MDX with it, believe me, I know. Acura positioned this model with one of the main differentiators relative to it's luxury competitors being the better fuel economy. And to be able to compete with the other non-luxury offerings who's pricing and features are now nipping on the RDX's heels, it needed to be able to compete in mileage as well. If the point of AWD is better traction and stability in inclement weather, the new AWD system will meet your needs. If you want the AWD to assist you in carving corners on dry roads, Acura says it is sorry, but you are in the minority and they are in the business of making cars that will sell and be profitable. The sales figures alone show that Acura made the best business decision.

AmberB

To expand on this, I suspect the VCM also presented a problem and was incompatible.

bh9712

Would SH-AWD really make that much of a difference given the more compliant (when working properly) suspension? I don't think you would get the full effect unless Acura tightened up the suspension, which would not appeal to many of the new RDX drivers.

Acura changed its target market for the RDX, going after the 80% who want something practical, comfortable, and just a little sporty rather than the 20% who want something sporty, practical and just a little comfortable and are reaping the benefits in their sales.

KeithL

So with the new MDX offering FWD model I am wondering if they will abandon SH-AWD across the line and instead opt for SH-SH-AWD? SH-AWD added some bulk and cost, but a I suspect SH-SH-AWD will add even more, sure the MPG will be better, but at what acquisition cost? $5K+ I think not,you will need to keep the car 5-6 years to gain back the added cost in fuel saving?

I wish they would make some sort of strategic direction statement so those of us on the fence as to when to jump or to jump back in could have some clue as to where they are headed, right now I have no idea what Acura's brand is all about other than value, which maybe that is all they mean to be about.

fleuger99

I read that it will have SH-AWD. I think it was on worldcarfans.com site where they had pics and a write up.

SilverJ

I had the truck all day and drove it for about 3 hours total. You can just hold the steering wheel for 30 seconds and tell its not the same. Some may like the disconnected "floating along" feeling. I prefer a little more response.

SilverJ

Not exactly. They made the truck better looking, more spacious and gave it a better interior. THATS whats driving the sales, not the neutering of the AWD system.

geocord

You're right but you forgot they also made it more than competitive in the MPG department, added a smooth V-6 and a 6sp auto transmission and made it ride easier. If they would have changed everything but left the SH-AWD in the price would be higher, it wouldn't get as good of MPG and it would have to ride stiffer to really use the SH-AWD. The public voted and said they didn't want the turbo, harsh ride, cramped quarters and didn't really care about the SH-AWD. How did they vote? By not buying the old RDX and buying a ton of the new one.

weather

Again, no disrespect but while I agree that the steering "feels" different, at the end of the day, once you get to drive the RDX on a day to day basis, you gradually become aware of its capabilities and that although it feels different, it still is a very capable rider and I would say that is about 90% of what Gen 1 was able to do.

HotRodW

Why exactly would it have to ride stiffer? I don't understand that comment. There is no reason the RDX can't have SH-AWD and the most comfortable ride in the category. In fact, one could argue that with SH-AWD, the car could be sprung more softly and still be a capable handler.

And the public didn't vote on SH-AWD. In fact, I have a hard time believing any sales were lost because the old car had a sophisticated AWD system. Customers are simply taking what is available. They're not buying because the SH-AWD was removed, they're buying despite it being removed. Admittedly most haven't a clue. But the overall package is greatly improved, therefore sales are better. Don't get me wrong -- I have not once wished the first gen was still available. The second gen is better in nearly every way. We'll never know if, all else equal, the car would be selling even better with SH-AWD.

geocord

I agree that there were probably no sales lost because of the SH-AWD in that package and the people that liked that total package. But the people that are buying the new RDX(twice as many probably) didn't like the old package. I didn't say the public voted on the SH-AWD per se. I said they voted on the vehicle. If the new RDX as it stands had the SH-AWD I still think it would ride stiffer similar to the first gen. That's an opinion based on the first gen. It would have added cost and mpgs which are two things that they wanted to stand out with. I have no problem with them trying to stand as a value oriented luxury brand. I like value and apparently a lot of other people do too.

Again, nobody has said the SH-AWD didn't handle better but the customer that the new RDX attracts really doesn't care about it. If you took a vote within these forums I would guess that if given a choice between losing a couple mpgs and adding $$$ to the price that most owners would say they would just as soon have it with the simpler AWD system. It handles just fine for me and I think the vast majority of the owners. It's certainly not a boat by any means.

As far as steering goes, every manufacturer is going to electric power steering which doesn't feel as natural as a hydraulic pump. They still haven't perfected it yet but it is getting better. The turbo 4 was a real pig on the gas and that was a major detriment to me and I think many others. It wasn't that much better than the MDX.

KeithL

SH-AWD does not mean it has to be as stiff a ride, they could have kept it, but the AWD version would have probably been another $1000-$1500 more.

SilverJ

I am not sure how the new rdx is more competitive cash wise. We paid like 30,500 for a non tech rdx brand new WITH SH-AWD. Isn't the new rdx at least 3K more then that ?
The 1st gen RDX ride is not harsh at all. Unless your like 70.
The 1st gen RDX didnt sell because it wasn't really marketed well IMO and it was not the best looking truck.
The newer one is better in almost every way, but driving dynamics and performance are not one of them.

geocord

I'll give you driving dynamics but performance? The new engine is faster 0-60 and 1/4 mile. Has plenty of grunt 40-70 too. So I guess we would need your definition of performance to really compare. And yes, the previous version of the RDX rides stiffer than the new one. Just about every professional reviewer that has tested both has mentioned it. I didn't say the old one rides rough, just stiffer. Not a bad thing if you really want to take curves/corners sharp but not needed for everyday driving.

The old ones were discounted huge the last two or three years because they weren't selling. The new ones.....not so much.

SilverJ

Well, handling IS part of performance. IS the new engine faster ? Doesn't feel like it but Ill take your word for it. I guess I'm in the minority. I like a comfy ride but I also like to feel like I'm driving the car, not the other way around. I also like manual shifts so I am in the minority I guess.

geocord

Well, you said driving dynamics AND performance so I thought you were seperating them. I personally have not time my RDX because I know it is plenty fast for me but auto mags that tested both have shown lower times for the new RDX in straight line acceleration. I consider acceleration to be part of performance and not really driving dynamics. No biggee really, a matter of semantics I guess.

I like manuals too but for my family situation they just don't make sense now. Maybe when I'm the only one driving my car I will get another one. Why would you even be concerned with a RDX if you drive only sticks as it doesn't offer one?

weather

^^ I think he was just making reference to driving a stick in general....people that drive sticks are usually more "driving" enthusiast which he was trying to illustrate....I could be wrong though.

General statement to all is below (and not directed specifically at geocord)

While I know people are often fascinated by straight line acceleration, how many g's it pulls, the braking numbers (etc), I don't know how this applies to a regular day to day vehicle, and especialy a CUV. People that buy these type of vehicle (like the RDX) is for the "multi purpose" and flexibility they offer....a vehicle that does many thing will often not do amazing at anything! That is why TRUE Sport cars serve the purpose of acceleration/handling....You would take your kids to soccer practise, pick up stuff at the garden centre and stop at the grocery store with your corvette now would you

I agree, the 1st Gen RDX had a "stiffer" (or more responsive) steering but did it sell as good as this one does? No...why? Because there are very few people that wanted the feel of a TL in an RDX. That is why I have an RDX and a TL...when I want a sporty and responsive ride, I pull out the TL, when I want versatility (and still very capable) vehicle, I get the RDX (when it rains, I drive neither *lol*). It is IMPOSSIBLE to build a vehicle that has it all, and at the end of the day, you buy what meets the most of your requirement while understanding that at some point, a compromise has to be made somewhere...especially if you can only have one and must make a decision as to which one to get.

hand-filer

^^ I can relate to this. We are fortunate to have 2 purpose specific vehicles.

SilverJ

I think your incorrect here. Like you, I have a TL and my wife actually has the RDX. She is by no means a sports car person but she HATED the "floating" feeling of the new RDX vs the one she has.
I maintain that the reason the new RDX sells much more then the old one is because everything else is better on the truck. Most notably--Exterior, interior and better gas mileage. I GUARANTEE you if the current RDX still had SH-AWD and the exact same suspension as the 1st generation it would sell just as much if not more. Having said all this if we could choose between the old rdx and the new one, we would choose the new one because despite it not having the SH-AWD, everything else is so much better.

powerflow

^^^ But the AWD does open up the page for consumers looking for AWD + good MPG.

In my area, Houston TX, dealers cannot keep the AWD on the lots, or maybe have 1 or 2 by chance. You wouldn't think it would sell down here. But I think outdoors / sporty type people look at the MPG and cost difference and say, why not go for it over the 2WD.

geocord

Exactly. And if Acura would have kept the SH-AWD which is heavier and would have reduced the great MPG Acura is able to advertise the sales wouldn't be there. I believe it is because the new RDX has a smooth V6 and still gets best in class MPG that has attracted many buyers. I know when I looked at the RDX a couple of years ago I took one look at the MPG and asked myself why I would put up with a small SUV that drank gas like full size one. There were other things I didn't like about then but the MPG really stood out. Now the MPG is a selling point. Big difference.

weather

I wasn't trying to imply, and sorry if that is how it came across, that the only reason the 2G is selling better is that people wanted a "less stiffer" steering/handling. I am not disputing that it feels more connected when you have a hydraulic steering with the SH-AWD that the 1G had, but it is not the principal feature people search for when people are buying SUVs. Acura is going with their EPS on their entire lineup and sure, if feels very different than the 1G but once you get the 2G and you drive it and start feeling it, you will realize that although it feels different, the steering is quite accurate and capable. Yes, the SH-AWD is an important part of the equation but as I said, even would have prefered that they would have kept it but its not a deal breaker to many. I am not saying its not making a difference but when you buy an SUV, you are not buying it with the main purpose to drive it as a sports sedan, otherwise, you would get a sports sedan. Sure...if you can buy an SUV that handles like one, that is gravy but I doubt many people go out shopping for an SUV looking for the MAIN point as being handling like a car on rail. Again, I am not suggesting people prefer a boaty feeling, but an SUV is a compromise between convenience and driving dynamic and why they are outselling mini van.

Its all about compromise....And quite frankly, Acura had to do the same to remain competitive. Look at the RLX section and how people are complaining that the RLX is going to be too expensive and priced almost as much as a BMW or a Mercedes and that NO ONE will pay that money for an Acura when they could get a Bimmer. The same would apply if they pushed the price of the RDX too high so again, they compromised by trying to offer a little more tech while holding the price as close to the 1G. I am still convinced that Acura could have offered things like HID and adjustable passenger seats (and rear vents) without pushing the price in the stratosphere but no one will argue that their business case worked...these things are selling like crazy.