ceb

It ain't that easy. You also need to get the car crash tested and everything re-certified.

Comfy

Wow... So that ain't gonna happen. Just want to know how do they decide which upgrades need re-certification and crash testing.

ceb

Depends. Anything that affects the crashworthiness like engines, transmissions and suspensions are obvious. Seats and interior trim bits (that you might hit or that might interfere with the airbag deployments) are less obvious.

If an accessory is available on a version outside of the US that isn't available here is a good indication that it falls afoul of a US law and probably requires crash testing. This could be as simple as a coin tray on the Euro version VW Golf or Jetta that won't meet crash specs. In order to meet anti-submarining specs, the Golf/Jetta requires a stiffening support in the lower dash - that part is replaced in Europe by the coin cubby.

electricview

Just wanted to chime in.. I debated HEAVILY about the prior to 13' RDX's and 13 and after RDX and even 12 TL (because it had SW-AWD too).


I mostly wanted the ability for some AWD for going up to the mountains for skiing. Living in Washington state, we don't get a ton of snowfall down here in the city (think seattle area). Maybe 1-4 days a year, and most of the time it doesn't stick or accumulate past 6 inches (we get that maybe every 3-4 years). So winter tires would be a waste of time, money and space for me or anyone in the metro area.


That being said I wanted something a little better than FWD to be able to handle a night where I'm out and it dumps 6 inches on the roads and they are slushy (we RARELY get completely snow covered roads that aren't wet in some way) or maybe an icey night (we get those) and most espically could get me out of a snow covered parking lot at the mountain.


I eventually decided it needed to be an 13 RDX because mostly the engine. I wanted the v6 power (when needed) and better gas mileage than the 12 and older RDX's (and even SLIGHTLY better or on par with the TL). I do mostly commuting to and from work, and the skiing will only be 4-10 times a year possibly, so I didn't need a JEEP for that much possible snow contact.


I figure it may not be the BEST AWD system, but it will surely do better than my old 02 Honda accord.. Heck I barrowed a family members 07 hyundai santé fe FWD only and on one trip back it dumped a foot of snow on me. I was fine all the way down the mountain and even back to the metro area (where I finally put chains on). Granted down the mountain was almost always downhill so I was just coasting and lightly breaking. So if I can make it with the FWD , then surely the lesser AWD of the RDX 13' will be as controllable if not better?


So some specifics about the AWD system in the RDX. these are more like questions that I've never had fully answered.


1. How long/much slipping does it require before the AWD kicks on.


2. After it kicks on does it only stay on until no slipping is detected? so less than a few seconds?


3. Does the system not give you AWD when going from a stop and accelerating to get the car moving? I thought I read it does this then once its up and moving it disengages it?




Lastly my .2 cents on why acura probably did this change to AWD instead of SH-AWD. It occurs to me that I see TONS of people driving MDX's around here, and I'm going to gamble approximately 90% of them will NEVER use it for off roading or snow handling AT all. WE do NOT live in city where snowfall accumulation is a real issue, and I'm futher going to speculate most of the 'families' or 'matured' people who drive them are not skiiers or snowboarders (i.e. very few trips up into the mountains). Granted it's just my state, But I feel 'us' (here on acurazine) are the hardcore who would have liked SW-AWD but all the rest will neither care nor know what they've lost (or gained if they go with MDX) and probably NEVER push the car to actually use it, and I think possibly acura knows this, just as they know up in Canada most people probably would NEVER select the FWD option. We are just in the minority here and we get what we get.. That said I am confident the AWD in the RDX will probably be just about right for what I need, and I know almost anyone else in my state (in this metro area) it will suffice for as well. Now Montana, might be a different story.

musty hustla

That video is not impressive.

rdxcellent

Thanks to all, from a newcomer, for the wisdom you offer. I've just returned from running some errands in my 2014 RDX AWD; this was its/our first foray into snow here in the Twin Cites, MN. My impression at this point is that its snow driving dynamics seem similar to the 2008 CR-V that I own, but I think the CR-V is more eager to transfer power to the rear wheels. In the RDX I was completely unable to break the rear end loose no matter how hard - or gently - I spun the fronts. I sense that there was a fair amount of power being sent to the rears, based on seat-of-the-pants thrust, but not enough to break them loose. It did remain point-able and predictable.

I'm a bit disappointed, frankly. I have an appointment to have some dedicated winter snow tires fitted - Nokian Hakkapeliitta R2 SUVs - and I know from extensive experience that aggressive tires like this provide maximum traction in loose conditions when spun a bit; look at the TireRack winter tire tests' traction thresholds if you're curious. It'd be nice to be able to turn off the VSA and actually drive the RDX through slippery conditions using the steering wheel and the throttle, with all four wheels contributing thrust.

I guess that's just not the vehicle I bought. I'm still glad to have it, overall.

I think the RDX will get me through everything I point it at. It just seems that they could have made it more capable and accommodating to those of us who are willing to explore the traction limits a bit.

Alas, every vehicle is a compromise. I have a 2001 Ford Excursion with "old school" 4-wheel drive that's a four-wheel drifting laugh machine on snow, but which is primitive and crude; the RDX makes it look like a buckboard wagon. If I had to drive through 6" of snow for a hundred miles, at this point I'd still pick the RDX.

Cheers -

Comfy

Thank you for the real first hand perspective of both the cars.

kareshi

The VSA can be turned off in 14' RDX. Did you try that?

rdxcellent

I neglected to mention that, so yes I turned of the VSA. Sorry for the confusion.

kareshi

Did it make a difference in your snow driving situation? I am interested to know.

rdxcellent

The behavior I described in my first post to this thread was with the VSA turned off. The only difference is that with it turned off, I can spin the front wheels as much as I want. That makes the car understeer in corners and wander when I'm on a straight. With more aggressive tires the ability to spin the tires 30-40% will provide a bit more thrust, so I'll turn the VSA off when I feel I need to.

Comfy

BTW what is VSA and why and how do you turn it off?

ceb

Here you go

skywalker168

I pressed the button the other day but it didn't do anything. Searched about it and I remember you need to press and hold the button until you hear a beep and VSA off icon shows up. Haven't tried yet.

dmnguyen

CRV

RDX

weather

^^ Wholly crap the wheels on the CR-V are ugly!! I nearly threw up.....

KenB350z

Lol

carreracup03

I have owned a 2005 Porsche Cayenne Turbo with snow tires (most winters) since 2008, and a 2008 MDX since new (2008). Both cars about the same in the snow minus all season vs snow tires.

I recently traded in my Cayenne for a 2015 RDX. I know there is a lot of controversy about the AWD system on the newer RDX ... but i have to say it has worked extremely well in some snowy and icy driving conditions. I always considered the Cayenne with snows one of he most capable winter drivers in the planet. I am not disappointed at all with the RDXs AWD system.

Sculldog3

Snow tires are a huge difference