I've been considering a RDX or TL for the last few weeks and I was almost sold on the RDX but the more I sit in it the more I notice cost cutting measures. The RDX has a lot of good things going for it which is why I haven't been able to rule it out. All the reviews mention a high quality interior and I'm just not seeing it. For example, the floor mats feel thinner and rougher than the TL or even TSX. The carpet under the mats looks more like felt. The center console feels like it belongs in a KIA, the back of the front seats doesn't really have a back at all just a thin vinyl cover that you can push in two inches and feel the parts inside the seat. The lack of ac vents for the back seat, what's up with that even the TSX has them.

Have any of you noticed these things? What are your thoughts?

 

We love the interior of the RDX and it's one of the reasons we bought it. Most of the things you mentioned we didn't even notice.

The overall quality is plenty high enough for our purposes and we really like the design of the dash, console and door panels.

But interiors (like exteriors) are in in the eyes of the beholder, so if these things are going to bother you, it would probably be a good idea to go a different direction because they will probably drive you nuts.

 

I've always thought of Acura as a value for money brand. Absolutely nothing wrong with that because they get the job done and do it with luxury in mind, but the cost cutting is becoming apparent in newer generation vehicles. A few things include: no fog lights in the base model, lack of ac vents for the rear, passenger side can only adjust their seats forward and back in the base model, and etc.

 

I agree with you. check out my review in my thread, 2013 vs 2009, when I talked about the seat belt issue, it might be due to the thin back seat you describe, interior of the 2007-2012 was much better overall, just the dash of the 2013 got fancier, but everything else got worse, too bad because I love the new exterior look, but the interior is more important to me since that's where I'll spend my time when driving.

 

Coming from the Volvo XC60, I do find many components of the RDX interior to be lighter, less plush, 'flimsy'-feeling, and a bit less 'put together' by comparison. However, the RDX was $10K cheaper. As much as a cost difference, I feel much of the 'atmosphere' of the RDX is Japanese in origin, while the Volvo is a bit more Euro(not bricklike like the M-B or BMW, but more cushioned). As such, I'm not dismayed with the feel or quality of the RDX...quite the opposite as it relates to the dash. Yeah, glovebox is meh. Center console lid is really dumb. Little Scottie misses the rear-seat vents and I was disappointed that no cargo area 12v was available. Rear hatch beats Volvo, IMO...non-flat cargo area is less than ideal.

One 'challenge' I've discovered is the loose nature of the driver window when it's part-way down. Now that we have some weather below 90 degrees, I've been driving with the windows partly opened and closing the door results in a rather disconcerting rattle of the window in the frame. I need to study the other windows a bit; but this is the 'loosest' window I've had in the last half-dozen vehicles. I'm hoping it's a minor defect.

Not sure I would have noticed the passenger seat height problem if I hadn't read about it here. We don't have rear seat passengers all that often and DW hasn't mentioned the height of the seat itself. Definitely a cost-saving move to eliminate the adjustment; but no reason why they couldn't simply position the seat a touch higher(perhaps they were trying to enhance to perception of roominess for the passenger).

Manual moonroof slide is not a biggy, but likely saves quite a bit of money vs the auto-'screen' from the XC.

In closing, I'm not comparing the current RDX to a previous model since I never sat in one; but, I can compare it to the Volvo XC60, RX330 and even the 'old' Tribute ES. The RDX is certainly not a disappointment overall...some things feel 'upscale' while others give notice that this is a vehicle in the upper $30 grand range vs the upper $40s or more.

 

I also really like the design of the interior, my issue isn't how it looks it's how it feels (excluding the dash, I think the quality of materials used for the dash is very good).

It probably will drive my nuts which is why I haven't pulled the trigger but I've looked at every car and suv possible and I keep coming back to TL or RDX. The TL has it's own issues but they are different from the RDX.

I'm just trying to figure out why I don't see reviewers or owners complaining about the quality of the materials of the interior. I don't think it's just my opinion. I believe it's a fact the TSX, TL, RL, MDX all use better materials. The RDX seems on par with the ILX.

 

I totally agree with you on value which is why I like Acura's. I'm glad someone else see's the issue with the newer gen vehicles. The no fog lights I personally think is fine because it's an option, the lack of ac vents really confuses me and why the hell did they leave a hole there? They couldn't spare a dollar to put a door over it? I've noticed the passender seat issue but are you sure that's limited to the base model? I'm pretty sure it's across the board.

 

As a new 2013 RDX owner (coming from a 2006 Murano) I also found a few things in the RDX that makes me feel like they cut corners so you're not alone. Some of the items you've already mentioned, like the quality of the center console isn't awesome, there are no back vents, there's that weird stupid little pocket in the back fo the center console. The side door pockets are pathetic and no adjustable front seat, no heated rear sets, etc. etc. These are all details that were there on the murano so it's still taking me time to get used to.

I also looked at the 2013 Accord and noticed some of these items were present, and also present in the 2012 Murano. So yeah, I agree with what you're saying but at the end of the day, there was simply nothing else to get. I wanted to try something other than the Murano so that left only 1 choice. For me, anyway...

 

I agree with you about compareing the mid 30s RDX to it's mid 40s competitors. But I'm comparing it to Acura/Honda's own product line. Compared to a Honda Pilot at the same price point the materials used in the honda seem better. Although the design and layout of the RDX is way better but it should be since it's the same price and much smaller.

I always thought the RDX was like a TSX suv and the MDX was a TL SUV. I'm realizing that this generation RDX isn't a TSX suv. I just noticed a V6 TSX TECH is $39k and a RDX FWD is $38k. So does that make the RDX a lower model and therefore has lower quality?

 

This is my problem exactly. Except I'm still considering a sedan as well. I'm just trying to sort out the lesser of the evils.

 

***
Correction:
The passenger seat does not have height adjustment even on the top trim 2013 RDX AWD with Tech package... not just the base model.

 

Thanks for the info. I noticed it because I normally need to lower the seat or I'd feel cramped since I'm tall. I didn't know it'd be excluded from all trim levels because it seems like it should belong in a vehicle at that price point.

 

Agree. My wife is pretty short, it would be nice to raise her position. This is also missing in the 2013 Accord. WTF Honda???

 

Int is just fine for me and I've owned many more $$ cars. I knew what I was getting for the money. I was in an mdx and zdx loaner recently and didn't notice less quality materials. In face the rdx was more solid than the zdx.

 

I think they focused so much on the new body, new engine and new trans, that they didn't bother working on the interior, I bet if they had, it would have cost much more than $40,000 (which is a great price compared to everything out there costing $50,000 nowadays). I guess they were correct in the Motortrend review that they cut corners in the interior, I didn't think it would be a big deal at first, as I am no fancy pants mofo, but they went backwards compared to the old RDX, as I noticed first hand when I test drove both 2013 and 2011 models recently, the least they could have done is make it just as good, new dash is nice though, but that's about it.

 

You may have known what you are getting but you are way off base when you say the RDX is more solid than the ZDX. If you really compared them you would see how wrong you are. The RDX is very nice for the money but not in the same league as the ZDX and of course shouldn't be for the difference in price.

 

That's so sad! If you're choosing a car based on the lesser of the evils, it's a sign that you should go a different direction entirely.

I strongly feel that a new car should be something that excites you. It should put a smile on your face every time you drive it (at least for the first couple years).

I have that feeling for both my RDX (6 months) and my new gen Mazda MX5 (three years). The Mazda isn't equivalent to a Boxster but it's half the price, which factors heavily into to my enjoyment level. It's simply a great car for the money, as is the RDX.

If you won't enjoy the fact that you're getting a great car for $5-10k less than its competitors (and if you're unable to accept the obvious reasons for the cost difference), I really do recommend that you don't buy it. It sounds like you'd be better off waiting another year to save up for a car you really want. That's what we did.

I can't imagine spending nearly $40k for a car that you already feel is disappointing.

 

That's why for now I'm gonna stick to getting an 08-09 with low miles, I was hyped about the 2013 until I saw the cutbacks in the interior, I'll get a used RDX soon, I hope, and then will have something with value to trade in in 2015-2016 if by then the RDX is to my liking.

 

It's a driver's car

Who cares what the passengers' think, they are lucky they get to ride with you.

 

The zdx had 3k miles and rattled over bumps. The soft touch materials were more prevalent, but the rdx has it in all the right places. It's just fine for a 40k car.

 

For those that do not like the fact there are no air vents in the back of the center console be advised the back seat passengers get plenty of hot or cold air from the ducts located under the front seats and from the center of the dash located just a few feet forward.

 

I have two kids who sit in the back (8 and 3), and not once have i heard them about getting hot or cold!!
I keep the car between 66 and 68 and AC is on at all times. No complaints here!!

My biggest complaint is (after seeing the new Accord) is the missing "advance package" with all the tech goodies!

 

Tell that to the little Scottie-girl who keeps her snout directly in front of the side-rear vents in our XC60(Well, she used to...'til we traded it )

 

Unusual to say the least. I had a ZDX for 2 years and it had nary a rattle or a squeak. The fit and finish was well done the carpeting and leather are also superior to the RDX, as well as the hatch area, very nicely done hidden storage in the hatch, stereo also sounded a little better in the ZDX.

I am not knocking the RDX it is a great value for the price but to indicate the materials and finish are superior or equal to an MDX and a ZDX is a little over the top.

I liked the new RDX but still liked my 2 turbo 4 cyl with shawd better but that doesn't mean I don't appreciate where the new RDX has gone.

 

I knew I wasn't going crazy...there's no 'hole' for a rear vent that I can find...certainly not in the B-pillar where I would expect it. Where is this 'hole' ?

 

Im glad you commented on this as i have been debating between the new Santa Fe sport 2.0T and the RDX awd w/tech package. That was one of the things that really bothered me was the lack of rear air ducts in the RDX other then the ones under the seats. I wondered how much air came out, especially on a/c?

The santa fe is a sweet ride for sure but there are a few features i like better about the RDX and vice versa. My wife is 51% for the santa fe while im about 90% for the acura, so it has been hard convincing my wife that the acura is worth the extra $4k price tag.

Honestly i like the interior of the new RDX a whole bunch more then the previous years interior.

 

Look under the front seats from the rear, there are at least two sizable vents that pump air into the back. The back middle console mounted ones are just nice when you want a quick cool down or directed hot air...otherwise, cars have been doing under front seat vents for decades. I would have preferred to have them, but obviously it was not a deal killer.

 

Fair enough, perhaps the demo was beat up more than usual. I liked the metal textured trip and more use of leather on the dash parts. Interesting car for sure.

 

Didn't know that! Good to know the back passengers aren't completely left out in the cold... but still would have preferred directional vents instead of that silly little pocket in the back center console.

 

maybe if they add the directional vents to next years RDX, it wont be too difficult to retrofit to the current version... its been on my mind

 

I'm a current 3G TL owner and you hit upon one of the few things I didn't like about the RDX - the interior. The cost-cutting already mentioned kind of bugged me, but if that's what it takes to push it under $40,000 and get a nice V6 engine, then I won't knock Acura.

The other thing I hated is that the 2013 Honda Accord can be optioned out more than the RDX or the ILX. This makes no damn sense to me whatsoever. It's one thing to call acura "smart luxury" or "value luxury", but it doesn't coincide with the fact that a Honda of the same model year has (generally) better tech.

As for the quality of the interior, I always think of the RDX as the SUV TSX and the MDX as the SUV TL. If you're looking for an SUV TL interior in the RDX, you're going to be disappointed.

It's still a good vehicle, but for now, I think I've decided to pass or at least wait for the next model year to see what they may add. It's no-doubt a winner in the eyes of many.

 

I'd say the interior quality is good, not great. But then again, it was $10k less than the BMW, Lexus, or Infinity.

However, in comparison to the Highlander, Jeep, CRV, Terrain, etc, it is a good step up.

 

I don't think it's a fair comparison to say this 2013 model has a certain feature and a different 2013 model doesn't simply because the model years are generally arbitrary. The 2013 RDX hit dealers in what, March 2012?

That being said, I do hope that some of the 2013 Accord features are considered for the 2014 RDX.

 

I don't sit in the right hand seat much, but have had 3 passengers mention how low it seemed. One said it was like sitting in a bathtub. And one rear-seat passenger on a long trip moved from the right seat to the left because the lack of foot-room under the front passenger seat was "making my feet cramp up."

Today I called the dealer to see if they could raise the passenger seat a little higher; the service advisor checked and said no, it would be unsafe to raise it with spacers and they would not condone doing that. So, I guess I will have to find a nice, comfortable, Sandstorm-colored leather seat cushion somewhere <g> although that won't help with the rear passenger's foot-room.

Really, Acura, please make it adjustable again.

 

You may be right, but it's odd that the Acuras don't get the technology first.

The RDX went on sale towards the end of April and the Accord went on sale towards the end of September, so we're talking 5 months. Those technologies weren't all of a sudden invented and slammed into the Accord in 5 months. Then again, maybe they were slammed in - lol, who knows.

I think what happened was more like Honda had to step their game up to compete against the new Optima, Passat, Altima, etc.

Anyway, the RDX is still a good vehicle, and it probably will have that typical Honda loyalty due to general reliability, which ain't a bad thing.

 

At first I thought the monotone LED display on the instrument cluster was a litle old school, but the the more I'm sitting thedriver's seat, the more I actually like the design. I know other manufacturers use graphics and rearangable dials, but I actually prefer the classic look. Going from 3 dials to 2 was a good design choice. The font is sporty and I like how the dials are actually raised a little, which makes it seem more premium plus pays homage to the previous generation designs where the circular clusters stood out. Also the dimmer works awesome and is tied to the navi screen so if you try it at night, it really brightens things up.