I really like my 2013 FWD RDX with the tech package but...

I don't understand why Acura will not supply tech like:
1) Backup Sensors, they are useful when navigating in
close quarters.
2) Blind Spot Warning Tech. There are times that this would
have saved me from a potential heart attack.
3) Lane drifting warning tech.
4) Collision Avoidence tech ( help with preventing rear end accidents ).

The MDX has this stuff but I find the MDX too big and expensive.

I looked at the 2015 specs and did not see any improvements over the 2013 RDX.

I understand that the above would drive up the price if installed but I
would like to at have the option to be able to buy such tech.

Shoot, even the honda pilot at least has the backup sensors.

Jerry

 

I have a 2 eyes, a neck that rotates and common sense. I'm good.

 

I agree with you Grayfox the MDX was too big for my family the lexus RX comes with all these features but the price is too high for me

 

I think Acura should make standard CMBS that works at low and high speeds. Everything else is nice to have as an option. I would love the see heads up display option on all vehicles.

 

I would expect these available in an additional package on the MMC

 

+100.

What is happening to driving these days?

 

it was a business decision by Acura. The MDX and TLX will have this stuff. Next year they will have it to compete with the Lexus NX being released in the late fall. Acura is a laggard at this point and not a leader with tech.

 

I am kind of shocked at the responses to the safety tech. People feel they are perfect drivers and do not need it, funny if that were the case there would not be car accidents. With all the in car distractions(and unless you tell me you don't listen to music, talk on a phone or to a passenger) then the human is a fallible animal that can and will make mistakes. Also we can not process information from as many sources or as rapidly as all the tech that is being added to a car. Additionally the car in processing that information faster can also react faster. Do I need the tech, no, do I like the tech yes. Does this tech take some of the fun out of driving, sure, is some of it annoying, yes. I disable some of the safety tech because it is over sensitive (Lane Keep assist in my A6).

Even if you are not the "distracted driver" look around you as you drive, every day when I commute I have people texting and talking on cells as they drift and slow down and such. I like the idea of smarter cars, if for not other reason as I wish all those idiots on the road had them so I could worry less about them rear ending me or t-boning me while they are updating their facebook status.

 

BINGO

In addition, every car has a blind spot or two and I doubt that people's necks rotate 360.

 

You will find that as the years pass by your neck will not 'rotate' as far
as it once might have and your eye glasses will muck with your
peripheral vision...

Jerry

 

Well, my neck is over 60 years of age but I have no glasses(except sunglasses) to block my vision.
I had three of the mentioned items on my XC60 for 3.4 years...don't have them on the RDX and don't miss them one bit. In fact, I used to defeat the lane change feature regularly...it's a pain in town. BLIS ? ...no need for it. I'll bet studies would show someone looking at the BLIS indicator can't focus on the mirror(for REAL information) and someone focusing on the mirror wouldn't notice the BLIS light much of the time.

The only one of that class of gee-gaws that I found surprisingly useful would be Adaptive Cruise...but...it should only be used on the open highway(like any cruise).

I would trade BLIS, lane-holding and collision avoidance for a cargo area 12v outlet and rear vents in a flash!

 

Would i like all those things... sure...
Are they more things that could break in the long run... sure
Do i want to pay for them... nope.

 

I really like CBMS and ACC on my 11 MDX Adv. The CBMS activated several times before I normally would to reduce my speed to keep a safe interval between vehicles. ACC is great for long stretches open hwy with those annoying "yo-yo" drivers (speed up and then slow down every 5 mins). I don't really trust BSI because if the tech is ever wrong, you will be at fault and cause a very serious accident. Just use BSI as a triple check along with turning my head and mirrors. The good thing is I can turn the tech off at anytime and fly manual if it is not working for the road conditions.

What I like about this tech is it is always looking/analyzing the road all the time. We can't always keep 100% of our attention on the road like the tech can. It is a supplement; not a replacement for the human senses and driving experience level. If you look away for a second at 80 mph is +100 feet traveled with almost zero awareness in-front of you. The time it takes to look and react could add another 50-100 feet of travel time. I would ever give up an additional 100-200 feet of stopping distance if it was available as an option.

 

I wonder if the people complaining about the added tech would have complained when seat belts were added and safety glass was mandated...

People need to look at the death rate per million miles driven over the last 70 years, those improvements did not come from us being better drivers, but from us having safer cars!

 

A lot of the conversation comes down to the buyer. If these features cost more as an option many buyers will pass. When Bluetooth was an option many people passed on it.

If Acura adds an advance trim with these features then you will see buyers choose what is important to them. A lot of buyers don't get the tech trim which shows their priority.

If you buy your cars and plan to hold them for 6 or more years it is better to get the features or else reselling the vehicle may be tougher outside of a trade in. If you were buying a used car would you even consider one that didn't have bluetooth or a keyfob to unlock doors? Some of the 7-10 year old used vehicles don't have these.

 

Truth.

Also OP keep in mind that the RDX (albeit missing all the goodies of say a q5 or RX) is ranked #1 in Luxury Compacts SUVs
while the MDX is #2 in Luxury midsize SUVs

So over complicating things isn't always a WIN WIN

 

I actually disagree. I recall at pone point the take rate on Tech vs. base was 70% and on the 4G it is fairly easy to determine cars driving around are tech vs. base and I rarely see a base trim 4G TL. Same with RDX, driving lights are the give away and most I see have them, I doubt many people bought them as accessories. One thing I will say is more people by tech optioned cars from Acrua than Infiniti, I know how much trouble I had finding loaded M37S. I remember dealer a while back telling my when the G was popular more bought it without Nav than with.

 

Apples, oranges and bananas...not the same stuff at all.

Did anyone think they could be LESS aware of their surroundings because they were wearing a seat belt or surrounded by safety glass?...don't think so. BUT I gar-on-tee there are people depending on BLIS to tell them whether there is a vehicle to their right or left AND/OR feel they can be sloppy in traffic because collision-avoidance will kick in...maybe even text a bit more often because they know lane-holding will warn them if they drift.

I've had BLIS in four vehicles for over 80,000 miles and it has not once warned me of a vehicle that I wasn't aware of. Collision-avoidance kicked in as someone pulled out in front of me(from their RED light); but the jury is out as to what actually stopped our XC60...MY foot on the brake or the avoidance system. Lane-holding was essentially useless since I don't drift from lane to lane while piloting a two-ton vehicle(mind you, I don't take long sleepy trips on the highway, either).

So, if people want to crash into others, a beep or flashing light isn't likely to stop them. Some of the technology is useful to me, most of the gee-gaws are not. Doesn't mean they shouldn't be available; but folks like me will get the RDX without the BLIS, collision-avoidance, lane-holding type features EVEN though we have had other vehicles WITH them. It was hardly a consideration for me(although my DW likes BLIS...she has not had any problems driving the RDX about 1/3 of the time).

Carry on...

 

They're busy yacking, texting, drinking coffee, applying makeup and so on and so forth so they need these safety features to help protect the rest of us.

 

I get having a back-up camera, most cars have them now. Heck, even the new Civic's have them - if you can't back up a Honda Civic with out a camera there's something wrong but it is nice to have. In my opinion I think it's safer not to have the technology. I have 2 other vehicles with out it, I drive them all equally and say I get a comfortable with the car telling me there's something in my blind spot and I go to another vehicle without it - sounds like a bigger problem to me.

 

I for one don't want all that crap as guess what? IT IS MORE PRONE TO FAILURE.

That's right car quality has suffered greatly as they have started to compete on tech....

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/car-qu...210338204.html

I want a reliable car, not a crappy one

 

 

True maybe overall quality has suffered, but when cars were less reliable 30 years ago they left you stranded, today the quality issues are the buggy electronics. ford took a huge hit because of Ford Sync, not because the cars left people stranded. I do agree these tech features are not for everyone, and that is why there are various trim levels in most cars.

 

^Go look up some of the costs associated with that tech if you ever had to replace it... also you are still running the risk of being stranded.... when some electronics don't work like immobilizer

 

I've been driving for 34 years and never been in an accident. Not once. I've been a passenger in an accident; my car has been hit while parked in my driveway; my car has been hit while in a parking lot; but not once while I was behind the wheel. I'm sure some of you have an even longer streak. I'm a defensive driver but I feel like my luck is going to run out sooner than later. I can spot a distracted driver ahead of me and behind me. Many of them are young and not the best drivers anyway. They are worse than drunk drivers imo because they are everywhere all the time. Drunk drivers are usually driving while I'm at home. I'm not shy about honking at distracted drivers. Often they don't realize I'm honking at them, or they don't even notice they are in my lane as they give me a puzzled look. When I'm alone in the car you would not believe the things I yell at them . If they could see themselves driving as I do I think they would be shocked. And as there are more and more of them on the road my luck is going to run out.

I look forward to buying a new car partly because it will be a safer car in terms of airbags and structural improvements. The drivers aids I don't care much for since I don't really need them but they tend to be bundled with other things I want. The closest I ever came to hitting someone else was years ago at a stop light where I was late on the brakes. I still stopped but collision avoidance is one tech I might like.

What I need is the tech that allows me to put the brakes on the car behind me... to nudge the car beside me back in their lane.... I've heard they might be coming in the future.

I'd be concerned as more of these technologies find their way into lower priced cars that poor distracted drivers will think the tech will keep them out of an accident. In older days we never had the need to be on the phone or text while driving. What the heck is so damned important that you have to risk your life (and mine) to find out?

So I like things that make me safer against the idiots all around me. Because one day my luck will run out and one of them is going to hit me and I want to walk away unscratched.

 

I don't know about all that fancy tech stuff but I can confirm the ABS works . Yesterday morning I wasn't paying attention and realised I was about to blast through a red light at 45mph. Floored the brake pedal and the RDX came to a quick stop in a nice straight line with pretty much no tire squeal.

 

2016 RDX will be availabe in an Advance model with all the safety features

 

and you know that how?

 

I think the issue is that drivers, over time, become too reliant upon the technology and start to lose many of the necessary skills to drive safely. Safety tech up to a point is good because it enhances the driver's abilities. However, it can also reach a point where driver's start to abdicate responsibility for certain common driving tasks by relying on the car and technology. People will feel like they no longer need to do things like looking behind them when backing up or doing a head check when changing lanes and that total reliance on technology would most likely be a bad thing, especially since technology can break or fail.

 

A lot of good points mentioned here but to me it comes down to this:
- Acura should offer these since the industry competitors are
- Acura has it on the TLX and MDX so why leave them off the RDX
- Honda offers these in the Accord and will be adding to other vehicles

A lot of people who are good drivers mentioned they don't need these which is fine since they will not be forced to use them but for a company they should offer them or risk losing sales. I also think insurance rates may be lower for vehicles with these features.

At times in the past power windows, power seats, blue tooth, and ABS were all options that are relatively standard now. I don't think many would consider a new car without these features.

 

True, but the current generation of distracted drivers is distracted not because cars are safer or require much less skills than cars 20 years ago, they are just self absorbed irresponsible people who believe the world revolves around them ;-)

 

The problem is how Acura bundles these options, which means you either pay for them and don't use them or you cannot get a car with other options that you may want without paying for a bunch of options you may not want.

Making it standard and absorbing it into the price helps somewhat, but if it is done at the expense of quality materials or construction to hit a price point, that would be a mistake.

 

Well, to be fair, cars nowadays to require less skill to drive. Automatic transmissions, power steering, ABS brakes, stability control, self diagnostics; all of these are features that have made cars easier to drive and maintain, requiring a lot less skill from owners that cars of the past. Not that this necessarily detracts from the self-absorbedness of the average distracted driver, but it certainly makes it easier to facilitate their distractions.

I still think that an over-proliferation of electronic nanny features that are peripherally related to safety, but really more about driver convenience, will have negative consequences for us in the long run.

 

It may be an end of an era of common sense not being so common. I see vehicles moving in the direction of doing math with calculators in school, no more shade tree mechanics, and never writing a school report in cursive with pen/paper. We might be loosing more than we gain with technology.

I made sure my son knew about his TSX before he got behind the wheel from changing a flat, difference between force induction compared to N/A, brakes, auto/manual/DCT/CVT transmissions, tires, routine maint, suspension, etc... He was the only one in his driver's Ed class that knew anything about a car other than how loud the stereo could thump.

 

So you forgot to teach him the important part

Anybody aside from me take the German driving exam back in the 70's?

 

This is similar to the Airbus vs. Boeing debate. Airbus trust the electronics more than the pilot and Boeing is vice versa.

 

Interesting comparison.

I believe that all of these electronic nannies are here to stay. They will mature and seamlessly integrate into cars just like ABS has become standard and virtually invisible.

The least expensive econobox now has safety features and creature comforts (power windows, remote locks) that not too long ago were relegated only to luxury cars.

 

The difference is that the average jumbo jet pilot requires regular certification and testing. The average American driver receives driver training once in their lifetime and absolutely no re-testing ever.

If we required regular re-testing and periodic assessments for drivers to stay licensed, I think I personally would be a lot less concerned. As it stands now, not a chance.

 

Agree in part, but then why would Airbus and the Europeans still prefer the electronics over Pilots? They know no matter how much training and how much skill the human is far more likely to make a mistake. And use electronics can fail, but with the redundancy and such it is less likely. You can test drivers every year and I don't think it would matter, they will do what they need for the test and then go back to their habits. What you need is more personal liability in cases where it was clear there was a distracted driver. See how much texting you will do if you insurance company can walk away if they can prove you were texting while driving and you are fully liable. The problem is people do not feel they will be accountable for their actions. Hell in my state (GA) they won't even pass a hands free law so people are leaning on their phones, dialing their phones and such. The Feds are so eager for backup cameras, they should mandate BT and BT voice commands in every can and then states should pass hands free laws. Yes it is still a distraction to be talking even hands free, but far less.

 

A couple of weeks ago I was accelerating away from a traffic light when a woman who was parked in the curb lane tried to do a U-turn in front of me. I got onto the brakes quickly but not quickly enough to prevent a collision (although the impact was slight and the damage was minor).

As fast as my reflexes might be it occurred to me that the computer in a collision-avoidance system does not have to move its foot as far in order to apply the brakes, and in this case a few milliseconds would likely have made a trip to the repair shop unnecessary.

At the time I was debating between the RDX and spending a bit more (OK, a lot more) for a CUV with more goodies. Ultimately I decided on a fully-tricked out XC60, in large part due to the availability of the safety tech.