Bees on your needs, but I think RDX is a bigger suv and cannot compare it to NX. NX is very small and cargo space sux. RDX is pretty big suv.

NX looks sexier though...

 

In Canada, a fully loaded NX is way more expensive than a fully loaded RDX. The RDX is better in 95% of all areas than the NX. For example, the NX has a 4 cylinder engine with 235 horsepower. The RDX has a 6 cylinder with 279. The RDX is substantially bigger with more leg room. It's accelerates a lot faster. The headlights are way better. The sound system is way better. The seats are more comfortable. It looks better than the NX (NX has ugly oversized grill and way too many sharp angles). The list can go on but you get the picture...

 

How is the NX sportier than the RDX? One major example: the RDX has a 0 to 100 km/h time of 6.2 seconds. The NX can't touch that.

 

To me, and I am a bit conservative, the new spindle grill on Lexus is way too much. It was like Acura with the stupid beak I had with my 2010 TL SH-AWD. I think the new RX 350 is beautiful from all angles, except the front. The interior is also a knock-out, save for the nav screen which to me looks like it is not integrated like the Acura. That said, Mercedes and BMW do this as well. The RX is also freaking expensive.

What do I know, other than what I prefer and am willing to pay for. I liked my 14 RDX so much, I bought it out for my Wife and bought another 17.

 

I was so shocked when I noticed this a while back... They gave it to us standard in 2007, but now, all you get standard is the basic lighting equipment of a Civic or Accord at least until the the 2016 mid-cycle refresh... But still no fogs, Lexus has had it standard on nearly every model since about 1996, and Acura had them standard on everything between around 2000 until about 2013, then took them back and now you have to pay extra for them now... This irritates me a little...

Also, I'm not sure if the LEDs have the power of HIDs, I think that's why it's jewled eyed, so they can have three for low beam, and two extra for highbeam, for a total of five on each side... But to me, LEDs in general, seem dimmer, now this is from an adjacent vehicles perspective as I've never driven anything equipped with LEDs, but the light hits the pavement softer...

I do hate the highbeams on the 2007 RDX though, sometimes I'm driving by memory!!!

Just because it's quick doesn't mean it's sporty...

 

RDX all day

 

New IIHS ratings show most headlights are lacking

TLX was rated "marginal".

 

I remember that now!!! I thought the new Jewled Eye lights didn't do so well...

 

Many automakers took back features that were standard in the past, not just Acura. But I mean now we get LED headlights as standard where on other brands they tend to be 4 figure upgrades.

I had a lot of experience with the jewel eye headlights, on the mdx, rdx, and ilx. In my experience they were pretty weak in terms of range, but very bright directly in front of the car. The hid's on the 1G rdx are in a class of their own, anyone who rode in my rdx always mentioned how ridiculously good they were, hell even my mom mentioned it when she went with me one time. I wonder why Acura never made them bixenons at the time.

Oh and don't bother replying to rockycock, he's a 12 year who's parents may or may not own an Rdx. I drove a 2016 rdx tech, I was scared to take turns even mildly quick, had to be under 20-30kms not to tip over

 

Bi-xenons, like LEDs are a marketing gimmick. With a few exceptions (MB), the LED technology isn't there yet -as evidenced by the poor tests results.

HID low beams, with halogen high beams are probably the best for lighting with bi-xenons having the sole advantage of having the light color matching.

 

I don't know about this one ceb. I had bixenons on my touaregs and they were incredibly bright in the highbeam setting. Were they better than the halogen highbeams in my rdx and santa fe? No, not really, it was whiter light, not necessarily farther reaching, so in that regard, I agree.

I have to give it to acura though, rather than doing their own rendition of LED christmas lights in the headlights, they made the LED lights into the actual headlight. They actually look really really good and do give the vehicles a design language/dna. Now functionality? Still working on it. That might be why the new civic has 10 individual projectors vs the acura 5.

 

I bought my NX F-Sport last October after almost buying the 2016 RDX. I was about to walk back into my Acura dealership and sign the papers before I spontaneously bought the NX. I am very glad that I made this choice.
I wrote a pretty detailed post about why I made the choice https://acurazine.com/forums/second-.../#post15651783.

I want to address the biggest misconception that I see on this thread: the RDX and NX are really similar in size, exterior AND interior.
On the exterior, the RDX and NX are pretty much equal in dimensions. The NX is actually 300lb heavier. I confirmed this before I made the purchase and I confirmed it again last week when I parked right beside a 2016 RDX. The dimensions are pretty close.
On the interior, the NX seats and front cabin are more snug than the RDX which I liked because it feels sporty.
In the back seats, they're roughly identical.
In the trunk, the RDX is a bit deeper and a bit wider, but honestly not by much. On paper, the interior cargo volume of the NX is rated at 17.6 cu ft (vs RDX at 26.1 cu ft) but this is only the volume that will fit under the tonneau cover. If you go above it, it's much higher and closer to what it actually seems like when I use it. I've fit a decent amount in there. I'm not sure why they only measured it up to the cover when their competitors in North America measure it to the ceiling. Measuring to the seat is what they do in Europe.
You can read about it here: Within Warranty Inquiries (WWI) NX Advertised Cargo Capacity - Club Lexus Forums.

Anyway, I test drove the RDX many times. I think I might drop in and test drive it again after owning the NX for several months just to get a feel for comparison because I'm still very much interested in the RDX for the day they give it SH-AWD. Until then, I highly recommend the NX.

 

I do not care what you say, I sat in an NX and it is way more snug than my RDX and I immediately discounted it. I am 6'3" and 240 lbs. The RDX fits me far better. Further, you cannot compare the price tags. The RX similarily equipped is quite a bit more. That said, the interior of the NX has better quality.

 

Coming from a TSX the RDX headlights seem a little better and don't have the sharp cut - off. Could also be that I haven't given it much though because they seem fine...

 

I was strictly talking about the cargo space and the exterior dimensions being similar. Unless you're sitting in the trunk, then taller people are going to find the NX tighter especially in the front seats, which I mentioned. They went with a very sporty front cabin that feels closer to a sportscar than an SUV which I like, because the seats in the RDX felt too big for me (I'm 5'9 180lb, quite average). I slid around in the RDX seats when doing a turn at higher speeds and so I felt more comfortable doing the same in the NX.

I also never made any mention of the RX, unless you are referring to a post by someone else in this thread.

 

I think he made a mistake with the RX statement and meant to say NX. I really didn't like the seats in the new rdx, they were clearly intended to be wider and flatter than the older rdx, which is the same issue many people had with the tlx and mdx seats compared to the old tl and mdx seats. I am about 6' tall and have the same weight as you, the new Acura seats look like they are intended for someone weighing 50-80 pounds more. On the other hand, yours is an f-sport with the sport seats, the regular nx seats are not as supportive.

Now on the other other hand, the cabin in the latest gen acuras are clearly intended for taller drivers which I really appreciate. I had to sell my 1G rdx because it was causing me knee pain (which went away right after selling btw). While I like the nx interior, it can feel a little claustrophobic, especially in dark colors.

 

I can definitely see this as a problem with the NX front cabin. The NX feels like the RC when you sit in the driver's seat. Very sporty and un-SUV like. This was a plus for us since we wanted an SUV that still felt sporty and that wasn't too big. The NX definitely fits in here. I've always felt that the NX feels like a natural iteration on the first gen RDX.

 

The way you described the nx is the same reason I loved (and still do) the rdx. I like the raised seating position of an suv, but I want my suv to feel like a tall hot hatch and not like it was on a ladder frame. I never sold my rdx because I wanted to, but because I had to. I would take the nx any day of the week over the new rdx, I almost leased an nx in fact but decided right now isn't the best time till I finish uni.

I think the 1G rdx was too far to the sporty side and would annihilate the nx in a lap, I would LOVE to see a comparison of the 2 on a track but I agree that the nx is a logical evolution of the 1G rdx. If it was faster and had a better awd system, it would fix everything wrong with the 1G Rdx.

I don't necessarily see the snug interior of the nx as being a bad thing. I especially like all the little luxury touches, and the interior is aggressive, I love that. No pano roof though right?

 

I've felt like the NX is Lexus' answer to the gen1 RDX... I feel like the NX will become a more "baby" RX for gen2 as the RDX did opposed to the MDX...

But where does that leave the NX... Well, that's not the issue and won't be for years...

I'm actually not the only one who sees the gen1 RDX as something more like a GTI vs. a Chevrolet Exinox...

 

Lexus actually knows what they are doing with their lineup, I don't ever see them ruining the nx like that.

I do see the rdx like a tall hot hatch. The equinox can't dream of doing half of what the rdx could. I put hatches and cars to shame daily. Whenever I pushed it too far, the shawd would activate to pull me back in, I didn't need it most of the time though

 

In comparing the specs on carsdirect.com I was surprised how close the exterior dimensions are as the NX looks tiny when I see them on the road. The telling figure to me though was passenger volume of the cars. 103 ft3 in the RDX vs 72 ft3 in the NX. That would explain why it feels so cramped.

 

I just can't seem to push it too far...

I turned off the VSA, got into a corner, then floored it...

Maybe a slight tire chirp, someone claimed they heard it, but I didn't... I did, hovever, feel the rear end maybe kick out just slightly, but that's it...

Sometimes I can't even imagine the thought of going faster, and I'm not even lit up yet... The tires, that is...

I was also on a sweeper going about 60 mph, or 100 km/ph, and I maybe heard a slight whistle...

I've never expianced body roll of any kind...

Now addressing the NX, Lexus does have four SUVs, and two of them being CUVs...

I like that the NX is sporty...

The NX fits me well when I sit in it, went of topic...

Here's some advice for Lexus, make a CUV that is lager than the RX to compete with the MDX and QX60, Lexus you're loosing sales...

I just hope the new CDX makes it here and I'm sure it will one day, that being said, give it the SH-AWD when it gets here...

I called the RDX a hot hatch last week too... That's why I've modded it to look like it does...

 

I've been cross-shopping these two and I'm reasonably sure it'll be the RDX that wins it for me. I think interior space in the NX is fine as long as you need to haul people and not junk. I'm 6'2" and I was easily able to find a good driving position in the NX, hop out, and get comfortable behind the driver's seat (even after it had slid back in its tracks to let me out). I found the driver's seat to be really comfortable, too, although I'm not terribly wide [yet] and I like a well-bolstered seat. The interior of the NX is a really nice place to be. The center stack seemed a little funky at first but it's very functional. Hatch space is where it falls apart for me. I want to be able to fit a large dog crate in my next car and still have room for some other junk and I don't think the NX will pull it off. There's room back there for some luggage, but sporty roofline cuts the corner too severely for tall objects. I also didn't find the driving dynamics all that compelling relative to my own expectations. The 4-cylinder moves the car well, and I'm fine with it since my current car is also a 2.0L 4-banger from a different manufacturer.( I also think Toyota's D4-S system is the way to go in light of the tendency for DI engines to crap-up with carbon.) But in the non-F-Sport model I felt like I was driving a big marshmallow. A well-controlled marshmallow, but still much more isolated and numb than I'd like. (I admit that's partially because I'm not used to what this segment offers. I'm in a Volvo S60 now, which is a very different thing.)

The RDX doesn't win as many "WOW" points for design or materials, but it's still a nice place to be. The seat and driving position work perfectly for me. (I'm comfortable in the Volvo, obviously, but the RDX actually provides better range of seat and wheel adjustment thanks to the added space. My little sedan is tight.) Rear seat space is plentiful and, critically, the cargo area does what I want it to do. Honda V6 power is a plus in my book. Finally, RDX pricing makes a lot more sense to me. I just can't get my head around what Lexus wants to charge for the NX. The 2nd gen RDX has also been around long enough that I could buy pre-owned to save a little money, which would be tougher and less beneficial with the NX.

I'm still shopping around, though. I haven't seriously considered an RX but I probably should.

 

About a year ago I went to a Lexus sponsored event to drive the NX. They also had comparable vehicles from BMW, Audi, Acura, and MB. Here are my thoughts:

• The cow catcher grill looks much better on an SUV than a car
• The NX is a nice looking vehicle
• I like the projector headlights much better than Acura jewel eye
• Of the comparable vehicles, the NX was the slowest. The RDX was the fastest and dominated all the acceleration based tests.
• The RDX had the most body roll.
• The NX felt sporty compared to the RDX but the Audi and BMW are driver's cars.
• The RDX had the most interior volume.

I think the RDX IMO was the best all-around vehicle and value; particularly if you plan to have passengers and carry your stuff inside your vehicle.

 

Thanks for the insights. I hope the next gen RDX will address all the remaining shortfalls. In addition, it will have to fend off another potential competitor from the Hyundai (Genesis) group apart from all the mainstream volume SUVs which are stepping up the game and aspire to be premium. I really hope they have a good game plan.
I'm not worried about Honda. In general they seem to be always ahead of the pack, but not so much with Acura.

 

So all the RDX really needs is coilovers!!!

 

I think the issue with Acura is that Honda doesn't know what to do with the brand. They are trying to be something to everyone and therefore failing at everything. In commercials they market the RDX as being on the track, so you think it must be a SUV tuned towards the sport side of the equation. But then you get in and it rolls like a slab sided cargo van. So then you assume it must be a luxury vehicle, but then VERY quickly realize it isn't doing a great job at that either with the ample wind noise and just average quality interior.

The 1G RDX was pushed WAY too far in the direction of sport and sacrificed luxury completely, though for the time it was very advanced. The current rdx is not sporty, and not luxurious either. Is that a bad thing? No not at all. Just that if you want to improve sales you need to go in a direction and really take it. It sometimes feels like Honda isn't sure if Acura will survive and therefore doesn't think too much about it.

My one suggestion to Acura, is to either pick a side (sport OR luxury) or create distinct product lines within their offerings like everyone else. But actually go completely with it. For example have a a-spec or r-spec line with completely original engines, suspension settings, and interior materials. Then have a luxury or signature line with softened everything and a nicer interior. You can't do high luxury AND high sport without a high price tag.

I think Acura's issue is that they have marketed themseleves as a budget luxury brand. I think they need to do what kia and Hyundai have done and increase prices but also significantly increase product quality, design, and technology.

Don't get me started on that new diamond pentagon grille.

 

This summarizes my sentiments about Acura now. I've always appreciated them because Acuras were sporty with a bit of luxury. My mom's CSX was a pleasure to drive and I liked that it was a sportier civic with a nicer interior and a sporty steering wheel. I really liked what my TL felt like and I really liked the 1G RDX because it looks like an aggressive and fun hot hatch (I wanted to buy one and put coilovers on it).

It really irks me that Acura isn't quite sporty anymore because I feel that they haven't become more luxurious either. They've dropped manual transmission entirely in favour of a sub-par DCT. They have 0 turbo engines when I really think the RLX needs a turbo to be a competitor in it's market. Furthermore, they do not market the SH-AWD in any way. Not many people know what it is and how capable it is, and the ridiculous name is off-putting.

I really wanted to like the RDX because it felt like it was everything that I needed. But compared to my 4G TL, the interior wasn't as great and the road/wind noise was more than I could tolerate for a vehicle at that price point. I also didn't like that the seats were so wide and therefore I didn't feel comfortable taking quick turns because I would just slide around. The last straw was the fact that they took out SH-AWD.

 

It's still better than some vehicles, I'd imagine...

But really, what is the worst handling vehicle you've ever driven, and on a scale of 1/10, how bad is the current RDX?

Just saw it on a '17 MDX Thursday night, not a fan...

 

Acura RDX

Lexus NX 0-60mph = 8.8 seconds (what year is this? 1996?) - and a nickel and dime pricing structure (packages...good luck finding what you want other than the nameplate at a reasonable price) on top of it all.
Acura RDX 0-60mph = 6.1 seconds

Yes, the above is a major factor when I buy a new car and is an auto disqualifier...same goes for the "vaunted" RX (6.8 seconds and a lot more money when similarly equipped...see "nickel and dime.")

 

LOL...maybe. To be honest, the autocross driving we did at the Lexus event I would never do in the real world in an SUV (particularly with passengers/kids). We own a '13 RDX and it handles fine for everyday driving.

One factor that may played into the handling is that the RDX was also the tallest vehicle. The others were more like a tallish wagon than a proper SUV.

 

8.8 seconds sounds extremely slow. I think that might be the hybrid speed.
From my experience with my NX, it's about 7.5 seconds which is about what I'm finding when I search online.

 

Apparently I must show my work...very well. Lexus NX Reviews - Lexus NX Price, Photos, and Specs - Car and Driver

And if the 7.5 seconds is accurate...well then congratulations on the 2006 (vs. 1996) car.

 

In the link you posted, the car they tested was indeed the hybrid (194HP) so I'm not too surprised by the speed. At 7.5s it is slow for luxury SUVs in the segment for sure. That was the main drawback for me when buying the NX. But I didn't buy the NX for speed so it's not giving me any regrets.

 

You're right, sorry, I just checked out another site 2015 Lexus NX 200t F Sport, 300h First Test - Motor Trend well, I agree, the Lexus has arrived in our century...it is the 2010 level...that's pretty good...making progress! You must really like the "luxury of locomoting" across streets.

 

It's not 8.8, no way!!!

But even at 7.5, its prey for almost any predator!!!

I mean, a K24 Accord could smoke it, maybe even a CR-V with a few bolt ons!!!

Oh well Lexus, here's to this Lexus!!!⬇️

 

Well said, and exactly what I was trying to get at. They cut out the sportiness but didn't increase the luxury. The reason I think they did that is because they now offer a lot more features and therefore had to cut back because they had to stay within certain price constraints. I get it. I just absolutely do not agree with it and seeing as most people on here are talking about moving on to other brands if nothing changes, it looks like a sinking ship to me.

[QUOTE=MidnightMystery;15802898][QUOTE=RDX10


It's still better than some vehicles, I'd imagine...

But really, what is the worst handling vehicle you've ever driven, and on a scale of 1/10, how bad is the current RDX?


Just saw it on a '17 MDX Thursday night, not a fan...[/QUOTE]

Honestly, it is probably within the worst vehicles I have driven in terms of roll. The worst I have driven/owned was a 2005 bmw x5 with a comfort suspension, that was a 2/10, the current rdx to me was a 3-4/10. I remember dropping my rdx off for an oil chainge and taking a 2016 base with acura watch for a few hours, I barely pushed it on corners and felt like I was about to roll over. It matches my current 2009 santa fe with 16 inch wheels and ultra high tire sidewall in terms of roll with the santa fe having stiffer steering feel (which I like). The 1G rdx was EASILY a 8.5/10 for me. Sometimes even a 9.5 when shawd would activate on time with the curve.

I agree with you that something taking 8.8 would automatically be off my list. But it is also a compromise of handling for me. I wil take 0-60 in 8 seconds with good handling vs 0-60 in 6 seconds with horrible body roll.

And for what it is worth, the rdx is heavily hampered by the transmission. It had 2 personalities depending on my speed, sometimes it would downshift quickly and the power was very very good, other times it was reluctant to downshift and instead would hold a gear and slowly accelerate like a cvt. Not sure why it was doing that. But putting it in sport mode and holding second gear through me in my seat! I was like DAMN!

 

I didn't consider the body roll and suspension but I think that was another contributing thing about the 2G RDX that I wasn't comfortable with when taking a quick turn. I compared that with the F-Sport suspension on the NX that I test drove and later bought which has a sporty suspension. I haven't driven the normal NX and that could make a big difference in Canada where the cheapest F-Sport package is automatically $7-8K CAD. I wouldn't get the NX without the F-Sport though just because I don't like the shark-nose front end of the non-FSport.

This is what I was thinking when I made the final decision to buy the NX. I enjoyed the speed on the RDX, but the NX felt sportier and the steering felt better.


As BLEXV6 said, you can't always just compare the two because they're not quite at the same price point. I wanted the NX all along but the RDX had much better value. In the end, the dealer gave me invoice pricing for the NX, which is VERY cheap for Toronto where the NX (and all of Lexus) is extremely popular and the average price paid for the first few months was MSRP. So my NX F-Sport ended up costing me 4k more than a RDX with Tech (also invoice pricing) which felt worth it to me.

 

In my experience the suspension was also very floaty. Mild dips in the pavement would cause me to feel like I was on a boat. The one good point about the suspension though was the comfort, it really did soak up bumps very well.

What color is your nx by the way? I really like the f-sport in white, atomic grey pearl, mica red, black and the blue color. Yours is f-sport package 1 correct? That involves cooled seats, heated steering wheel..etc right?

While there is a somewhat significant price difference between the nx and rdx, I think the nx more than makes up for it with the very good quality interior. But at the end of the day, someone interested in an rdx for the size, won't buy an nx and vice versa. Really 2 different markets.

 

I have a 2015 F-Sport 1 in Atomic Silver. In Canada, the 2015 F-Sport 1 is the equivalent of the 2016 F-Sport 2. They bumped everything up 1 F-Sport # in 2016 because they introduced a new F-Sport 1 which is only a cosmetic package (ie no nav and no blindspot monitoring etc). 2015 F-Sport 2 became the 2016 F-Sport 3.
I have heated seats but no cooled seats because cooled seats are not available on the nuluxe seats (in all F-Sport models). It doesn't get too hot in Toronto so I don't mind. One thing that I really do enjoy are the heated steering wheel which is great after a day of snowboarding. The blindspot sensors are also very useful.