Napoleon

My vehicle search, which started with a long list of 12 different vehicles, is finally down to the final 3. Of course the RDX remains top of the list mostly because of its value and since my current car (2005 Acura RSX) has 180,000 miles and still runs BEAUTIFULLY with MINIMAL maintenance costs... if this is the reliability that Acuras have then its hard for me to consider a BMW (even though its been a dream of mine to one day own one)...

That all being said, I am weighing the tech vs non tech option. The sound system upgrade is no big deal and neither is navigation (my garmin is wonderful). Fog lights are overrated too in my opinion. The only reason I would want the tech is for the HID lights and power tailgate and larger 8 inch info screen. But not sure its worth the price just for that.

Curious to know from the NON TECH owners if they are happy with their choice? I know this was discussed on an earlier thread a while back, but hoping to get better answers now that those owners have driven their RDX over a longer period of time. Also, can any non tech owners post photos of their dash with the smaller screen? I test drove a tech package and never got to see what the non-tech looked like.

Dorsey

After 9 months and 7200 miles I remain happy with my decision to forego the tech package. I can't improve on my rationale which was in the earlier post you mentioned. It really comes down to whether you beleive the cost of the tech package is worth the value received.

C0rrion

Here's a small photo I found and posted on another thread: http://consumerguideauto.howstuffwor...nterior#toptab

KeithL

For me I am into sound and love the convenience of nav so I would never consider a car without the tech package. But if you really don't need the extra goodies then while HIDs are nice I have driven cars without them They work bets in bad weather in my opinion. So not sure if the power lift gate, HIDs and bigger info screen then become a $3800 decision. One thing I always suggest to people, if you are planning on keeping the vehicle a long time it is better to over buy then under buy as you are less likely to have any kind of buyers remorse by having options you don't use vs. options you wish you had.

KeithL

Actually at a bigger level I am more upset they do not offer an Advance package or at least some of the safety options that are even on a 13 Accord. The GF wants an RDX and I love Acura and I struggle with how a $34K Accord can have Blind Spot monitoring, collision warning, lane departure warning and adaptive cruise control and LED headlights, DRLs and taillights. Virtually everyone in the RDX class has or is moving to some of these features.

Mike_TX

Okay, mine has Tech, but I want to reinforce your feelings about the HID's.

The wife got a loaner car a few weeks ago (a 2013 Maxima) that didn't have HID's, and I was shocked - shocked - at the puny pitiful light those non-HID's put out at night. After years of driving behind HID's, those weak yellowish lights struck me as actually unsafe.

Acura has some kickin' HID's - they light up the road and surrounding areas beautifully, and I believe they contribute a lot to safe driving at night. And I'll even put in a pitch for the fogs - these fogs actually make a visible difference, lighting up the area immediately in front of the vehicle.

The Tech package will pay for itself at trade time, since the HID's, nav, power tailgate, foglights, etc., are desirable items and will make your trade-in a lot more valuable.

I say bite the bullet and get a fully-equipped car. You won't regret it.

Napoleon

Keith,

I understand why people would be frustrated with that, but to me those aren't important. Mostly because I don't trust a computer to tell me if my blind spot is occupied or not. Even so, they still tell you to check your blind spot. Adaptive Cruise Control, I like actually driving and hardly ever use Cruise. Lane Departure is a good idea in theory, but I feel the technology still needs work.

Also, you can get all that on an Accord of course for $34, but you don't get AWD, cargo capacity, general room, or ground clearance.

LED lights though I would love - for the look and the quality of light.

Mikey Dallas

Non tech since June, 2012. Added fog lights for $450. Hope to add HID's either DIY or my own mechanic for about $250. That just leaves the tailgate for the concerns you have. I have never missed a power tailgate personally. So, for $650 or so you can have what you want without what you don't. The only question will be at sell or trade in time if people want the tech and make it harder to move my car.

Stump

Couple thoughts...

I think the built in Nav is a big deal when it comes time to sell or trade it in.
First question asked by Acura dealers when i traded in my last two MDXs was whether they had the Tech Pkg. Apparently much easier to resell with Nav. And the 8" screen is nice (not saying Garmin isn't).
Another feature it includes is the TPMS display. I frankly didn't think it was that big a deal until last week...when i was driving along the freeway and the display alert came on (26lbs in left rear). I ignored it. Couple minutes later same deal, but 24 lbs...net/net was i was going to be flat in probably 5-10min. Knowing this i was able to take the next exit, find a tire shop and be OK (8" screw was pulled out )...the alternative could have been me pulling over to the side of the freeway and stuck.
And lastly, the multiview rear view camera is nice.

My 2 cents...

Mikey Dallas

Stump, the TPMS is also on the base...

Domm

The RDX base also has the multi view rear camera. The only issue I had with the RDX was the lack of HIDs and fog lights. I hardly ever use the navigation because my phone is a lot easier to use. I installed an aftermarket HID kit and my concern over the fog lights was purely cosmetic and that went away because the car looks nice with or without them.

Stump

display with PSI per tire, or idiot light?

Domm

PSI per tire. Not sure why they're not standard on all vehicles. After dealing with a nail in the RDX, I'd gladly pay a little more for that feature because walking around my car checking the tires while my girlfriend slowly moves the car forward is getting old.

KeithL

Agreed on some, but LED tail lights are a proven safety add on by illuminating that fraction sooner can make the difference of an impact. To me the AWD in the RDX while nice is not a big deal for me in Georgia as if it were SH-AWD. True it will help in some weather and such, but when you look at $40K vs what I can get in an Accord Touring I am struggling. Even though this is for the girl friend ultimately .those extra things add up.

BLEXV6

I drive vehicles with the Tech Package. I have had navi since my 2004 MDX when they first came out with same in Canada.

I drove the 2013 RDX without Nav as a loaner when my car was in for service. To me the small screen alone is a major deal. When your back-up camera comes on that little screen is too small to be overly useful. The graphics for the nav model is worth it. The Stereo is worth it, the nav is worth it. I would never buy the RDX without the Nav. It's so worth the money for me.

Mike_TX

Slightly off-topic, I guess, but since it was mentioned, the non-LED tails seems odd to me. I have lots of LED flashlights, etc., and even the good ones (Crees) are dirt cheap. So why Acura didn't include them on the redesigned RDX is a mystery.

Having said that, it looks like they went to some lengths to make the tails LOOK like LED, with rows of accents built into the lenses to look kind of like individual lights.

I wouldn't be too surprised to see actual LED tails show up in a couple of years on a mid-year refresh.

KeithL

Other than ELS the only Tech the RDX has over an Accord is the TPMS, seems Honda cheapened the TPMS on the 13 Accord, other than that they have LED headlights,, DRLs and tails, as well as Lane Watch, Lane Departure,Adaptive Cruise, The Accord also have all the tech apps that the RLX has. The Accord also has Chrome door pulls which baffle me as how they have removed these from virtually all Acuras.

1bythesea

I opted for the base as the only thing I really wanted were the HIDs and couldn't see paying over $3K for them. Once the SH-AWD went away I really didn't see the point of that either. I do agree with a previous poster regarding going from HID to halogen. Halogens seem very weak and dangerous. With that said, the RDX halogens are much better vs the 2012 Subaru I traded in. They do shine a very good distance on low beam. However, since I still want a bit more light I have an appointment to install fogs later this month. I have to say Acura has cheaped out by not including fogs and HIDs on the base. That was the biggest surprise since my 2010 TSX had both and was way cheaper. The base ILX left these off too as well as leather seats. This may be the new trend for Acura on lower end base models.

geocord

I have the Tech and the HIDs but I also have two other vehicles, both with halogens. While I do notice a difference, the other two vehicles are hardly what I would call dangerous. In fact I have fog lights on one of the other vehicles and never use them unless there is well.....fog. That's what they are for.

1bythesea

I used to be of the impression all halogens were created equal; they are not. Bulb shape etc vary output. The ones on my Subaru were much more yellow and weak vs the RDX. The difference between the Subie halogens and the TSX HIDs was starling. As far as fogs...I generally don't use them all the time but with that said, the previous fogs also spread more light out to the side like HIDs tend to do. It makes seeing easier in situations other than fog. Maybe the Acura fogs won't do this, maybe they will, but it's worth trying, IMHO.

geocord

It might have something to do with the type and quality of the relector housing that the halogen bulbs sit in. Some might be better and focusing and projecting the light. I'm sure there are differences between manufacturers. Like I said, I definitely notice a difference but it's not bad. If they were dangerous the NHTSA wouldn't allow them.

aquaholik

I opted for the base since I know I will be spending at least a grand on floor mats, cargo tray, cargo cover, hitch, bike hitch. I love good bass and loud stereo but these days, I barely get to blast the M&K subwoofer at home. Riding around with the wife and kids, the stock system is already too loud for them. I prefer Google now and the navigation on my Galaxy Note 2. I found when I need to do navigation, I can mount it on the flat spot near the stereo display and can still see all the A/C and radio info. If the navigation system is touch screen then I say go for it. But it is not and you can't fiddle with it while you are driving.

I am still getting use to the rear cam and still have the old habit of looking around and not trusting the camera 100%. I put all my music on a USB stick and don't even bother to stream over bluetooth from my phone but it is a nice option to have when your friends want to play their collection. To me the USB straight connection always sound better and not using the phone to stream means one less device to distract me.

Roadie2000

In my opinion, the base model has the perfect amount of tech for me. I can't really see myself ever really needing the power liftgate and if I really want the foglamps and HIIDs I can get them installed later.

I already have a Garmin and an Android phone for navigation, and the fact that you can't operate it while the car is moving makes it almost unusable for me.

And I think the sound system is fine. I don't really need to rattle my neighbors windows when I drive by, it's plenty loud enough for me but I'm no audiophile.

I wasn't sure I'd like the smaller screen at first either, but I don't mind it at all, everything is still clear enough and readable.

Mike_TX

If you're happy with it, that's what counts. But I'd like to address a few points:

- Aftermarket HID's can be a mixed bag, so be sure you know what you're doing. And good ones can be very pricey - as can fogs.

- It's not true that you "can't operate the nav while the car is moving". You can still do most things via voice recognition, just not with the knob.

- The upgraded sound system isn't about loudness. It's about sound quality. The upgraded system sounds fuller and richer than the base system.

Again, if you're fine with it, that's what matters.

Roadie2000

Exactly, that's all stuff that would be nice to have, but given the choice I'd rather not pay extra for it. But this is my first luxury car, the only options I had on my last car were keyless entry and power windows. At this point, I'm still happy just to have a car with a working fuel gauge and adjustable seats.