Would you buy the 2013 again?
11-13-2012, 12:31 PM
#1
Advanced
Thread Starter
Would you buy the 2013 again?
If your car would be destroyed or stolen and you would get back all the money you paid for it, what would you do? Buy the same thing again? Pay a bit extra and upgrade? Or maybe downgrade?
11-13-2012, 01:17 PM
#2
Instructor
Not sure if you're looking for a discussion on trim level or on different cars altogether. My answer wouldn't be affected anyway, I'd buy another Base AWD on the spot. The '13 RDX isn't perfect but it does everything I ask it to and don't feel remotely like I overpaid for it.
If I had to knitpick one thing I'd probably say it's too bad the gas tank is small. The MDX is 21 gallons, the Q5 is 20, the RX is 19... and we're stuck with less than 15. But considering that's my biggest issue, I think we have a winner.
If I had to knitpick one thing I'd probably say it's too bad the gas tank is small. The MDX is 21 gallons, the Q5 is 20, the RX is 19... and we're stuck with less than 15. But considering that's my biggest issue, I think we have a winner.
11-13-2012, 01:40 PM
#4
Advanced
Thread Starter
I was thinking that after the new RDX was out for a while and people got the chance to discover all the details about it, it would be interesting to see if they would choose the same model or consider another brand/car.
I would personally choose between an upgrade to RDX AWD/Tech (I have the AWD-non tech right now) or I would look again at the Q5.
I would personally choose between an upgrade to RDX AWD/Tech (I have the AWD-non tech right now) or I would look again at the Q5.
11-13-2012, 01:46 PM
#5
10th Gear
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm happy with 2013 RDX, but it was hard to believe that 2013 Accord Touring got more bell & whistles then Acura. If I want to redo it again I'd wait for mid-cycle refresh and hopefully Acura pack more standard features. How can Accord (V6) running regular gas and got more HP then RDX?
11-13-2012, 02:04 PM
#6
I'm happy with 2013 RDX, but it was hard to believe that 2013 Accord Touring got more bell & whistles then Acura. If I want to redo it again I'd wait for mid-cycle refresh and hopefully Acura pack more standard features. How can Accord (V6) running regular gas and got more HP then RDX?
11-13-2012, 02:23 PM
#7
Racer
Not sure if you're looking for a discussion on trim level or on different cars altogether. My answer wouldn't be affected anyway, I'd buy another Base AWD on the spot. The '13 RDX isn't perfect but it does everything I ask it to and don't feel remotely like I overpaid for it.
If I had to knitpick one thing I'd probably say it's too bad the gas tank is small. The MDX is 21 gallons, the Q5 is 20, the RX is 19... and we're stuck with less than 15. But considering that's my biggest issue, I think we have a winner.
If I had to knitpick one thing I'd probably say it's too bad the gas tank is small. The MDX is 21 gallons, the Q5 is 20, the RX is 19... and we're stuck with less than 15. But considering that's my biggest issue, I think we have a winner.
Last edited by geocord; 11-13-2012 at 02:27 PM.
Trending Topics
11-13-2012, 06:20 PM
#8
.
11-14-2012, 11:16 AM
#13
Honda is a weird car company.I upgraded from an Accord to get more features with the RDX,now the 2013 Accord has more features,more hp on reg gas.The small gas tank is a pain,plus the rear seat looks cheap with no vents or place to charge a cell phone.I still like the vehicle,but it could already use a refresh.I would look at other vehicles.
11-14-2012, 06:35 PM
#17
Tell you a little secret...I have a 'zero' birthday next year and DW and I were going to let Volvo 'pay' for our trip to Sweden to pick up the replacement for our '10 XC60. NICE birthday present! Could get the vehicle spec'd just for us, special color if we wanted, small discount on the price AND would drive the new vehicle around Europe for a week or two before shipping it home.
Along comes Volvo with their Summer Savings Program and darned if I don't get antsy and start looking at 2012 deals. Long story longer, Volvo makes me 'mad' and I start looking at other options...particularly leases since I've got $25K equity tied up in the XC. I considered the Lincoln
, Infiniti, Lexus and found the Acura to be the best value, IMO.
Three months in, I think the only other decision that would have made me 'happy' would have been to keep the XC another year and consider other options(Volvo isn't making significant changes for next year, so the prospect wouldn't have been for a seriously updated XC, even if I waited).
There's about one moment a week that I 'wonder' what it would be like to drive the XC60 R-design; but then I remind myself that it costs around $52K.
If I had it to do over again...I'd still have the RDX in the garage!
Along comes Volvo with their Summer Savings Program and darned if I don't get antsy and start looking at 2012 deals. Long story longer, Volvo makes me 'mad' and I start looking at other options...particularly leases since I've got $25K equity tied up in the XC. I considered the Lincoln
, Infiniti, Lexus and found the Acura to be the best value, IMO.Three months in, I think the only other decision that would have made me 'happy' would have been to keep the XC another year and consider other options(Volvo isn't making significant changes for next year, so the prospect wouldn't have been for a seriously updated XC, even if I waited).
There's about one moment a week that I 'wonder' what it would be like to drive the XC60 R-design; but then I remind myself that it costs around $52K.
If I had it to do over again...I'd still have the RDX in the garage!
11-14-2012, 07:06 PM
#18
bc they are a nice addition. Even if its not a 12 second, 500hp sports car, it makes driving more "thrilling" if you will, to have the paddle shifters vs the regular manual shifting shifters the others use.
I like em and it is one more reason i like the RDX, so i guess it makes a difference for some of us.
11-14-2012, 09:08 PM
#20
Car Crazy for Sure!
For the price...yes I would. Owned..AWD Tech since June. No regrets. Some are complaining of the "stuff" on the new Accords, etc. I took note of that when I looked at them. But, bottom line...you can't really compare an entry level luxury SUV to a 4 door sedan. Especially an AWD one. Value for the money....I'd buy it again....yes, knowing that the Accords give you "some goodies" that I don't have.
11-15-2012, 06:58 PM
#21
I'm happy with 2013 RDX, but it was hard to believe that 2013 Accord Touring got more bell & whistles then Acura. If I want to redo it again I'd wait for mid-cycle refresh and hopefully Acura pack more standard features. How can Accord (V6) running regular gas and got more HP then RDX?
I thought Acura was heading in the right direction and then Honda does something stupid like this. I don't know if it is Honda's fault or Acura's, but its absolutely ridiculous that the new Accord comes with technology and feature that no Acura's currently does. We are paying a price premium over a Honda for what, an extra year of warranty? That is not the way its suppose to work. You bring out new tech and features in your luxury line and let it trickle down into the mainstream line. They need to take a clue from Lexus, Infiniti, and Audi. All the tech there has begun trickling down into Toyota, Nissan, and Volkswagen respectively.
11-15-2012, 08:34 PM
#23
Racer
Didn't the RDX hit dealers in April? The new Hondas are out now so that is like 8 months.... not a year and a half.
11-15-2012, 09:49 PM
#24
I actually drove the Accord touring and was impressed by the tech and wished they had it in the RDX. But coming from a 2006 TL I wanted a CUV that was fun to drive and not a sedan. So I bought the RDX and do not regret it. BTW, I drove the Audi Q5 and BMW X3 and MDX and EX-37. For the money, the RDX is the best you can get.
I almost did buy the Q5, but my better sense took over and I decided that the Q5 was not worth $15K more than the RDX, especially for a car that has a pretty bad reliability rating. I drove my 3G TL for 150K+ miles without a single mechanical repair.
The EX-37 is also nice, but it was more expensive and impractical. In fact, the Infinity should not be considered in the same category. It is low and has no cargo room. It is basically a G-37x hatchback and should be compared with the Acura ZDX or Honda Crosstour, not the RDX.
2013 RDX AWD Tech Silver Moon.
I almost did buy the Q5, but my better sense took over and I decided that the Q5 was not worth $15K more than the RDX, especially for a car that has a pretty bad reliability rating. I drove my 3G TL for 150K+ miles without a single mechanical repair.
The EX-37 is also nice, but it was more expensive and impractical. In fact, the Infinity should not be considered in the same category. It is low and has no cargo room. It is basically a G-37x hatchback and should be compared with the Acura ZDX or Honda Crosstour, not the RDX.
2013 RDX AWD Tech Silver Moon.
11-15-2012, 09:51 PM
#25
Who knows what's going on with the corporates in Torrance, but I think the beancounters at Honda pretty much hit the sweet spot on the RDX with regards to price. At the moment, it's still a pretty good value proposition and prime to pull up shoppers who are looking for a little something more (CRV's, Subaru's, Hyundai's) as well as pull-down shoppers who are fed up with paying for the sake of brand name alone (Lexus, BMS, Audi's of the world). Best part I think is that even with the base model's, everyone gets the same silky smooth V6 so while there are nicer cars like maybe the Volvo XC60 R-Design, you're going to have to pay significantly more for the same content.
If the mid-cycle refresh of the RDX incoporates some of what Acura plans to have in there upcoming models (RLX, NSX) in addition to addressing some of the shortcomings of the current vehicle and possibly introducing some more dynamic color combinations, I think they will have my attention in 2-3 years to make a trade.
For the current moment, this being 2012, I would still go with the 2013 RDX due to price.
If the mid-cycle refresh of the RDX incoporates some of what Acura plans to have in there upcoming models (RLX, NSX) in addition to addressing some of the shortcomings of the current vehicle and possibly introducing some more dynamic color combinations, I think they will have my attention in 2-3 years to make a trade.
For the current moment, this being 2012, I would still go with the 2013 RDX due to price.
11-16-2012, 01:16 PM
#27
Every time I see a Q5, I have a twinge of buyer's remorse. So if I had it to do over again today, I would go with the Q5. Ask me again in 4 years when the Acura is still running well, and I will probably have a different answer.
The following users liked this post:
Tiaunn (11-16-2012)
11-16-2012, 04:00 PM
#28
Racer
Sorry, I misread your post. Thought you said a year and a half. You're correct that is was just a little more than half a year. But I would argue that 6 months is really not all that much time. I think we all have to remember that the Accord is THE most imporatant vehicle in the entire Honda/Acura lineup. Making a big splash with that vehicle is much more important to Honda than the few, in comparison, RDX sales.
11-16-2012, 04:04 PM
#29
Racer
I looked very, very hard at the Q5 too. Price with comparable equipment was about $3k more. The 4cyl turbo wasn't quite as smooth as the v6 and the combined mpg was about the same. Controls for the infotainment and nav were kind of strange(to me) and the ride was just a little harder but it did handle and steer very nicely. If I leased I might have went with the Q5 but for long term ownership I think the RDX is really the way to go.
The following users liked this post:
guyver626 (11-18-2012)
11-16-2012, 05:22 PM
#30
Sorry, I misread your post. Thought you said a year and a half. You're correct that is was just a little more than half a year. But I would argue that 6 months is really not all that much time. I think we all have to remember that the Accord is THE most imporatant vehicle in the entire Honda/Acura lineup. Making a big splash with that vehicle is much more important to Honda than the few, in comparison, RDX sales.
11-17-2012, 07:55 PM
#33
Advanced
Thread Starter
I used to get the same feeling, but now I feel a bit better after I read about all the carbon build up in Q5 engines in the Audi forums.
11-17-2012, 11:28 PM
#34
2010 TL AWD 6MT: New King
Otherwise the Q5 is totally worthy of serious contention IMHO...
11-18-2012, 12:34 AM
#36
I get a little q5 remorse but remember why I crossed it off, the 2.0t lag stinks, and I shopped the 3.2 which is a sweetheart of an engine, but poor mpg and neither has strong reliability. Oh, and a comparable model was thousands more on an older platform.
11-18-2012, 03:59 PM
#38
In the event of some sort of freak destruction or theft of my 2013 RDX, I absolutely would buy another one again. Owning one has been an awesome experience thus far. However, I might possibly wait for the 2014 RDX and MDX to roll out before purchasing another RDX.
11-18-2012, 11:47 PM
#39
yeah, with a base AWD, so far, so good. Highway comfort is wonderful; ride is smooth & quiet, engine is strong and efficient, interior features nice. Jury is still out on snow/ice handling and AWD. Will know more about that later this winter!
11-19-2012, 08:51 PM
#40
Probaby the same performance as the CRV in snow. I think, I am not mistaken, the RDX uses the same AWD system as the 2012 CRV. Not sure if they tweak anything on the RDX.