dcpc08161992

Hi all,

Beside removing the entire bottom shields, is there anybody here know how to remove the bumper mesh (you know the plastic mesh that the foglight housed in)...?

Trying to access the foglight.

Thanks.

mykey06

If you are trying to adjust the fog light, you can just use a screwdriver. There is a hole on the bottom cover where the screwdriver goes into. If you are trying to remove it, the best way would be to remove the bottom splash cover and access the fog lights from the bottom.

mykey06

Sorry, I didn't read your post entirely about removing the entire bottom shield. Unfortunately, I actually found it easier to remove the bottom shield. I didn't want to scratch the bumper trying to remove the inserts. Even removing the bottom shield, it was kind of hard to pry out the inserts.

dcpc08161992

****

Hi,

I actually wanted to install this DIY DL/Turning Signal Light that I made...so, I need to remove the original mesh and put this one in (after connecting the wire, of course)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/44529364@N06/8210577002/http://www.flickr.com/photos/44529364@N06/8210577002/ by http://www.flickr.com/people/44529364@N06/, on Flickr

http://www.flickr.com/photos/44529364@N06/8210577002/

alexderaven

Any pics with them installed?

Al Bundy

Most definitely. I would love to see how it looks installed. Coming from a car/forum where personalizing your car is commonplace (IS350 on Clublexus.com), I like to see things like this.

I think the RDX could use some beefing up as it looks somewhat plain in the front. It def needs LED DRL's. I just love how aggressive the DRL's look on Audi, Benz and even Lexus, while we have these dirty yellowish/orangish colored halogen lights for DRL's. I would also like to have some way of beefing up the front end. Nothing crazy, just some kind of subtle gfx lip to enhance the front. Similar to the beefy front ends like on the Q5. The RDX needs it. It's just too sharp and narrow up front.

And the car def needs bigger wheels. I think the RDX is the only car in this class that does NOT offer at least 19" wheels. The GLK, X3, Q5, RX350, EX37, SRX all have at least 19's offered, if not 20's standard on some models. Shoot, the Infiniti FX goes up to 21"! WTF?

That just really bugs the ish out of me about the RDX. Even the MDX has 19's. Seriously Acura? Also, I just don't get why the RDX and MDX have different bolt patterns. What was the rationale behind that? And on top of that, there's only one OEM option (19" accessory wheel from last gen RDX) that will fit the car and I'm not 100 percent thrilled about it. And I know larger wheels are not for everyone due to the rougher ride, however, you can still do a 55 series tire (with a substantial sidewall) on a 20" wheel and sustain positive ride comfort. The RDX needs it in my opinion. The profile of the car needs help. All you see are big donut tires.

Okay, sorry. My fault. Rant over...

musty hustla

^I agree with you Al. WTF is up with the different bolt patterns for the same class of vehicles?

Sculldog3

"And the car def needs bigger wheels. I think the RDX is the only car in this class that does NOT offer at least 19" wheels. The GLK, X3, Q5, RX350, EX37, SRX all have at least 19's offered, if not 20's standard on some models. Shoot, the Infiniti FX goes up to 21"! WTF? " Acura/Honda is actually conservative, and has a philosphy that seems to support why they went this route. Larger wheels generally results in more unsprung weight, need to do more to adjust the suspension, and can lead to rubber band tires that cause a crappy ride. They are also more prone to damage running up against curbs or even big potholes, so plan on either getting the protection package, or be ready to pony up the $$$ for a replacement OEM rim once winter, at least here in New England. So...with the redesign, seems they were aiming for a different market that wanted a comfortable, quiet ride, and the engineering solution said 18s. The 20's on the Q5 3.0 are a 45 series vs a 60 series on the RDX, and you'd definitely feel this. Toss in that they are also close to $500 more for a replacement set after maybe 3-4 yrs of average driving for most customers, and I can see Honda's point. Honda has never been big on bling, and as more of an engineering company, they'll always go practical. They de-blinged the RDX so much that it's hard to even know where the exhaust pipes are without climbing under the thing!."there's only one OEM option (19" accessory wheel from last gen RDX) " -- The accessory wheels for the 2013 RDX are actually 18s...and they look nice! Think someone posted about getting 19s from the 2012 MDX to fit, not sure what is up with the bolt pattern.Final thing to note is the RDX is probably quicker, in some cases much quicker, than all but the new mercedes, which still costs much more...so they might look the part...but won't be able to back it up!! I'll take my little wheels and enjoy the complete package!

Al Bundy

^^^Nah, I disagree and you're wrong on several points. Although it's very obvious and I do agree Honda went for the masses with the new RDX, I think only offering 18's was a cost-cutting measure, NOT because they are more conservative or wanted less bling. That's ridiculous. Lexus, a brand known for being MORE of a conservative company than Acura, has 19's on their RX350. This is Lexus we're talking about. Also, why have 19's on the MDX then? It has nothing to do with being conservative. It's more about saving money. Why would a "conservative" company, as you say Acura is, offer a Type R, Type S, or Aspec on their models?

That is why they left out so many features that other models the competition offer like: lane departure, blind spot, panoramic roof, parking sensors, LED tail lights (let alone LED DRL's), rear DVD entertainment, etc., etc. The list goes on and on...

This is in addition to other cost-cutting measures to regular features that are standard with the competition with such things like rear vents on the center console and a passenger seat that is only 4-way (opposed to 10-way for the driver) that does not raise. I mean seriously, Acura makes their customers pay extra money for the rear cargo cover for your hatch. Seriously Acura? And have you noticed in the interior of your car the tan pillars in the front and back are hard plastic instead of covered by fabric like the rest of the interior? Cost-cutting again. This is a luxury car brand we're talking about. Not a Kia or Suzuki. I'm also pretty sure the soft material they used on the inside top of the doors was another compromise. It should be the same material like those on the dash. The material they used feels real thin and I'm sure it's not as durable as the other soft touch dash panels. Those and several other cost-cutting measures coupled with the less expensive 18 inch wheels (not to mention less cost for 18 inch tires) was what allowed Acura to keep the price down to $40,000 max MSRP for the top model AWD RDX Tech. This is so that it would not encroach upon the MDX in price as well as be thousand less than other competitors like the Lexus RX and Audi Q5.

And also, when I mentioned the accessory wheels for the RDX, if you actually ready my post, I referred to last year's 19" accessory wheel for the 2nd gen RDX as being the only 19" OEM wheel offered for the RDX. They are discontinued now but you can still find them online. I am completely aware that the current model accessory wheels are 18's, although I'm not really feeling them at all. This is what I was referring to:

https://acurazine.com/forums/2g-rdx-tires-wheels-suspension-410/19-sparkling-silver-rim-2013-rdx-859041/

And you're also wrong that the Mercedes GLK is the only car in this class faster than the RDX. Are you serious? The RDX, depending on what publication you check, does 0-60 in somewhere in the 6's. I just saw on tv on Motorweek test an RDX with a 0-60 time at 7 seconds flat. But were you aware that the the 6-cylinder (300hp) turbo in the BMW X3 is in the late 5 sec range with a quarter mile time in the low 14's. That would smoke the RDX. Also, the Infiniti EX would burn the RDX with its 325hp V6. The Cadillac SRX with its new 3.6 liter V6 with 300+hp will do 0-60 in the late 6's to early 7's. I've also seen the Audi Q5 and Lexus RX rated with late 6 second 0-60's as well. Don't get me wrong, I do love my RDX, but you are dead wrong stating the Acura is the 2nd fastest in this class.

And yes the Q5 does have lower profile tires on their 20 inch offering, but as I was referring to in my previous post, there are cars like the Cadillac SRX with 55 series tires on their 20's. And if you really physically look at the SRX on the road, the car does NOT have "rubber band tires". They are very meaty. I understand why some companies may not offer a 20" wheel option, but 19" is NOT considered bling. It does not stand out in that way. It's pretty standard fare. Maybe it's an age demographic thing. I understand some older folks (no offense) aren't very keen on things like this, but there is a major demographic of people who are conscious of these things, which is probably why EVERY major competitor to the RDX has a 19 or 20-inch wheel offering. EVERY.

Al Bundy

I know, right? It's some wack ish if you ask me. You'd think Acura would see that there's an opportunity to make additional sales in their parts departments for those folks who want to purchase OEM Acura wheels from other cars and install them on their cars. Just like the previous gen 19" RDX accessory wheel. There are several ppl who have installed them on their TL's as well as other Acura models. And I'm sure there are several folks who would buy the 19" MDX wheels and install them on their RDX's.

But that just makes too much sense for it to actually happen I guess. Go figure.

Sculldog3

Ok...I'll revise my earlier statement.... Faster than any other vehicle that is within 2-3K in sticker price... or that is a reasonable competitor that would actually be cross-shopped by real buyers that are paying for the car. It's sort of like the Motor Trend truck competition, where they had the Mercedes GL win. The cheapest as tested price of the big Benz was 80K, versus the 22K for the Subaru that got into the test. One would hope tha the 60K difference would add up to a better vehicle. Same goes here, with most of the faster cars listed easily some 8-10K more expensive than the RDX. Try for example to even find an X3 that comes close to the base price, most are ordered with tons of options. So.........Motor Trend lists the RDX at 6.3 seconds. X3 with the 300hp is pushing closer to 50K and will do it in 5.8, a GLK they tested for Motor Trends TOTY stickered at almost 49K, also 5.8, think the Q5 with the uprated engine would also be tough to get much under 45K. As for the caddy, it's a bit of a porker weight wise and Car and Driver timed it at 7.1 I think. RX350 is listed at 6.8, the new RX sport is probably quicker with an 8 speed and more power, but also has a base price of 48K. Think the best chance is the EX, with the new 3.7 liter, but I haven't seen anyone review it or do formal testing. For 40K, or technically 36K for the base non-tech, it's pretty hard to find anything that comes close, and that should have been my point above....

computerperson

I was thinking of doing the same thing for turn signals, except using combo DRL & turn signal LED set.

Any pics on how the front looks with this mod?

visiter555

Next you will want the jewel eyes installed on your '15.

computerperson

I am not sold on the LED driving lamps yet. The 9005 DRL/hi neam LED direct replacement ar arpind $45 each but I would need to drive with them first...or buy a 2016 Acura!