i'm in socal, the prospect of getting a fwd with Tech for $45k - $46k is really having me intrigued. anyone here own a fwd MDX or is going to get one please chime in.

 

If we decide on the MDX, we are getting the FWD (Atlanta resident). Sure reviewers say the AWD is more fun to drive, but I'd rather save the money and also get the MPG bump.

 

It's all we're really selling here. I think we've had 1-2 AWD models and nobody is really missing it as an alternative.

 

If you don't get much rain or snow, then you can save some money on the FWD model.

Most buy 4WD/AWD SUV's specially for their higher ground clearance and 4/AWD traction for the snowy winters.

 

^+1 this. If you live in a warmer climate and don't have to worry about snow and/or needing AWD, you are probably okay. However most SUVs are AWD now a days.

 

Buy it...

 

now, if this is a Lexus RX or MB ML350, or Infiniti Q60, then it's a no brainer, fwd it is. because none of the AWD systems in those models are special enough to worth the extra money if you DON'T need it. now back to MDX, the main selling point of the previous gen was the SH-AWD, and people were worried if the current version won't even carry that (especially after the launch of the RLX). what i'm saying is buying a MDX which made famous by SH-AWD would be like buying an Audi without Quattro.

 

By that premise you need AWD. However, from my POV, the (older) MDX was a hit despite the AWD. I'll go out on a limb and say that 80-90% of my clients never cared about AWD because of our climate. This is not the say that the minority that DID care about it didn't have some influence, but (again IMO), most buyers would gladly trade it for better MPG.

I guess you'd call it the 'halo effect' that marketers crow about all the time. While the actual buyer didn't care about it, they sought 'approval' from the Car Guy friend... and it was granted because of SH-AWD. I'll go even further out on a limb and say that only 5% of the Car Guy friends even knew how to initiate the SH effect in a turn.... (Me: You know it primarily works under power Car Guy: Um yeah.... Me: It's best if you apex early Car Guy: Apex?)

 

I test drove the FWD model and the SH-AWD model. The front wheel model seemed a little rough on bad pavement when driving. The SH model, felt heavier (which it is), and the ride was more composed.

 

I was planning on purchasing a MDX in the spring and go for the FWD model (live in the southwest). I have a RDX and the sh-awd is nice to have; but, not necessary 99.9% of the time the places I travel. We visit ski resorts in NM & CO in the winter and beaches in CA in the summer. Only about 1/4 of the vehicles at the ski resort parking lots are awd anyways. We put about 20,000 miles per year on our RDX at +75mph with commuter duties, visiting family and vacations. MPG and space is needed more than sh-awd.

I have to take a tight corner at 15-25 mph over the speed limit just to get the "sh" to kick in. Most of the time my RDX is in 50-50 awd or 60-90% fwd mode during hard acceleration. My RDX only got about 38,000 miles from my Conti DWS because of the awd. I have the same tires on my TSX and the tires still show DWS after +35,000 miles. I have eibach lowering springs which lowers the RDX and helps with its "Tossibility". It is still a +4300 lbs top heavy SUV I am trying to drive as a sport sedan. Having the best handling SUV is like having the the "sportiest looking minivan" or "fastest accelerating hybrid Prius" (nice selling point; but, not the top reason for purchase).

If I lived someplace that was covered in snow/ice during the winter months is when I would consider awd. Even then, the +2013 RDX awd system would be plenty. Acura could save the sh-awd as an option or type-s version with higher output engine.

 

Personally no. Sort of defeats the purpose. Might as well save even more money and get a Honda Odyssey less luxurios but more utility. Plus it has a vaccum!

 

Keep in mind - comparing the RDX's AWD to the MDX's SH-AWD is like comparing apples to oranges. Completely different systems. The SH-AWD is far superior, especially in spirited driving. I am curious as to how equipping the MDX with SH-AWD vs FWD will affect resale? I have a feeling that a car WITHOUT SH-AWD will be far less desirable than one with it. Of course, the region the car is in may also affect that. Will be interesting to see if the buyer gets any return on the SH-AWD when trading in. I'll predict that buyers with FWD will take a bigger hit. I feel it will be a situation like having a luxury car but not purchasing it with NAV. BTW, to the other poster, ML350 is RWD standard.

 

FYI,in 2008 the RDX AWD system was SH-AWD. From 2013 on, it's a simpler (but lighter) system.

 

Plus no spare tire on the FWD model. Getting a the spare kit costs around $600, so that is about a 3rd of the up-front cost. The only major point is the MPG hit you get with AWD.

 

Its basicly the same as the crv. In my experience it works pretty darned good in the snow, it simply doesn't provide any handling benefit. If you consider the RDX as a plush crv with a lot more thrust and livelier handling you are about right (because that is exactly what it is). BTW that is not derogatory the CRV is an excellent base for the RDX.

 

I'm sure the same will be true of the future pilot and the mdx. Interestingly the RDX is an over achieving CRV while the pilot is a decontended MDX. Redesign schedules are a mystery wrapped around an enigma .

 

I'm aware of that.