2019 Acura RDX A-Spec Fuel Economy
#1
2019 Acura RDX A-Spec Fuel Economy
I recently purchased a 2019 Acura RDX A-Spec, and the fuel economy is horrible! While I am 100% driving in the city, 17.8L/100KM (13.21MPG) is insane for a 2.0L 4 cylinder. I have only driven the vehicle in comfort, been cautious of my behaviour, and used 91 gas.
How are all your experiences with the fuel economy? At this point I am concerned that something is wrong with my vehicle.
How are all your experiences with the fuel economy? At this point I am concerned that something is wrong with my vehicle.
#2
Three Wheelin'
I recently purchased a 2019 Acura RDX A-Spec, and the fuel economy is horrible! While I am 100% driving in the city, 17.8L/100KM (13.21MPG) is insane for a 2.0L 4 cylinder. I have only driven the vehicle in comfort, been cautious of my behaviour, and used 91 gas.
How are all your experiences with the fuel economy? At this point I am concerned that something is wrong with my vehicle.
How are all your experiences with the fuel economy? At this point I am concerned that something is wrong with my vehicle.
#4
I recently purchased a 2019 Acura RDX A-Spec, and the fuel economy is horrible! While I am 100% driving in the city, 17.8L/100KM (13.21MPG) is insane for a 2.0L 4 cylinder. I have only driven the vehicle in comfort, been cautious of my behaviour, and used 91 gas.
How are all your experiences with the fuel economy? At this point I am concerned that something is wrong with my vehicle.
How are all your experiences with the fuel economy? At this point I am concerned that something is wrong with my vehicle.
#6
An oil change might help but for 100% city driving, 13 mpg is not far off.
You don't get Acuras for fuel economy! Have you considered a hybrid or EV?
You don't get Acuras for fuel economy! Have you considered a hybrid or EV?
Trending Topics
#8
#10
If you don't need the "oomph" of the 2.0T, I'd dump it and go with the CR-V hybrid. Very nice car. I test drove one and the dealer wouldn't budge from sticker (initially wanted ADM) and wouldn't match CarMax on my trade-in on my RDX. It's quite nice just putting around town, but I'd probably hate myself after a while with how anemic the power is. If you don't mind, it might be something to consider. You could easily double your gas mileage.
The following users liked this post:
ELIN (06-21-2023)
#11
This has been my experience with my '23 A-Spec Advance. I get ~14.5 mpg in city stop and go traffic. I can stretch it to just over 16 mpg with a very light foot in Comfort and Auto Stop/Start engaged.
#12
Three Wheelin'
If you don't need the "oomph" of the 2.0T, I'd dump it and go with the CR-V hybrid. Very nice car. I test drove one and the dealer wouldn't budge from sticker (initially wanted ADM) and wouldn't match CarMax on my trade-in on my RDX. It's quite nice just putting around town, but I'd probably hate myself after a while with how anemic the power is. If you don't mind, it might be something to consider. You could easily double your gas mileage.
#13
It's posts like these that really make me question if I want an RDX. I personally am IN LOVE with the exterior and interior styling of the 3G RDX but that surpringly terrible city fuel economy given the weight is very concerning to me. I completely recognize that SH-AWD is "always on" but damn that is some seriously disappointing mileage. That 2G Q5 with 23MPG+ city (personally experienced this and better when I had one as a loaner while the Q7 was in for maintenance) is starting to look more appealing.
#14
It's posts like these that really make me question if I want an RDX. I personally am IN LOVE with the exterior and interior styling of the 3G RDX but that surpringly terrible city fuel economy given the weight is very concerning to me. I completely recognize that SH-AWD is "always on" but damn that is some seriously disappointing mileage. That 2G Q5 with 23MPG+ city (personally experienced this and better when I had one as a loaner while the Q7 was in for maintenance) is starting to look more appealing.
#15
#18
#19
#20
Here's a recent trip (I haven't seen fuel econ this good since my tiny '97 Sentra). I just barely passed a quarter tank of gas on this trip!
In trips to NYC, I average about 22-23 mpg. The 4-cylinder has either matched or exceeded EPA estimates and this is quite common w/BMW!
In trips to NYC, I average about 22-23 mpg. The 4-cylinder has either matched or exceeded EPA estimates and this is quite common w/BMW!
Last edited by ELIN; 06-23-2023 at 06:47 AM.
#21
I actually recently checked my CID for the MPG and my gas mileage actually went up to a whopping 22.7MPG! I was actually quite excited. This is doing about 70% highway. I wonder if we can get it up past 23 ... prior to this, the car was always hovering in the 20.x-21.x range.
Slowing down certainly has helped. I used to be a chronic 75-80MPH driver. Now I'm usually at 65-70MPH.
Slowing down certainly has helped. I used to be a chronic 75-80MPH driver. Now I'm usually at 65-70MPH.
#22
AZ Community Team
I recently purchased a 2019 Acura RDX A-Spec, and the fuel economy is horrible! While I am 100% driving in the city, 17.8L/100KM (13.21MPG) is insane for a 2.0L 4 cylinder. I have only driven the vehicle in comfort, been cautious of my behaviour, and used 91 gas.
How are all your experiences with the fuel economy? At this point I am concerned that something is wrong with my vehicle.
How are all your experiences with the fuel economy? At this point I am concerned that something is wrong with my vehicle.
https://www.caranddriver.com/acura/rdx
Fuel Economy and Real-World MPG
Fuel Economy and Real-World MPG
The RDX has competitive EPA fuel-economy ratings that approach the mid-20s, with the front-drive model getting slightly higher city and highway estimates than the all-wheel-drive one. The former is rated at 22 mpg city and 28 mpg highway; both those numbers drop by 1 mpg when you select all-wheel drive. Opting for the A-Spec package will reduce both highway estimates by 1 mpg, to 27 mpg with the front-driver and 26 mpg for the SH-AWD car. We tested an RDX A-Spec SH-AWD on our 75-mph highway fuel economy route, which is part of our extensive testing regimen, and achieved 26 mpg—exactly its EPA rating. For more information about the RDX's fuel economy, visit the EPA's website.
#23
Nice!, that's good analysis there!
Something seems off with your RDX, Car & Driver got 26MPG (same as the EPA) with their testing. I'd suggest getting it checked out by a Acura dealer.
https://www.caranddriver.com/acura/rdx[h2]
Something seems off with your RDX, Car & Driver got 26MPG (same as the EPA) with their testing. I'd suggest getting it checked out by a Acura dealer.
https://www.caranddriver.com/acura/rdx[h2]
The OP's concern is with city driving. Although it's on the lower side, I didn't disbelieve it because I have prior experience being well south of the EPA city estimate with my prior MDX and TLX.
Only experience w/multiple brands tells you if EPA estimates are achievable. I'd hate to be an Acura owner all my life and not know the grass is definitely greener on the "other side" for fuel economy!
#24
The TLX-S definitely tickles my fancy in many ways, but it's a complete dud in the performance department, at least for what I'm looking for in my next car. The M3 has always been a "bucket list" car for me ever since High School. I still don't particularly like the front end, but the performance of the thing is unmatched. Plus, if it's a rattling shitbox of a car like Acura makes, I'll just go back to buying exclusively non-premium cars (unless I can find one with deep discounts).
Then again, even those are getting way too expensive. A CR-V Hybrid Touring is $40k!
#25
Acura was my first dip into the "premium" car market, and it only reinforced my preconceived notion that these cars aren't "worth it." The only reason I did was for the engine.
The TLX-S definitely tickles my fancy in many ways, but it's a complete dud in the performance department, at least for what I'm looking for in my next car. The M3 has always been a "bucket list" car for me ever since High School. I still don't particularly like the front end, but the performance of the thing is unmatched. Plus, if it's a rattling shitbox of a car like Acura makes, I'll just go back to buying exclusively non-premium cars (unless I can find one with deep discounts).
Then again, even those are getting way too expensive. A CR-V Hybrid Touring is $40k!
The TLX-S definitely tickles my fancy in many ways, but it's a complete dud in the performance department, at least for what I'm looking for in my next car. The M3 has always been a "bucket list" car for me ever since High School. I still don't particularly like the front end, but the performance of the thing is unmatched. Plus, if it's a rattling shitbox of a car like Acura makes, I'll just go back to buying exclusively non-premium cars (unless I can find one with deep discounts).
Then again, even those are getting way too expensive. A CR-V Hybrid Touring is $40k!
#26
Those are great numbers man wow! But after 2 horrible experiences with X5's in the passed I've sworn off BMW for life. I know they're not the same company today as they were when I had mine 10 years ago but burnt twice and that was enough for me.
The Q5 loaner loaner I had a couple years ago had unbelievable fuel economy. I drove it extremely hard for like 3 hours and the fuel gauge only went down half a tick! That's the type of fuel economy I expected the RDX to provide. But unfortunately doesn't look like that's ever happening.
The Q5 loaner loaner I had a couple years ago had unbelievable fuel economy. I drove it extremely hard for like 3 hours and the fuel gauge only went down half a tick! That's the type of fuel economy I expected the RDX to provide. But unfortunately doesn't look like that's ever happening.
The following users liked this post:
MTB (07-04-2023)
#28
The RDX highway fuel economy is very acceptable IMO. The 10At, lack of SH-AWD activation, and probably lack of boost at those speeds all lends to fuel efficiency. It's the stop and go with boost activation city stuff that hurts.
#29
I don't understand how Acura has fallen so far behind in efficiency. They simply aren't very competitive. Comparing the CX90 Turbo S's numbers to the MDX Type S's just leaves me scratching my head because I do not believe Mazda has has better engineers. Well, I didn't believe it. Now I'm not so sure. It doesn't matter at this point because Acura is focusing their efforts on the transition to electric power and will make little to no effort to make their ICE's more efficient.
#30
Burning Brakes
13.21 mpg? What conditions is that in? FWD or SHawd?
Mine is a 21' RDX Aspec SHawd with 19k miles on it. Gas mileage has improved significantly after 18K miles on the clock.
The worst I ever got was 14.5mpg in -10 degrees with deep snow. Otherwise most city driving is 17-20mpg. Just took a 1,100 mile road trip and averaged 27.2mpg, going 73mph in the summer heat (93-97 degrees outside). I use regular gas, tires inflated to 38psi (cold) and have the cruise on at 73mph. I use sport mode too. A clean engine air filter is key.
Mine is a 21' RDX Aspec SHawd with 19k miles on it. Gas mileage has improved significantly after 18K miles on the clock.
The worst I ever got was 14.5mpg in -10 degrees with deep snow. Otherwise most city driving is 17-20mpg. Just took a 1,100 mile road trip and averaged 27.2mpg, going 73mph in the summer heat (93-97 degrees outside). I use regular gas, tires inflated to 38psi (cold) and have the cruise on at 73mph. I use sport mode too. A clean engine air filter is key.
#31
Burning Brakes
It's a turbo - more time spent in "turbo spool up land", the more petrol it will consume.
The following users liked this post:
RDX10 (07-06-2023)
#32
AZ Community Team
Car and Driver's route averaged 75-mph on a highway so of course 26 mpg is achievable. Note that 100% city driving is not addressed in the review nor does C&D have a route for it.
The OP's concern is with city driving. Although it's on the lower side, I didn't disbelieve it because I have prior experience being well south of the EPA city estimate with my prior MDX and TLX.
Only experience w/multiple brands tells you if EPA estimates are achievable. I'd hate to be an Acura owner all my life and not know the grass is definitely greener on the "other side" for fuel economy!
The OP's concern is with city driving. Although it's on the lower side, I didn't disbelieve it because I have prior experience being well south of the EPA city estimate with my prior MDX and TLX.
Only experience w/multiple brands tells you if EPA estimates are achievable. I'd hate to be an Acura owner all my life and not know the grass is definitely greener on the "other side" for fuel economy!
As for the OP, there are so many factors (speed, driving style, environmental, elevation change, engine conditions, tire pressure, traffic,.......) that affect gas mileage (city and/or highway). EPA get alot of grief (some deserved some not) for their ratings but they do a good job creating the standards and running the tests. Some media do their tests which are not necessary standards just how they drove the vehicle and the total mileage. Whereas Car & Driver got the EPA highway mileage while testing a RDX , they could only obtain 20MPG observed with their driving (I presume it was mixed) when they tested a 2022 BMW X3 M40i which is even lower than EPA city driving. Bottom line, YMMV
https://www.caranddriver.com/acura/rdx
https://www.caranddriver.com/bmw/x3
https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a15388892/the-truth-about-epa-city-highway-mpg-estimates/
Last edited by Legend2TL; 06-28-2023 at 03:29 PM.
The following users liked this post:
RDX10 (07-06-2023)
#33
I think everyone's definition of "city" driving is a bit different as well. I'm in Los Angeles with mostly stop and start traffic with frequent short trips.
I can see myself getting significantly better gas mileage in a city like Tampa that's more of a collection of suburbs.
Good to hear that mileage improves after awhile though. I only have 1k on mine so far.
I can see myself getting significantly better gas mileage in a city like Tampa that's more of a collection of suburbs.
Good to hear that mileage improves after awhile though. I only have 1k on mine so far.
The following users liked this post:
RDX10 (07-06-2023)
#34
Mostly highway driving here with my 2019 RDX A-Spec SH-AWD. Wife can get up to 26-28 mpg because she drives between 55-65. I confirmed that driving under 65 can get around 26+ mpg on the highway WITH ACC activated. I average 22-24 mpg on the highway typically between 70-80 mph WITH ACC activated (typically 24 mpg with this feature activated). City driving or driving anywhere I do not use ACC I have seen it get 18 mpg. Never experienced below 18 mpg for the average though. SoCal driving environment, so you have flats, dips and uphill mixed. ACC is always activated in heavy traffic for me, so that also helps with fuel economy.
The following users liked this post:
RDX10 (07-06-2023)
#35
I don't understand how Acura has fallen so far behind in efficiency. They simply aren't very competitive. Comparing the CX90 Turbo S's numbers to the MDX Type S's just leaves me scratching my head because I do not believe Mazda has has better engineers. Well, I didn't believe it. Now I'm not so sure. It doesn't matter at this point because Acura is focusing their efforts on the transition to electric power and will make little to no effort to make their ICE's more efficient.
The following users liked this post:
HotRodW (07-06-2023)
#36
As for the OP, there are so many factors (speed, driving style, environmental, elevation change, engine conditions, tire pressure, traffic,.......) that affect gas mileage (city and/or highway). EPA get alot of grief (some deserved some not) for their ratings but they do a good job creating the standards and running the tests. Some media do their tests which are not necessary standards just how they drove the vehicle and the total mileage. Whereas Car & Driver got the EPA highway mileage while testing a RDX , they could only obtain 20MPG observed with their driving (I presume it was mixed) when they tested a 2022 BMW X3 M40i which is even lower than EPA city driving. Bottom line, YMMV
Aren't you better off waiting until the RDX Type S comes out to compare it against the M40i (then it's apples to apples...or maybe not if current RDX vs xDrive30i real world fuel econ is any indication)?
#37
AZ Community Team
So let me get this straight: you're comparing real world fuel econ vs EPA estimates b/w an RDX (4-cylinder mas market car) vs an X3 M40i (6 cylinder enthusiast car)?
Aren't you better off waiting until the RDX Type S comes out to compare it against the M40i (then it's apples to apples...or maybe not if current RDX vs xDrive30i real world fuel econ is any indication)?
Aren't you better off waiting until the RDX Type S comes out to compare it against the M40i (then it's apples to apples...or maybe not if current RDX vs xDrive30i real world fuel econ is any indication)?
#38
Anyway, I'll be very keen on the RDX Type S real-world fuel econ reports when it shows up. Based on the delta b/w the TLX and the TLX Type S combined fuel econ of 3 mpg, I expect the RDX Type S combined fuel econ to be in the 19-20 mpg range.
#39
AZ Community Team
Very interesting how you picked on the M40i instead of the 30i.
Anyway, I'll be very keen on the RDX Type S real-world fuel econ reports when it shows up. Based on the delta b/w the TLX and the TLX Type S combined fuel econ of 3 mpg, I expect the RDX Type S combined fuel econ to be in the 19-20 mpg range.
Anyway, I'll be very keen on the RDX Type S real-world fuel econ reports when it shows up. Based on the delta b/w the TLX and the TLX Type S combined fuel econ of 3 mpg, I expect the RDX Type S combined fuel econ to be in the 19-20 mpg range.
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 22 mpg
75-mph highway driving: 31 mpg
Highway range: 530 miles
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/city/highway: 25/22/29 mpg
Observed: 22 mpg
75-mph highway driving: 31 mpg
Highway range: 530 miles
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/city/highway: 25/22/29 mpg
#40
What do you think RDX owners in this thread care more about, what C&D got or real ownership experience?
Here are my numbers from mixed driving (19 trips, 111 miles). If the sample size is too small, I can give an update at the end of the month!