He's getting 14-15 around town. Not sure what he gets on the highway.

 

if you make small trips and car never gets warmed up, and you constantly driving on small roads with traffic, this would seem normal to me

 

The RDX is just not some grocery getter. (Not that there’s anything wrong with that.)

You want an AWD car with torque-vectoring AWD, solid like little else, drives almost like a sports sedan, has all the modern driving aids, has very good (as opposed to acceptable, or great) power, hauls a ton of stuff, and has a great sound system and a sometimes workable Carplay/AA for a good price? The RDX stands alone.

You can pick a thing or two another one does better, sure, but the entire package? Nothing much short of 10K matches it.

 

I agree it's definitely one of the better SUVs out there, but compared to a sports sedan is where that doesn't make sense. As much as I like the car, you cannot overcome basic physics with more weight positioned higher in the vehicle. If you want driving dynamics like a sedan and comparable storage, look to a station wagon, not a CUV.

 

Put your foot in it and press it on a two lane blacktop. The only time it feels like another SUV is on a power-off, down hill curve.

 

I recently purchased an RDX... my average on the first tank so far is 16.7 mpg...the first full tank I put in will tell more, but based on city driving I do, that sounds about right. I do a lot of short distance driving... not expecting much fuel economy in that. (My previous car was a Lexus ES350 sedan... even that got only about 14 - 15 mpg. On long highway trips, it would be upwards of 28 - 30 mpg though)

 

BMW sure has a knack for being able to extract the maximum power and efficiency out of a turbo engine, don't they? Drove the X3 M40i (6 cyl 3.0 turbo) and that engine is amazing. So much power everywhere and zero turbo lag. Simply amazing. Their regular X3 (4 cyl 2.0 T) is known for having among the best fuel economy in its class. Acura and the RDX, not so much. I've read a few reviews in the press and a number of comments on forums that the fuel economy is worse than expected. Kia is also known for having poor relative fuel economy with the Sorrento. But in both cases, the Acura RDX and Kia Sorrento deliver a ton of value in other areas, and I'm sure their owners would happily trade off a bit of fuel economy for more features, room, luxury, and performance than the competition for the same price.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ecmproute;16513457[color=#222222

]This car is not "luxury"....it is just expensive. I drove the CX5, and they have the same HP and Torque when using regular fuel.

That's not accurate. The CX-5 makes 227 hp with regular and 250 HP with 93 octane.

Also, the engine is tuned differently. The 2.5 T of the CX-5 was designed for maximum low end power but loses steam at high rpms. The RDX has got a nice even distribution of power through most of the rpm range.

BTW, I also looked at and test drove the CX-5 with the 2.5 T engine myself, and considered it as an alternative to the RDX, but felt the rear legroom was inadequate (and the hump in the middle made it even worse), the stereo / infotainment / navi system wasn't as good, and felt the overall refinement and styling of the RDX is better than the CX-5.

One thing the CX-5 has that is missing on the RDX is the 40/20/40 split folding rear seats. I would love to have the 20 section in the middle so I could put the skis there instead of taking away the entire 40 section on the right with the RDX.

 

I'm getting 19mpg on my first tank.... FWD mostly grocery getting

 

When I first got my 2019 RDX I was disappointed in the gas mileage as my 2017 RDX averaged around 26-27 MPG with a commute that's mostly highway. The same commute in the 2019 was 22-23. That was 30,000 miles ago. The 2019 is still averaging 22-23 in that commute, and now I am used to it. Would I be happier with 26-27? Sure. However, at this point, it does not bother me.

15 would bother me.

 

I am getting 24 MPG combined with mostly highway driving. Isnt this inline with whats advertised for SH-AWD?

 

BTW, ASPEC SH-AWD has lower MPG than any other SH-AWD.
this is whats listed for aspec:

21 / 26 / 23

 

My new 2020 advance model with just over 1200 miles on it got 28.5 highway miles,comfort mode 300 mile road trip very pleased with that, also did a 200 mile road trip in sport mode and got 26 ish, comfort mode makes a difference or not perhaps. no complaints enjoy the ride..

 

SH-AWD here. Most of my driving miles are highway with occasional traffic / bumper-to-bumper, and around town suburban errands. Tankful to tankful, I average anywhere from 21 to 24 mpg (9-10 kmpl).

I'm in the middle of a 3-4 tankful test of regular (87) vs. premium (93) to see if and what the difference is. This will be for winter driving. I'll try the test again in the summer.

 

Pretty much people are getting advertised numbers, what is there to complain? If you did not look at MPG numbers before you bought the car, its obviously your problem

 

here, 25.1MPG for a 36mile commute to work. Only 30 miles are highway. Still on original oil. Given 26MPG rating for highway on sticker, what is there to complain about? I am getting what was promised. The milage will go up after you change oil and engine is more broken in. Maybe 2-3% more.

 

This engine seems to have an mpg sweet spot at 50 mph. Higher speed degrades the mileage considerably. I just returned from eight hours of highway driving averaging 70 mph. Mpg was 24 with hi test. At 50 mph, I can get in the low 30s. The 2nd gen sweet spot was at 65-75 mph with the VCM.

 

That doesn't make sense. At 50 mph, you're not in 10th gear. Probably 8th.

I get > 30 mpg at about 65 mph.

 

I drive my 2020 RDX SH- AWD bttween 20-45 mph mostly around the suburbs. Driven 1,479 miles and averaging 20.57 mpg. Driving from Atlanta to Tampa in February. First long distance on the interstate. Anxious to see what my mpg wlll be . I wont be going 50 mph I can assure you.

 

What's a simple test I can do to see if the car is within the advertised mileage.

Fill the tank, reset trip meter, go on the highway and drive at 65mph for 25 miles then check average?

 

yes, highway that is idle where you can cruise with mostly constant speed is a way to test. Clear your average and measure for 10 or more miles.

city driving is highly subjective area... in severe traffic your MPG can be 10MPG

 

... but if you consider that wind resistance is proportional to your velocity squared, it starts to make sense

 

For example, for a freight truck, it takes 57 hp to overcome wind resistance at 50 mph, but it takes 97 hp at 60 mph. Obviously, the RDX has a much smaller frontal surface area than a freight truck, but the take home message is that it takes much more power to overcome wind resitance with a slight increase in speed when you get above 40-50 mph.

 

The major argument in your flaw is if I drove at 50 mph on the highway without the flashers on, I'd probably get rear-ended.

 

Don't neglect the effect of ambient wind. Since wind resistance isn't linear, you don't get the same boost downwind as it costs you upwind. And cross-winds count too. It's probably tough to design a car that's aerodynamic with an effective wind direction at 45° to its direction of travel. Unless it looks like George Jetson's car. If a cross-wind causes the airflow over and around the car to become turbulent, all hell breaks loose.

So if you drive in a windy area, mileage tends to suffer.

Full disclosure: I used to race time trials on a bicycle. And my engine sucks.

But here's some more stuff to think about:

https://phys.org/news/2015-07-proper...s-mileage.html

 

But you would get great gas mileage glued to the grill of a semi...

 

Touché

 

I am on an extended road trip, driving conservatively, which is between 7-10 mph over the speed limit. (It is my God-given right as a natural born American to do ten over on any highway. It is right there in the Constitution.). I am getting just a tad over 25 mpg.

 

Frontal wind resistance is one part of it. A bigger force that requires even more power to overcome is drag. Drag is the "vacuum" formed behind a vehicle as it cuts through the air. It actually has the effect of pulling the vehicle backwards. This is where aerodynamics play an even more prominent role than in the front. This is the reason for all the gradual sloping effects in the back, especially noticeable on highly fuel efficient cars, i.e. Prius, Insight, etc. Some large commercial trucks are also starting to add large rounded drag reducers attached to the back.

 

I believe you're referring to trailing vortex drag, AKA eddy drag. ( There are other types of drag ). A "Kamm tail" can cause airflow to pass over a dead zone behind a vehicle as if it were a long tapered tail, reducing turbulence and the vacuum effect. The tapered flanks of modern crossovers, and the louver on top of the hatch are part of this. You may see a primitive version of this as fold-out flaps on the back of semi trailers. But these features are optimized for a vehicle passing though still air. A cross wind will mess it up.

 

you expected 27MPG?

 

I am just reporting what I am finding. I do not expect much in the way of FE. That is not what I got this for.

 

RDX is not a car for greatest gas savings. I do get MPG close to the sticker advertisement, so cant complain that Acura lied or anything.

 

I get 15 mpg in San Francisco with pretty slow driving. I thought it would a closer the the advertised 22 city.

 

I would hazard a guess there isn't a car sold in the U-S of A which will get the EPA city rating when stuck in San Francisco traffic.

 

Im in sf but not downtown and barely in traffic. Mostly driving in the sunset and Richmond district and then some to the peninsula. Our commute hours is usually at 6am going to work and then 3pm going home. Not many cars on the road.

 

not even with a hybrid?

 

Even hybrids will deliver below the EPA ratings with enough traffic.

 

OK, I completed my trip, a bit over 1300 mostly highway miles, average 25.5 mpg, highest observed was 27 which was at 70mph on totally flat roads with the temperature in the mid 60s.

 

Before I got my RDX I ran into someone at grocery store who had a brand new blue A-spec and I asked how he liked it. He was like I love the car but I'm only getting 17MPG and I'm pissed!

 

I normally get around 22 in everyday, suburban driving. Worse when it is cold.