Bummer. Was hoping they would bring back the beige interior.

 

Yes...no changes for 2026:

https://www.acurainfocenter.com/2026/RDX/#feature-guide

 

Was hoping Acura would of put the R & D into a new model by now. Could of at least thrown us a bone with a "Type-S" upgraded version (better brakes, lower stance, tuned engine to 350hp and some sport seats).

8 years is long in the tooth for basically the same model, with a slight cosmetic refresh in 2022. I'll just keep driving my 2021 Aspec SHawd with 30K miles, she been super reliable and solid build quality.

 

As long as people keep buying them (and let's be honest, I think at this point we've seen that the average Acura buyer doesn't have the most discriminating tastes), Acura has no incentive to send what little R&D money they get to the RDX.

 

Solid build quality definitely does not come to mind when I think of my RDXs. They have both been rattleboxes. But they have been fun to drive and offer a lot of value.

I say this with the caveat that I'm comparing to BMW build quality from 2003 325i. That was solid. Rattle-free till I got to around 150,000 miles. Even my 2014 328i and 2015 328i lacked the solid build quality of that car. So maybe there really isn't anything solid these days, but that's all the experience I have.

 

Are there any better alternatives? Everyone's producing garbage these days.

 

Well, the market seems to like the competitors more. I think the biggest knock on the RDX is that you have no choices. Want a hybird? Too bad. Want a PHEV? Too bad. Want a bigger motor? Too bad. You get what you get and you don't get upset seems to be the Acura mantra.

NX: 74K
X3: 68K
GLC: 64K
Q5: 56K
Envision: 47K
RDX: 42K
XC60: 39K
GV70: 29K
Corsair: 27K
XT4: 22K

Then you have the Model Y at 313K sales, but that's a whole separate ballgame.

 

Acura has always been a smaller player so this is not surprising and very much in line.

Their dealer footprint is much smaller than the others. Within 30 miles, I have 2 Lexus, 2 BMW, 2 Audi, 3 MB dealers. But only 1 Acura (and 1 Volvo) dealership. Considering how many powertrain options the XC60 has, I'd say Acura is doing way better than them.

Lack of hybrid has definitely hurt Acura overall. If they had one, they would probably be selling at least 50% more units but provided they can meet demand. Even now, it's not like my local dealer is sitting on tons of RDX. This is their current inventory:

ADX 29
Integra 18
MDX 51
RDX 4
TLX 11

IMO, NX is selling mainly because of the Lexus badge + only game in town for pure hybrid. It has so many negatives (RFT, excessive tech, overpriced, etc.). There seem to be a lot of disappointed owners in the Lexus forum. This will hurt the brand long term.

People are actually fed up of the garbage they're being fed, hence the Tesla sales numbers. People just want a simple car at a decent price, not a some overdesigned exterior with a nightclub interior which is where everyone seems to be headed these days.

 

I would not be surprised if the RSX is intended to replace the RDX as Acura's small SUV if they do actually intend to migrate to EV over time. Less incentive to pour R&D money into a whole new generation of RDX if the current one is still selling decent and the EV "sibling" is due out next year.

 

Oh I'm sure the RSX was intended to replace the RDX in the lineup, at least until the bottom fell out of bucket for the big push toward EVs and Acura was (once again) caught with the pants down. But by the time that happened, it was too late and Acura is (hopefully) now scrambling to figure out a 4th gen RDX. They're always seemingly in catchup mode, and as such, seems to be one or two steps behind where the market is at all times.

 

Whoever is doing strategy at Acura seems to be making all the wrong bets in terms of powertrain. Toyota/Lexus has nailed powertrains, but they chose to go yuck in terms of styling and controls.

 

I've been waiting for the 2026 model, hoping to see the touch pad turn into a touch monitor. That was the main reason I held off buying the last several months (that and waiting for my employee bonus). But what has now making me look closer at a GV70 or Lincoln Nautilus is that I feel Acura has given up on itself.

That they will be a no-show at the upcoming L.A. Auto Show tells me they have no faith in their products (as year-over year sales of the same models, but for one, continue to decline). Makes no sense to me as they had a display at last year's auto show. Nevertheless, while I don't think Acura will disappear anytime soon, the (lack of) faith they portray in their brand doesn't warrant me spending my money on their product.

 

Can’t really blame you. Acura is mailing it in these days. For whatever reason, the parent seems perfectly content to just keep Acura on life support.

 

I think there are changes happening in the industry in general--Porsche, Volvo, etc. all seem to be keeping models around much longer and making only tiny updates. Volvo just did a second update to the current gen XC60 which has been around since 2017.

They are dealing with a lot of challenges and uncertainties right now from geopolitical to regulations to labor, at the same time that auto loan delinquencies are near all time highs and used car market looks like it may be in big trouble. This may translate into a broader slowdown.

In the rest of the world (i.e. outside the US) most car makers are being eaten alive by Chinese brands.

 

Good points. But it seems that Acura can’t even get enough funding to put a freakin touchscreen in the RDX. That seems to be a red flag.

As for the broader market, I think that Tesla is eating everyone’s lunch. Their market penetration here in SoCal is insane, and it’s not hard to see why. What other car can match the Model Y in operating costs and performance per dollar spent? It’s almost at the point where a car buyer needs to find a reason NOT to buy one LOL.

 

The same is true here (Sacramento area) but I would imagine it's even more so in SoCal and even the Bay Area where leasing is more common and people want access to HOV. Things might change now with the expiration of the tax rebates since lease deals won't be as good. Still, if someone wants an EV, it would be very hard to pick anything other than a Tesla. Everyone else seems to lack a coherent strategy, they are expensive for what you get, the performance and efficiency are not as good, and they seem to be plagued with problems. I was recently researching ID.4 and EQB and both have nasty reports in their forums. ID.4 in particular there were several stories where the car randomly lunged forward in some cases causing a bad accident.

And then look at Tesla when it comes to design. Hardly any change since they first came out.

BTW, in most of the rest of the world, Tesla is hurting big time since they cannot compete on price with Chinese EVs.

 

I'm not sure Volvo is the greatest example, since they've always had long lifecycle for their cars. Most go for at least 9 years, sometimes longer. For instance, the P2 XC90 stuck around for 11 years from 2003 to 2014. The 240 lasted 18 years!

 

I don't think funding is the problem for Acura. It could be complacency. Even the Lexus GX460 went 10 years before being replaced by the GX550. But the last 2 years of the GX460, knowing its demise was two years away, Lexus gave a significant update to the interior. The only 'significant' change Acura has done in 7 years is give it a revised front end that few would notice from the previous year. Interior has been the same with the exception of changing the look of the seats. A touch screen may involve some (but not much) R&D money, but Acura can't even give the car full LEDs for the rear. The new Kia Sportage, if only it had slightly better contoured seats, is a better value than the current RDX feature-for-feature.

 

Acura updated the MDX infotainment, likely because that’s the best seller.

How about the Hyundai Tucson? Most reviewers seem to like it better than the Sportage. I’m seeing them all over the place. The Limited trim would seem to compete against the RDX.

 

Acura is on life support, right up there with Infiniti. Even the flagship MDX no longer has much to make it stand out while the price is pretty high.

 

Is Infiniti profitable as a brand? Are their dealers making money?

 

Wonder how long they will keep running the same power train thats been around since 2019

 

Does it really matter? The B48 which is BMW's mainstay 4 cylinder has been around since 2014.

 

Yes and yes but not heading in the right direction. And outside of the official data, I have a friend that works for them and he said they are still doing okay but it is beginning to get a little challenging keeping long-term customers, especially at lease turn in, as they don't have much updated to offer them and the customers feel as if they are jumping right back into the same vehicle.

And they are talking about bringing back the Q50: https://www.autonews.com/nissan/an-i...ered-q50-0821/

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a6...d-2027-manual/

 

Outside of being unclear about what the brand means (is it a performance brand, a premium brand, or a luxury brand?) budget is totally the biggest challenge - Honda pulled tonnes of R&D dollars to get caught up on EVs (and hybrids to a lesser extent) and had to starve the legacy platforms to do that. They were going to go straight from their ICE V6 to EVs for their large car platform and are only recently working on a hybrid powertrain to bridge the gap. Only recently have they pulled back (like others have) as EV adoption isn't taking off like they expected.

 

Bringing back the Q50 is clearly the wrong strategy. This is what happens once rot has set into an organization.

Acura is in way better shape, IMO.

 

It's clear that they were targeting performance. They chose the wrong power plant. IMO, they should have gone hybrid. In other words, they should have built the next gen of hybrid MDX as the Type S instead of the ICE Type S. But I think they are doing a lot of things right now (albeit slowly) -- like getting rid of the TLX, getting rid of the ZDX, putting a touchscreen in the MDX, working on the electric RSX. The Integra is OK (brings young first-time buyers to the brand) but I think the ADX is a mistake.

 

Why is the ADX a mistake? Acura lacks R&D money, and the ADX is a cheap way to add a new model to the lineup (in a very hot market segment). It's a lightly glammed up HRV using existing hardware, and that's way cheaper than trying to do something more bespoke.

Cars like the TLX was a mistake. Dying market segment, subpar performance, questionable value, and high development costs.

 

I think they did a bad job with it. Aside from it missing SH-AWD, I sat in one and didn't like the seating position. The car is almost as big as the RDX from outside yet feels very cramped on the inside. I couldn't adjust the seat to a comfortable position and I'm only 5'10".

 

Interesting, I thought from an interior space perspective it felt alright. Nothing like the coffin TLX.

I agree it's kind of annoying that they made the car half a foot longer than the HRV purely for aesthetic purposes; front and rear legroom for the ADX is identical to that of the HRV. That being said, it's still at the top of the class in combined legroom, bearing in mind that it competes in the subcompact crossover segment (pricewise, at least). Again, it's one of those things where increasing the front and rear overhangs is relatively cheap, and allows the car to appeal to buyers who want to feel like they're getting more for their money's worth (i.e. cheaper than the competition for a car a half class size larger). That's always kind of been Acura's M.O.; tweener cars.

In that same vein, I think a relatively low-cost option for the 4G RDX would be to base it off the new Honda Passport. The RDX needs to grow because the ADX is encroaching on its size, and the Passport has been very well received, which makes it already a great starting point. Let's be honest, nobody buys crossovers for their sportyness, but plenty of buyers buy them for the "off-road" vibes, so why not lean into that aspect rather than the "performance" bit, which is frankly absurd considering the RDX only has a base powertrain and nothing even remotely performance-oriented. Lux up the interior, soften the design a bit, add more sound deadening, option in the B&O audio system, and throw some more tech goodies and it could be a hit. If only Honda could get their large platform hybrid powertrain up and running...

 

The B48 and ZF 8AT combo is sublime.

 

In a competitive car market, especially luxury segment, you have to keep innovating powertrain. 7 years is kind of long. It might be a good thing in terms of reliability, but I think people expect innovation more

 

Because of lack of clarity with future in terms of EV, I think everyone has more or less stalled on developing new ICE powertrains. Power-wise the RDX is fine. It falls short in the MPG area, but that has never been Honda's strength short of going hybrid. I think the transmission could use more of an improvement here.

 

Agree with the comment on the transmission. The way it’s currently programmed, it feels too slow off the line.

 

I think the RDX content and handing is the best for my money. Sure there are faster, more gimmicks, sound systems, bigger information displays, better design (in the eye) for more money. Enjoy the RDX or find something more for your budget. Given the chaos in the automobile market (no politics) in my opinion availablity is going to be boring. EV or no EV, PHEV, ICE the gamble on EV is embarrassing for Ford, GM and Stellantis trying to define their market which is hindered by pricing and interest rates.

 

I am not sure the touch screen conversion is going to make a huge difference. Last December I traded my RDX in for a Tacoma which has a 14" Touch screen. I thought it would be great, but although I do like it, I can see how the RDX pad does have better control for the driver while driving the car, which I drove for 7 years. I find that while I am driving when I go to use the touch screen, say to touch an icon, your hand is out suspended and you have to aim your finger for an icon while you are driving. If there are many small icons it's not easy as your arm is moving up and down with the vehicle, even if it's not a bumpy road.

The precision I got used to with my 19 and 22 RDX's was much easier to aim for an icon once I got used to it. The same goes for swiping a map to move it. With the RDX your arm/hand is comfortable, supported, and your fingers have control of where the 'cursor' is going. When your arm is suspended in the air, again, swiping onto a screen that is not that close to you is not as comfortable or precise.

I have to say, I did not mind the touch pad one bit. Again, once I got used to it. Kept the screen cleaner as well.

Of course, your results may vary

 

Agreed and I personally don't find myself interacting with the screen all that much. I use CarPlay and Siri works great for Music changes or navigation destinations.

 

I also find the touchpad easy to use, and I like the snappy system response. The problem is that the touchpad works differently when you’re using CarPlay or Android Auto. From a marketing perspective, the touchpad is a problem because buyers want a touchscreen. That’s why Lexus made the switch.

It would be interesting to know how many more RDXs would be sold if a touchscreen was installed.

 

I don't think touchscreen by itself is going to be a gamechanger, but it would be a welcome improvement. However, it does have to be executed well. There are ways to execute a touchscreen poorly (like the VW ID.4 I test drove).

BMW's iDrive was probably the best non-touchscreen interface I have used.

Many car makers have implemented touchscreen infotainment quite well. Tesla of course has done it the best, but from what I gather most are happy with what Lexus has done.

The RDX touchpad is acceptable but can get very frustrating. For example, when I'm using Apple Carplay, Apple Maps will show speed checks and at the same time will ask me to confirm if the speed check is still there. But by the time I'm able to get the touchpad to point to the speedcheck confirm button, I will have passed the speed check point and it will be too late. I really have to hunt when trying to click alternative routes in Maps on CarPlay. It is virtually impossible for me to enter text input, actually I find it dangerous to even attempt it.

 

Its about aesthetics between the Tucson and Sportage. Aesthetically, the Sportage matches up better with the RDX. The more I compare it with the RDX, you have to ask yourself whether spending an additional $12,000+ for the Acura nameplate (like for like) is worth it?! As it is, most people in this segment buy more car then they can afford (which is why more people lease vs buy - I'm looking to buy). And with the RDX, is southern California car insurance would be at least 50% costlier then a Sportage or Tucson.

Lastly, a I type this I am embarrassed for Acura. I'm comparing two cars marketed to two different demographics. Yet the Kia is only in the conversation because of the lack of respect Acura has shown for the RDX as it hass aged.