When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
That looks just like the dial and vent for the back seat of my TL. If so...the center scroll just opens or closes the flue. The vents only direct where the air flow is going. No thermostat.
I’m sure the RDX system is better than that. Maybe a rear thermostat adjustment up front?
Let me be clear: The new RDX looks like a real winner to me.
But when shopping for a new vehicle it can be easy to be seduced by the positive points to and miss some negative points.
Some people have more experience and/or are better at noticing small details when test driving a vehicle.
Some people will have the chance to drive it for a longer ride.
The point of this thread is not to ask for more colors or for a 6 cyl. engine.
Any negative points you noticed?
I think it could be an interesting conversation.
Well we don't know yet but price. I am sure with A-SPEC now available and the car getting a huge upgrade Acura will not be shy pushing this to $50K fully loaded. Heck the new QX50 fully optioned out basically hits $60K. Other than that yeah well done Acura, this thing will easily sell 50k units annually.
So apparently the 360 degree camera is pretty low res.
Also, Android Auto will NOT be ready at launch, but rather sometime later in '18 via either an over the air upgrade or a trip to the dealership. And, it may not use the same 1:1 mapping on the touchpad.
1) No power tilt/telescope steering wheel linked with seat memory
2) No power folding mirrors (Canda looks like they will have it)
3) No mention of wireless charging (from an unverified source, will be added next year)
4) Premium fuel only ( If this is the same engine from the honda accord 2.0t, why premium? honda uses regular. If im going to use premium then it better be a BMW M class performance. RDX has no business using premium gas but lets see the data on performance when published before coming to conclusion here.
5) Pricing / performance compared to competitors ( This is speculation but I'm sensing this RDX will be over-priced and with so much competition I dont think they offer enough. I.E. Volvo, BMW, Lexus, etc.)
6) Voice commands extremely buggy. Example, navigation could not find a starbucks the first attempt but found it on second attempt. Can say "take me home" but cannot say "take me to nearest starbucks". Feels rushed, unpolished -- taken from another unverified source
7) As expected, first year of design often brings a list of headaches for owners
4 and 5 are my biggest concerns currently. We shall see very soon.
- No power tilt/telescope steering wheel linked with seat memory
- No power folding mirrors
- No mention of wireless charging
- No spare tire
- Wheels on the Advanced trim level
- Possibly a lack of an automatic parking brake feature that engages the parking brake when shifting to "park".
Spare tire will be included in the AWD models (except for A-Spec), and will probably be available as an add on for the FWD.
There isn't a wireless charging pad, my guess is Acura's logic is most people will want to use the CarPlay and Android Auto (whenever it comes out) and as of now you're phone has to be plugged in to use those which will charge it as well.
1) No power tilt/telescope steering wheel linked with seat memory
2) No power folding mirrors (Canda looks like they will have it)
3) No mention of wireless charging (from an unverified source, will be added next year)
4) Premium fuel only ( If this is the same engine from the honda accord 2.0t, why premium? honda uses regular. If im going to use premium then it better be a BMW M class performance. RDX has no business using premium gas but lets see the data on performance when published before coming to conclusion here.
5) Pricing / performance compared to competitors ( This is speculation but I'm sensing this RDX will be over-priced and with so much competition I dont think they offer enough. I.E. Volvo, BMW, Lexus, etc.)
6) Voice commands extremely buggy. Example, navigation could not find a starbucks the first attempt but found it on second attempt. Can say "take me home" but cannot say "take me to nearest starbucks". Feels rushed, unpolished -- taken from another unverified source
7) As expected, first year of design often brings a list of headaches for owners
4 and 5 are my biggest concerns currently. We shall see very soon.
Regarding the premium fuel, I highly doubt there is legitimate reason why they are recommending it and you should be just fine with regular. Most likely the Acura reasoning is "It's a luxury car so it needs premium fuel".
Regarding the premium fuel, I highly doubt there is legitimate reason why they are recommending it and you should be just fine with regular. Most likely the Acura reasoning is "It's a luxury car so it needs premium fuel".
It'll be fine but you won't get the performance you're paying for, your choice.
The key word is "recommended" fuel. Both RDX 2019 and Civic Type-R recommend premium and will only achieve the published engine performance numbers using the recommended fuel. Lower grade fuel will reduce power and MPG as a result because the engine can't extract as much energy from the same fuel volume due to lower resistance to detonation with lower octane fuel.
Again, Mazda calibrated the 2.5T for 87-93 octane with published power results that vary accordingly. the torque does not change in that case. On a steady trip I would prefer 87, for local commute would like the power.
I am convinced my 2.0T Sport Accord runs just fine on 87 with 252 HP, but a full tank of premium "feels" faster. I do not own a dynamometer Seat of pants.
Most likely Acura calibrated more toward premium to obtain the higher power and torque ratings, but 87 will work especially on trips.
Recommendation from informed (PHD + 25 yrs experience) consultant in energy-related industries:
1. Go with recommended octane on top tier gasoline. Exceeding recommended rating will not result in any significant benefit on top tier brands. Some non - top tier reduce beneficial additives in their regular grades.
2. Avoid all ethanol blended fuel.
3. Use full synthetic oils at recommended viscosity.
Again, Mazda calibrated the 2.5T for 87-93 octane with published power results that vary accordingly. the torque does not change in that case. On a steady trip I would prefer 87, for local commute would like the power.
I am convinced my 2.0T Sport Accord runs just fine on 87 with 252 HP, but a full tank of premium "feels" faster. I do not own a dynamometer Seat of pants.
Most likely Acura calibrated more toward premium to obtain the higher power and torque ratings, but 87 will work especially on trips.
this is is my view. Engine management will adjust timing in favor of more ‘power’ for higher octane. I bet the real numbers are the same for the Accord on regular and the RDX on regular, and the reverse is true too. So you can load up with regular when the wife takes it grocery getting or clothes shopping, and you can use premium for canyon cutting or long distance tripping.
Recommendation from informed (PHD + 25 yrs experience) consultant in energy-related industries:
1. Go with recommended octane on top tier gasoline. Exceeding recommended rating will not result in any significant benefit on top tier brands. Some non - top tier reduce beneficial additives in their regular grades.
2. Avoid all ethanol blended fuel.
3. Use full synthetic oils at recommended viscosity.
I don't know about #2, all you can get in CA is ethanol blended fuel. There are a lot of cars in CA and I've never heard of a large number of cars having problems because of it.
this is is my view. Engine management will adjust timing in favor of more ‘power’ for higher octane. I bet the real numbers are the same for the Accord on regular and the RDX on regular, and the reverse is true too. So you can load up with regular when the wife takes it grocery getting or clothes shopping, and you can use premium for canyon cutting or long distance tripping.
Engines don't usually take advantage of higher grade fuels than they have been tuned for. They will "detune" when they detect lower octane than recommended for self preservation reasons but won't "supertune" when octane exceeds the recommended level. Paying for higher octane than recommended is usually a waste of money.
I don't know about #2, all you can get in CA is ethanol blended fuel. There are a lot of cars in CA and I've never heard of a large number of cars having problems because of it.
Yes it can be tough depending on where you live but avoid whenever possible to achieve optimum performance. Ethanol has a lower energy content than fossil fuels so it delivers less power when burned. Lower power leads to higher fuel consumption or lower MPG. Ethanol has some advantages over fossil fuels but performance is not one of them.
Recommended means you will need the recommended fuel to achieve such power level. You can run regular in the Civic Type R or RDX, but you will not be getting 306hp or 272hp. For the Accord, the recommended fuel is 87, and with 87 octane, you will get 252hp as published.
The CTR engine is K20C1 somewhat different than the K20C4 in the Accord and RDX and here are some key differences
- CTR uses a bigger turbo
- Accord has a secondary balancer shaft
- CTR has higher-flow fuel injectors
Not sure if this is a negative point, but, everyone is talking fuel it seems. My Acura guy was in Chicago all day to drive an Advance, and it's competition.
Acura says fuel to use is...87 to 91. But, as I've seen published by many manufacturers and probably done by Acura....the 272 hp rating probably came with them running 91 octane.
Apparently...and I'm still having him do more investigating....the Accessories list does NOT show a "spare tire kit' for the Sh-Awd, A-Spec...and to me that sucks! But, if that's for sure, then we figure all the
pieces can be bought from parts as listed for the Advance and the other Sh-Awd models that come std. with the spare tire.
He drove the QX50...with the new "variable compression ratio engine"....and in his words and others there...."it's trash!" Low on hp, and just does not hold a candle to the RDX. And, it's more expensive...well there were
window stickers on the completion...but, NOT on the RDX. But, the QX50 can hit $50K
They were able to look over the A-Spec, but, did not drive it. He said the interior on it is amazing. MUCH better than the QX50.
I read on some thread here about the size of the exhaust tips of the A-Spec compared to the other RDX's. He said...they are definitely larger...as pics show, and look much better.
That's it for now. Apparently my dealer's first "drop of new RDX's" should be next Thurs, 2 days after Acura's announcement of the pricing, etc. I guess the RDX's are sitting in a lot in the Denver area.
I don't know about #2, all you can get in CA is ethanol blended fuel. There are a lot of cars in CA and I've never heard of a large number of cars having problems because of it.
Only available in CA in handful of stations....primarily racing fuel.
Limited availability in states where corn/ethanol lobby owns the politicians (i.g. Iowa, Illinois)...oops, I mean accept huge campaign contributions that of course don't impact their voting. Follow the Money.
See website: Pure-Gas.org
Also google "problems associated with using ethanol-blend gas"...
Even Al Gore no longer supports corn ethanol. Most states now allow customers to choose gas they prefer.
I pay a premium to buy E0 (ethanol zero) gas, while my tax dollars subsidize ethanol.
And so it goes.
Gasoline with ethanol is not market driven-if it were you would not be able to find it. The amount of corn produced fuel is dictated by the government. Yes, highly subsidized and much less energy content than pure gasoline. I wonder what we have saved by all this.
The government buys E85 vehicles and then forces employees to go out of way to purchase this product.
Sorry for the diversion on the subsidized corn fuel industry. RDX performance red and parchment interior come on down!
Recommended means you will need the recommended fuel to achieve such power level. You can run regular in the Civic Type R or RDX, but you will not be getting 306hp or 272hp. For the Accord, the recommended fuel is 87, and with 87 octane, you will get 252hp as published.
The CTR engine is K20C1 somewhat different than the K20C4 in the Accord and RDX and here are some key differences
- CTR uses a bigger turbo
- Accord has a secondary balancer shaft
- CTR has higher-flow fuel injectors
I think that pretty much only the block is the same. Lots of different bits on the CTR and Accord, while I think the Accord and RDX are mechanically the same.
I'm not saying that non-ethanol gas is not good, I would use it if it was conveniently available here. It's not though so I can't worry about it and while it might lower mpg a bit, I don't believe it causes other problems.
In looking at pics and videos, one of the things I’m curious about is the comfort of suspending your arm in air (to avoid drink cups in the cup holder) while navigating the touch pad. There’s a resting place for your wrist; but, I can’t help but wonder if I would have to hold my Starbucks grande and steer with my left hand all while operating the touchpad with my right. I’m sure the engineers thought about this, so possibly my visual observation is unfounded...but, I do plan to bring a “carry on” when the tests drives are finally avaiable to the public. Any thoughts?
This is an issue. Depending on the size of your arm and cup/bottle in the cup holder. We found ourselves trying to reach over and to the side of the water bottle to manipulate the touchpad. I had that feeling "did someone really engineered this". I can see situations where a hot cup of coffee could be knocked accidentally over trying to use the touchpad while driving. This is the worst design I've seen so far with the RDX.
This is an issue. Depending on the size of your arm and cup/bottle in the cup holder. We found ourselves trying to reach over and to the side of the water bottle to manipulate the touchpad. I had that feeling "did someone really engineered this". I can see situations where a hot cup of coffee could be knocked accidentally over trying to use the touchpad while driving. This is the worst design I've seen so far with the RDX.
I thought the cup holders were on the passenger side of the center console to allow for less obstructed access of the driver's arm to the touchpad? I guess it depends on how far toward the side the cups/bottles are. I looked for pictures, but everything I found has the cover closed.
I thought the cup holders were on the passenger side of the center console to allow for less obstructed access of the driver's arm to the touchpad? I guess it depends on how far toward the side the cups/bottles are. I looked for pictures, but everything I found has the cover closed.
Yes, it is on the passenger side. However, those of us with massive, Popeye forearms are always worried.
This is an issue. Depending on the size of your arm and cup/bottle in the cup holder. We found ourselves trying to reach over and to the side of the water bottle to manipulate the touchpad. I had that feeling "did someone really engineered this". I can see situations where a hot cup of coffee could be knocked accidentally over trying to use the touchpad while driving. This is the worst design I've seen so far with the RDX.
windycitycy (in a previous post in this rhread) posted a picture of a close up. I attempted to copy/paste but I either don’t know how or don’t have that privilege yet. Although the cup holders are to the right side of the opening...I can still see my thin arms having to angle over to retrieve a cup since the wrist pad for the touchpad sticks up...when I finally get to test it (armed with a prop), I’ll know for sure...but still of concern. Has anyone who has test driven taken a water bottle along to check it out? Since I like to stay hydrated in our Texas heat...it is on my “preferred” list in an auto. Especially if I’m paying upwards of 50k. On a side note...hope it looks better in person, but the piping is flat ugly in the pics (white piping on black...REALLY?)
Yes, it is on the passenger side. However, those of us with massive, Popeye forearms are always worried.
Good laugh! Bravo! I tend to carry larger bottles with sport caps (tend to be taller). I don't believe the smaller type bottles will have any impact. Need more testing when im actually driving car especially at night-time.
Larger type bottles or cups will be a hindrance especially selecting right side options of touchpad.
Thanks MTD. I’d use both��. I was just going over the specs (http://techinfo.honda.com/Rjanisis/p...BTJB1818OM.PDF) in the manual was posted by EE4Life and it does not mention a multi programmable drivers seat. Is it just a given these days? ( My 2002 and 2004 Acura TL both had this feature).
Thanks MTD. I’d use both��. I was just going over the specs (http://techinfo.honda.com/Rjanisis/p...BTJB1818OM.PDF) in the manual was posted by EE4Life and it does not mention a multi programmable drivers seat. Is it just a given these days? ( My 2002 and 2004 Acura TL both had this feature).
Is the stored position associated with the key, or just the car? We will eventually find out, but I am most curious as to whether seat and other settings follow the key, like it does in my BMW, or just the car, like it does in a Honda.
Is the stored position associated with the key, or just the car? We will eventually find out, but I am most curious as to whether seat and other settings follow the key, like it does in my BMW, or just the car, like it does in a Honda.
I can't take credit for this pic I saw online here, but I'm kind of surprised no one has mentioned the fact that Acura is using basically the same wheels (I guess it's on the base model) for the all-new 2019 RDX that they have used since 2013. It just strikes me as kind of strange that the new body is plopped on top of old wheels. It sounds like they are going to offer 19 and 20 inch wheel options as well depending on trim level, but to me the 18's really look out of place considering everything else on the vehicle has been redone.
Seat of pants. 
