Unobtanium

Looks like some things have improved in 2022 that maybe don't show up on spec sheets.

If you hate suspense, just skip to 19:40.

russianDude

Doubt 0-60 improved, the results vary on many factors including the driver skills.

Unobtanium

He tq braked it to 2K and full send. C&D and MT were a full half second slower. I doubt this guy is just that much of a savant in an automatic AWD vehicle.

bdawwg

I can't stop wishing for 4sec. everytime, RDX is fun, but miss having an overpowered car

supafamous

A few reviews (Alex on Autos for one) also got sub-6s 0-60 back in 2019 but typical reviews had it around mid-6s. To get down there comes down to launching in a way that you wouldn't normally like brake torquing so the realistic number is the 5-60 time which a few testers now do. Most of those show it around 7s or so which is about a half sec slower than its best competition (X3, Q5).

leomio2.0

The RDX only allows you to brake torque it to 2k. Redline proved he's an Acura shill with his TLX-S videos doing a staged race against an S4 where he had his camera guy let off on the throttle to let the TLX-S win and 0-60 times that nobody else in the industry could come close to. He should moonlight as an Acura salesman. That being said, no, C&D and MT know perfectly well how to squeeze out every tenth in a 0-60 test.

leomio2.0

The RDX doesn't build boost while brake torquing, so it doesn't do a whole lot. Do it in your RDX (I've done it plenty of times in mine) and the results are less than inspiring. Acura absolutely programmed in some nannies to protect the drivetrain.

russianDude

They need to do exact same test in 2019-21, otherwise I am not sure how they can claim it got better.

Unobtanium

So, are you saying his times are not valid in this video? Why? His times are similar to what I've gotten when I've tested the same vehicles he does, so he has a bit of credibility with me, anyway. He tested the CX5 turbo at 6.7 seconds, I got 6.8. He tested the Lexus RX450H+ at 6.0X and I got 5.75S from a RAV4 Prime which is a hair lighter (and he spun a tiny bit in the Lexus, when I did that in the Prime, I matched his 6.0X). So his times are literally right on top of the numbers I get in my own testing. As you can imagine, it makes me believe the guy's data is legit enough for ME.

russianDude

yeah, but where is the proof that this “improvement” is only in 2022

fiatlux

He also tested the TLX Type S at 4.7s on a non-prepped surface and claimed it beat the S4 in a drag race…

Baldeagle

Clearly, it was a cold day. There is a reason all magazines altitude adjust their times. Was the cold air enough to reduce a 0-60 time from 6.6s to 5.7s? Not sure. He could have also been going downhill very slightly.

leomio2.0

So you have equipment to test 0-60 data. Go out and test your own RDX. Why are you referencing a video instead? I already explained why I don't trust his numbers.

Unobtanium

Gotta break it in first. Got it last week in the middle of a snow storm.

Unobtanium

C&D got 4.9, and its a low horsepower AWD car. Surface prep isnt a factor. C&d also tested in July. Hot. Dunno when he got his 4.7. As to the drag race, Sam Car Legion shows an RDX 2021 killing an Audi Q5 2021 over and over. Shouldn't happen...but there it is. Over. And over. And over. And some more, lol! How? I dunno. But it did.

amcobra

Oops did not realized this is a racing forum, after I signed up after purchasing my RDX . All OK I had my time at the 1/4 mile track and it was always a blast

sonyfever

Wait, this has to be the 2G TLX forum?

fiatlux

Are you really trying to use Sam as a reference point to establish credibility? Let me guess, Sam was the one driving the Q5 wasn’t he? You know, there’s a reason why he doesn’t show the Dragy numbers. Dude can’t drive if his life depended on it.

dblwishbone

Indeed; SUV's are not meant for hooning. If you want that you are welcome to spend 2x as much on a comparable BMW with rock hard suspension and a phony M badge.

Unobtanium

I guess this leads to the question...why is an rdx base model better than a crv? Seems wasteful.

leomio2.0

Ah. How many miles do you have? If memory serves right, Acura themselves say the break-in is only 600 miles and then you can let her rip. Also, what are you using? dragy?

He tested it right around the same time C&D did. He released the first Type-S video in May '21 and the second in July '21.

As for the Q5 v RDX, I just watched the video ... as fiatlux pointed out, Sam is notorious for being a terrible driver. He leaves late on every single run.

I will say, I was kind of skeptical of C&D's numbers for the RDX. Even MotorTrend, which usually runs a couple tenths slower than C&D (likely due to no 1ft rollout) ran a quicker time with their RDX. Maybe somebody filled it with 87 rather than 91 by mistake, lol.

If there was a CR-V trim with the same 2.0T/10sp powertrain as the RDX, that would be in my garage rather than the RDX. Heck, if I was in the market for a sedan, I'd take the 2.0T Accord over the TLX between the two. Different strokes.

mathnerd88

lol..if you got it last week, don't claim your combined mpg is 24-25 only after having it for a week and then adamantly refute others claim when their MPG's are lower after years of using the vehicle. When I reset my battery, my combined MPG was that high too. I waited a couple more weeks and it settled down to 20. As you said, your car hasn't even been broken in yet.

Even on the youtube video, he said he got 17 mpg in the city and 23 on the highway (which he found disappointing.) That sounds way more accurate and on par with what everyone else is saying on here. Even my MDX which uses a V6 gets 17mpg compared to my RDX which gets 20. That's not much different for a heavier 7 seater vehicle running a V6 with more hp.

Also, you remind me of me when I bought the car 3-4 years ago. When I bought the RDX, I kept defending how great it was despite so many others annoyed and angry with Acura due to so many issues with their RDX. I tolerated the issues it had at the time because it had much newer tech than the other vehicle I traded it in for (Infiniti G37x) Oh my how the tables have turned for me. I can't wait to get rid of the RDX. I was able to test drive the 2022 RDX after bringing my car in for warranty service (again) and I felt that my older one was actually quicker than the newer models. My guess was that because the battery was reset, that the engine mapping was reset so the pedal was more sensitive.

I'm pretty sure the RDX infotainment system definitely improved significantly. My MDX was way more stable than the RDX. However, in terms of the drivetrain and power? Most definitely not.

While I do like the new RDX bumper because it's similar to the MDX, I hate how the side mirrors look on the RDX. They could've redesigned them to look more sleek and similar to the MDX, but they kept the old rounded shape with a turn signal that spans the whole mirror.

ELIN

Amateur Dragy runs on the 2.0 TLX got slightly higher than 6 sec. A heavier RDX with the same engine isn’t going to be quicker with the same driver.

Unobtanium

Why? The 1.5 saves fuel and it's not about speed, it's just a commuter SUV, ya? That was my point. A lot of people wasted money on useless horsepower and handling, it seems.

Unobtanium

I'm honestly expecting mid 6's. This thing obviously makes its beans in 3rd gear and above, just by feel.

Texasrdx21

Doesn't really matter in the real world, as its a sporty SUV - not a sports SUV. Just mash your foot to the floor in any mode (except snow mode obviously) and mid-6's constantly 0-60. Fast enough to get out of its way if needed, but plan ahead - as these are not Brembo brakes and a little too tall. More you mash that go pedal, more you'll see mpg in the low teens.

For comparison - A Ford Mustang Mach E GT @3.7 seconds or even a VW ID 4 AWD @ 5.7 seconds.

Unobtanium

Its fast enough and handles well enough to entertain me, and that's what matters. Id never own a pure EV. I did hand calculate the last 200 miles. 23.3mpg. Just like the dash said. Including a bit of hooning, lol

Baldeagle

Even with a very short first gear ratio, I still feel turbo lag off the line, which obviously hurts the launch and the 0-60 time. Compared to other N/A cars I’ve driven that were in the mid-six second range to 60 mph, I think my RDX has better passing power and better acceleration on a highway ramp. That is where I typically floor my car and use my power.

Not sure if this next anecdote is relevant, but I would regularly take my old Accord Coupe (stock V6-6MT) to the dragstrip. A normal run was a 2.4s 60’ time with a 14.0s quarter at 102.5 mph. A few times I managed a 2.1s 60’ time with a 13.7s quarter at 101 mph. The better launch did not improve the acceleration once off the line. It only lowered the ET. The car was not “faster.” My point is if one publication somehow managed a better launch that resulted in a better 0-60 time, does it matter if the car still pulled the same on road? Too bad these publications/videos don’t show quarter mile trap speed. That would be a far better indication of power.

I mentioned altitude adjusting in a previous post. Altitude adjusting is a MAJOR component of published times. For every 6°F decrease in temperature, air density increases by about 1%. Car magazines adjust all their times to a certain temp and barometric air pressure for a fair comparison. Motor Trend adjusts to 72°F. Car and Driver adjusts to 60°F.

https://www.caranddriver.com/feature...-we-test-cars/

“Ambient weather conditions—we record absolute barometric pressure and wet- and dry-bulb temperatures trackside—determine how much power an engine makes. Because of that, we also correct acceleration results to 60 degrees Fahrenheit at sea level.”

Car and Driver posts better acceleration times than Motor Trend because of how they adjust them to a colder temp. They don’t drive their cars any better. They fudge their numbers more.

On the OP's video, it stated the temperature outside was 28°F. Compared to 75°F, air at 28°F is about 8% more dense. That equates to 8% more power. So instead of 272hp at 75°F, at 28°F that RDX produced closer to 293hp. Will an extra 20 hp reduce a 0-60 time by almost one full second in a 4,000 pound car? Probably not, but it certainly makes the water muddy and greatly reduces the significance we can place on those performance figures. If you remove rollout times from the equation, it becomes even less meaningful.

fiatlux

This is why I’m a big fan of the 5-60 times that C&D publishes. It eliminates the launch component, and is much more representative of how most people accelerate in the real world. 99% of the time when people out the pedal to the floor, I bet they are not using LC or brake torquing.

ross7777

Agreed. The 2022 in Sport is plenty fast for me. Not sure why people care so much about 0-60 in an SUV but to each their own.

fiatlux

The party line is that when the numbers are good, 0-60 matters, but when the numbers are bad, 0-60 doesn’t matter.

JB in AZ

When it takes an electronic device to determine the difference between two cars' 0-60 times, who cares? 6.7 6.4 Really? Do we all know how short a second is to begin with?

If the car has enough acceleration to let me feel safe when passing, it is fine with me.

Texasrdx21

You will have very limited pure ICE options in the next 5-7 years, given all gov't regs in the USA, EU and Canada are moving that way and most mfg are moving a lot of engineering resources to EV.

bdawwg

I drove a Golf R prior to an RDX. I was starting to get bored with the Golf R. I find the RDX handling to be more fun since its so big. RDX acceleration is underwhelming, but not terrible. I'm hoping a Type S brings a big improvement, but the BMW X3 M is sub 4 sec, which seems hard to beat.

Funz51

Ktune it.

leomio2.0

I think you're jumping the gun a little. Every car reviewer is screaming, "the sky is falling!" ... and yes, automakers are definitely pushing heavily into EV, but I still think we're a ways off before EVs take the majority of the line-up. I'm not against it, but humans are creatures of habit. I think the change will be a lot more incremental. I know Honda announced they want to stop all production of ICE vehicles by 2040, but even that is a stretch IMO. I could be completely wrong, but I just don't see it.


This episode aired in 2009. Not only is Aston Martin unveiling another new V12 Vantage, but we have Hellcat everythings. The demise of the ICE is coming, I just don't think it's coming anywhere remotely as quickly as some people believe.

The RDX handles well when you're able to take advantage of the SH-AWD (ie: on throttle), but handling when off throttle isn't exactly confidence inspiring. You can't completely beat physics. As for a prospective Type-S, if they keep using the same 3.0T as in the TLX and MDX without adding some hybridization to help acceleration, it's not going to break a 5 sec sprint to 60. It won't be able to keep up with an X3 M40i, let alone an actual X3M. Just like the TLX-S though, people will flock to the reasoning that it is going to be cheaper to purchase and purportedly cheaper to maintain in the long-run.

Have you done any dragy runs after tuning the car? Curious what a Stage 2 (and other mods) will do to help performance.

bdawwg

Don't mind if I do, might just order one now.

bdawwg

Ah, I just can't pull the trigger yet. Already experiencing gas shock coming from the Golf, I degraded down to 87 to get by. US gas stores are at over a decade low and we're just getting into the high demand season. $130/barrel seems inevitable and $150+/barrel oil is not out of the question. Problem is, hard to see an end in sight

russianDude

So you look at current gas price and based on that decide which car to buy? Good luck with that approach

bdawwg

are you serious? go be miserable somewhere else промиті мізки російські соціопати