Volvo XC40 vs 2019 RDX?
#1
Racer
Thread Starter
Volvo XC40 vs 2019 RDX?
Anyone else in a similar situation? I'm considering either or....the RDX is most likely going to be the one I shoot for, but the XC40 is also a very nice offering.
I really do like the design and style of the XC40. It's not as peppy at just 240HP, but maybe it has less weight? Big issue is that this is the 1st generation of the platform. Acura RDX is now 3rd gen.
Anyways, anyone else considering the XC40 as well?
I really do like the design and style of the XC40. It's not as peppy at just 240HP, but maybe it has less weight? Big issue is that this is the 1st generation of the platform. Acura RDX is now 3rd gen.
Anyways, anyone else considering the XC40 as well?
#2
I am in somewhat similar position. My wife and I looking to go smaller from our current MDX and at the top of the list is the new RDX (I owned a 13). Other cars on our potential list include XC60 (XC40 seems a little too small for us), Q5, maybe X3.
Looking to test drive all of the above in next month.
Looking to test drive all of the above in next month.
#5
I am considering BMW X3, Volvo xc40 / xc60 and now the RDX 2019.
- I really liked driving the Volvo, its definitely fun however cargo room is an issue so if i decided on the Volvo, would probably be xc60.
- RDX (not drive tested yet) only comes in 1 engine option currently. I really don't need that power. The packages seem odd to me. A-spec is the choice for me but I can not get options I want. Dealer accessories always was bad experience for me in the past.
- BMW - really solid feeling, nothing rattles in that car period. Quiet and refine. Price is +++ over others however
The decision process is harder than ever. These SUV's do a lot of things well. My advice is to make a list of importance to you and narrow it down
I'll update more on this later after my decision
- I really liked driving the Volvo, its definitely fun however cargo room is an issue so if i decided on the Volvo, would probably be xc60.
- RDX (not drive tested yet) only comes in 1 engine option currently. I really don't need that power. The packages seem odd to me. A-spec is the choice for me but I can not get options I want. Dealer accessories always was bad experience for me in the past.
- BMW - really solid feeling, nothing rattles in that car period. Quiet and refine. Price is +++ over others however
The decision process is harder than ever. These SUV's do a lot of things well. My advice is to make a list of importance to you and narrow it down
I'll update more on this later after my decision
#6
Seriously looking at the XC40. The smaller size is a plus for us. It has all the bells and whistles and I never used ventilated seats when I had them. Do like the power folding mirrors and the touch screen. Still need to drive the RDX. Was very impressed with ride quality in the Volvo compared to current Lexus NX.
#7
CPO's are where the value is when buying a Volvo. Let somebody else suffer the massive depreciation, and enjoy the extended warranty in the process. I was quoted $51k US on a loaded 7k-mile T6 with an original MSRP of $64k+, and I hadn't even started negotiating. Just be sure to check the Carfax. It seems when Volvos go bad, they go bad in a big way.
Trending Topics
#8
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,521
Received 845 Likes
on
526 Posts
I think there's a pretty big difference size wise between the two:
XC40:
WHEELBASE: 106.4 in
LENGTH: 174.2 in
WIDTH: 73.0 in HEIGHT: 65.0 in
PASSENGER VOLUME: 95 cu ft
CARGO VOLUME: 21 cu ft
RDX
WHEELBASE: 108.3 in
LENGTH: 186.8 in
WIDTH: 74.8 in HEIGHT: 65.7 in
PASSENGER VOLUME: 105 cu ft
CARGO VOLUME: 30 cu ft
I personally would find the XC40 to be too small coming from a 1g RDX. It depends so much on whether size is important to you or not.
XC40:
WHEELBASE: 106.4 in
LENGTH: 174.2 in
WIDTH: 73.0 in HEIGHT: 65.0 in
PASSENGER VOLUME: 95 cu ft
CARGO VOLUME: 21 cu ft
RDX
WHEELBASE: 108.3 in
LENGTH: 186.8 in
WIDTH: 74.8 in HEIGHT: 65.7 in
PASSENGER VOLUME: 105 cu ft
CARGO VOLUME: 30 cu ft
I personally would find the XC40 to be too small coming from a 1g RDX. It depends so much on whether size is important to you or not.
#9
Racer
Thread Starter
I think there's a pretty big difference size wise between the two:
XC40:
WHEELBASE: 106.4 in
LENGTH: 174.2 in
WIDTH: 73.0 in HEIGHT: 65.0 in
PASSENGER VOLUME: 95 cu ft
CARGO VOLUME: 21 cu ft
RDX
WHEELBASE: 108.3 in
LENGTH: 186.8 in
WIDTH: 74.8 in HEIGHT: 65.7 in
PASSENGER VOLUME: 105 cu ft
CARGO VOLUME: 30 cu ft
I personally would find the XC40 to be too small coming from a 1g RDX. It depends so much on whether size is important to you or not.
XC40:
WHEELBASE: 106.4 in
LENGTH: 174.2 in
WIDTH: 73.0 in HEIGHT: 65.0 in
PASSENGER VOLUME: 95 cu ft
CARGO VOLUME: 21 cu ft
RDX
WHEELBASE: 108.3 in
LENGTH: 186.8 in
WIDTH: 74.8 in HEIGHT: 65.7 in
PASSENGER VOLUME: 105 cu ft
CARGO VOLUME: 30 cu ft
I personally would find the XC40 to be too small coming from a 1g RDX. It depends so much on whether size is important to you or not.
#10
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,521
Received 845 Likes
on
526 Posts
Here is a C/D test:
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...isfying-review
Weight: 3854lb, so about 200lb less than an AWD fully loaded RDX.
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 6.2 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 16.4 sec
Zero to 120 mph: 26.8 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 7.0 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 3.4 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 4.5 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.8 sec @ 95 mph
These numbers are on par, with the current 2018 RDX:
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...ed-test-review
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 6.2 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 16.4 sec
Zero to 120 mph: 26.8 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 6.3 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 3.6 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 4.4 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.5 sec @ 96 mph
The new RDX is said to be slightly faster than the old one, but no real data available yet.
FWIW, here are XC60 dimensions:
DIMENSIONS:
WHEELBASE: 112.8 in
LENGTH: 184.6 in
WIDTH: 74.9 in HEIGHT: 65.3 in
PASSENGER VOLUME: 100 cu ft
CARGO VOLUME: 30 cu ft
CURB WEIGHT: 4107 lb
As you can see, that's a lot closer to the new RDX. Even then, the passenger volume is still less than the new RDX. The XC40 has 10% less passenger volume, I'd think you can definitely feel the difference.
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...isfying-review
Weight: 3854lb, so about 200lb less than an AWD fully loaded RDX.
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 6.2 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 16.4 sec
Zero to 120 mph: 26.8 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 7.0 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 3.4 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 4.5 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.8 sec @ 95 mph
These numbers are on par, with the current 2018 RDX:
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...ed-test-review
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 6.2 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 16.4 sec
Zero to 120 mph: 26.8 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 6.3 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 3.6 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 4.4 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.5 sec @ 96 mph
The new RDX is said to be slightly faster than the old one, but no real data available yet.
FWIW, here are XC60 dimensions:
DIMENSIONS:
WHEELBASE: 112.8 in
LENGTH: 184.6 in
WIDTH: 74.9 in HEIGHT: 65.3 in
PASSENGER VOLUME: 100 cu ft
CARGO VOLUME: 30 cu ft
CURB WEIGHT: 4107 lb
As you can see, that's a lot closer to the new RDX. Even then, the passenger volume is still less than the new RDX. The XC40 has 10% less passenger volume, I'd think you can definitely feel the difference.
#11
Burning Brakes
I'm in the market and my includes the C300 Wagon (Canada! Canada! Canada!), the V60, the X3 and RDX. The Mercedes and the RDX are my top two and the pricing isn't dramatically different (about $5-10k depending on equipment).
I sat in the XC40 and it's a bit too small for me (hoping to start a family soon) and the XC60 pricing is pretty high for what it is.
Stuff I crossed off: 3 series wagon (limp chassis), Q5 (back seat too small), A5 Sportback (Merc wagon beats it), CR-V (not enough power).
I sat in the XC40 and it's a bit too small for me (hoping to start a family soon) and the XC60 pricing is pretty high for what it is.
Stuff I crossed off: 3 series wagon (limp chassis), Q5 (back seat too small), A5 Sportback (Merc wagon beats it), CR-V (not enough power).
#12
Drifting
I have not checked out the new XC40, but I must say that I was rather disappointed with the new XC60. The new Volvo's are amazingly good looking, and their interiors are beautifully designed. However, with every single one that I have tried (XC60, V90) I have to say that I was NOT impressed with the engine, the ride, and the level of refinement. Somehow, the Volvo's just don't drive as well as they look. There is a level of cheapness in how they drive, esp. when compared to their main rivals. And when loaded, their prices shoot through the roof. So after the test drives, I completely gave up on the new Volvo's.
Therefore, I don't have any good hope for the XC40 either. So this may sound completely biased but before I even test drive either of them, I would say go with the 2019 RDX totally....
Therefore, I don't have any good hope for the XC40 either. So this may sound completely biased but before I even test drive either of them, I would say go with the 2019 RDX totally....
#13
Drifting
I'm in the market and my includes the C300 Wagon (Canada! Canada! Canada!), the V60, the X3 and RDX. The Mercedes and the RDX are my top two and the pricing isn't dramatically different (about $5-10k depending on equipment).
I sat in the XC40 and it's a bit too small for me (hoping to start a family soon) and the XC60 pricing is pretty high for what it is.
Stuff I crossed off: 3 series wagon (limp chassis), Q5 (back seat too small), A5 Sportback (Merc wagon beats it), CR-V (not enough power).
I sat in the XC40 and it's a bit too small for me (hoping to start a family soon) and the XC60 pricing is pretty high for what it is.
Stuff I crossed off: 3 series wagon (limp chassis), Q5 (back seat too small), A5 Sportback (Merc wagon beats it), CR-V (not enough power).
#14
Anyone else in a similar situation? I'm considering either or....the RDX is most likely going to be the one I shoot for, but the XC40 is also a very nice offering.
I really do like the design and style of the XC40. It's not as peppy at just 240HP, but maybe it has less weight? Big issue is that this is the 1st generation of the platform. Acura RDX is now 3rd gen.
Anyways, anyone else considering the XC40 as well?
I really do like the design and style of the XC40. It's not as peppy at just 240HP, but maybe it has less weight? Big issue is that this is the 1st generation of the platform. Acura RDX is now 3rd gen.
Anyways, anyone else considering the XC40 as well?
#15
I currently drive/own a 2015 Mazda CX-5 Touring. I've started my search for a new vehicle and hopefully will be in the market about this time next year. I've also decided to look at up-scaling to get a little bit more luxury. One other requirement that I have is a minimum towing capacity of 2000 lbs, but would prefer 3000+ lbs. I was disappointed to see the RDX maintained the 2018 tow capacity of 1500lbs. Vehicles that I'm now currently looking at are the Lincoln MKC, Volvo XC40, Audi Q5, and new Mazda CX-5.
Search Continues.....
==
Michael
Search Continues.....
==
Michael
#16
Intermediate
I saw a black XC40 R Design today while picking up my younger son for school. I have to say -- I found it quite attractive sitting on its 20" wheels. A little squat for sure, but in my opinion, it's a nicely designed vehicle. I do worry about it being a bit too small for me, though we will still have a 17 RDX Advance for our heavier hauling should I need it. One thing I like about the XC40 is that you can pick the "sports" spec in the R Design and still add all of the luxury/convenience options from the Inscription luxury trim -- something we all know we can't do on the RDX. The R Design with everything checks in at around 44-45k MSRP. Downside is even loaded, it lacks the Heads up Display of the RDX Advance and the ventilated seats of the Aspec. It would have the surround view monitor I can't get on my Aspec though.
It's going to be an interesting 6 months for me while I sort all this out.
It's going to be an interesting 6 months for me while I sort all this out.
#17
Suzuka Master
I have not checked out the new XC40, but I must say that I was rather disappointed with the new XC60. The new Volvo's are amazingly good looking, and their interiors are beautifully designed. However, with every single one that I have tried (XC60, V90) I have to say that I was NOT impressed with the engine, the ride, and the level of refinement. Somehow, the Volvo's just don't drive as well as they look. There is a level of cheapness in how they drive, esp. when compared to their main rivals. And when loaded, their prices shoot through the roof. So after the test drives, I completely gave up on the new Volvo's.
Therefore, I don't have any good hope for the XC40 either. So this may sound completely biased but before I even test drive either of them, I would say go with the 2019 RDX totally....
Therefore, I don't have any good hope for the XC40 either. So this may sound completely biased but before I even test drive either of them, I would say go with the 2019 RDX totally....
The XC40 is not the comparison, and your observations line up with mine.
The apples to apples is XC60 T5 and we test drive that and the 19RDX. The XC60 interior very luxurious and feels far more expensive that the RDX, but the RDX is more refined and suspension is better IMO. A well comparable equipped XC60 T5 is about $52K, while the Advance RDX AWD is $49K.
#18
Drifting
The apples to apples is XC60 T5 and we test drive that and the 19RDX. The XC60 interior very luxurious and feels far more expensive that the RDX, but the RDX is more refined and suspension is better IMO. A well comparable equipped XC60 T5 is about $52K, while the Advance RDX AWD is $49K.
Last edited by ostrich; 06-04-2018 at 09:44 PM.
#19
Racer
Thread Starter
I'm revisiting this thread because it appears Volve has added a Polstar Software upgrade option for the XC40. It brings the HP to 252 from 249, but torque goes to 295 from 258. Additionally, throttle response, handling, shifting, have all been increased/improved. Not sure if this link will work, but you can see more info on the software upgrade here: https://engineered.polestar.com/us/u...XC40&market=us
Now, given the weight of the RDX, is it possible the XC40 could hold it's own against the RDX with this new performance update?
Now, given the weight of the RDX, is it possible the XC40 could hold it's own against the RDX with this new performance update?
#20
Team Owner
I’d sell my soul to the devil if Honda and Acura came out with tuning options for any of their turbo cars. Something to bump the power a bit without voiding warranty. Not only that, it’s an easy enough revenue stream for them.
#21
Instructor
I compared these two vehicles before choosing the RDX. I was looking to get the Inscription XC40 because I liked all of the tech included with it. The self-parking feature was a nice party trick, but I don't think I would use that often. I noticed a few quality control issues in the tester and a rather harsh ride (because of the short wheelbase?). My wife held the deciding vote, she just didn't like the cabin of the Volvo but immediately fell in love with the cabin (and the seats) in the RDX.
#22
Drifting
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: New Yorkie, Hudson Valley
Posts: 3,001
Received 1,026 Likes
on
716 Posts
Since Volvo announsed its demise of the gasoline engine, and since the current Volvo engine is fairly new, I wonder about parts and serviceability going forward. So, If I were set on a Volvo, I would lease.
#23
Team Owner
That’s a bit an interesting justification.
It’s not like the engine is only going into production for one year. It will be out for several years. And I’m pretty sure Volvo isnt going to tell customers “sorry, your two year old car can no longer be repaired because we made no spare parts.” This isn’t ferrari or something. They still move countless thousands of units every year.
Leasing would be no different financing for the first several years. You’re protected by warranty. You’ll get your repairs.
Also, don’t forget about the aftermarket- they will continue to make parts for a while, even if Volvo didn’t. I don’t know what parts prices are, but I’m betting oem parts are hella expensive anyway.
It’s not like the engine is only going into production for one year. It will be out for several years. And I’m pretty sure Volvo isnt going to tell customers “sorry, your two year old car can no longer be repaired because we made no spare parts.” This isn’t ferrari or something. They still move countless thousands of units every year.
Leasing would be no different financing for the first several years. You’re protected by warranty. You’ll get your repairs.
Also, don’t forget about the aftermarket- they will continue to make parts for a while, even if Volvo didn’t. I don’t know what parts prices are, but I’m betting oem parts are hella expensive anyway.
#24
Drifting
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: New Yorkie, Hudson Valley
Posts: 3,001
Received 1,026 Likes
on
716 Posts
That’s a bit an interesting justification.
It’s not like the engine is only going into production for one year. It will be out for several years. And I’m pretty sure Volvo isnt going to tell customers “sorry, your two year old car can no longer be repaired because we made no spare parts.” This isn’t ferrari or something. They still move countless thousands of units every year.
Leasing would be no different financing for the first several years. You’re protected by warranty. You’ll get your repairs.
Also, don’t forget about the aftermarket- they will continue to make parts for a while, even if Volvo didn’t. I don’t know what parts prices are, but I’m betting oem parts are hella expensive anyway.
It’s not like the engine is only going into production for one year. It will be out for several years. And I’m pretty sure Volvo isnt going to tell customers “sorry, your two year old car can no longer be repaired because we made no spare parts.” This isn’t ferrari or something. They still move countless thousands of units every year.
Leasing would be no different financing for the first several years. You’re protected by warranty. You’ll get your repairs.
Also, don’t forget about the aftermarket- they will continue to make parts for a while, even if Volvo didn’t. I don’t know what parts prices are, but I’m betting oem parts are hella expensive anyway.
Elimination of downside risk matters, IMO.
#25
I still think the XC60 is the closer match for the RDX, with the exception of the price where it aligns closest to the 40. That extra 12” of length isn’t wasted space on the RDX vs. the XC40 and the RDX still wins with bang for the buck on features vs. the equally sized and appointed XC60.
#26
I had a friend who worked for the GM tech center in Warren Michigan and he told me years ago that federal law requires automakers to provide a supply of parts for ten years after the discontinuation of a model. Not sure if that is still the case, but I own a 1997 BMW M3 and can still order original BMW replacement parts from the dealer and online (the E36 chassis end of life'd in the 1999 model year). The only part I couldn't get was the headliner which is a M3 only anthracite color, the dealer even searched inventory in Germany.
The following users liked this post:
TacoBello (10-06-2018)
#27
Team Owner
One of the, if not the major benefit of leasing is the elimination of downside risk. There are relatively few engines produced by Volvo. So, relatively, there may be fewer replacement parts out in the wild, and fewer mechanics out in the wild as well. Plus, the 2.0 Volvo has is turbo charged or turbo and supercharged. A high stress environment, built by a company that abandoned it fairly quickly. Too risky for purchase, IMO. If something crops up in a couple of years, lesees are scott free, but owners are totally screwed.
Elimination of downside risk matters, IMO.
Might be worth actually talking with a dealership first. There’s also warranty and extended warranty you could purchase if you were really that afraid, which will ensure you are covered, even as an owner.
Last edited by TacoBello; 10-06-2018 at 02:59 AM.
#28
Team Owner
And again, aftermarket parts. There will be aftermarket repair and replacement parts, guaranteed.
#29
Just wondering if anyone has done a drive comparison of the XC40 and RDX. I know that the XC40 is smaller but for me that might be alright. I have no experience with Volvo but the XC40 is getting very good reviews (Alex, Driven, etc). When I configured the R-Design and the Aspec the Volvo was about $3500 less. Any guess if Acura with eventually bring a more powerful CDX to the North America?
#30
Just wondering if anyone has done a drive comparison of the XC40 and RDX. I know that the XC40 is smaller but for me that might be alright. I have no experience with Volvo but the XC40 is getting very good reviews (Alex, Driven, etc). When I configured the R-Design and the Aspec the Volvo was about $3500 less. Any guess if Acura with eventually bring a more powerful CDX to the North America?
But IMO the XC40 is a sexy little ute. It's also very boxy on the inside and outside meaning that despite its' smaller exterior size, it actually has a decent amount of interior space. I also really like all the little unique and funky touches like the D pillar and carpet material up the inner door, and my FAVORITE feature on any new car, the little garbage bin in the center console. You can tell that Volvo REALLY tried maximizing the interior space.
The RDX is also really sexy but it's hardly a compact crossover anymore. It used to be 180" long in gen 1 (which was why I liked it so much) and it's now a whopping 188 inches long, longer than a ford edge by an inch! The Xc40 is something like 174" iirc. But on the flip side the Xc40 may be too compact, but of course that depends on your needs. For 3K difference I'd spring for the RDX personally just because it's nice having some space, it might be more reliable long term, and lastly SH-AWD is far superior to the haldex system in the Xc40.
The following users liked this post:
quantum7 (10-15-2018)
#31
Three Wheelin'
I was keen on evaluating an XC40 because Volvo is known to have the best seats and I actually prefer a smaller car. 2 problems -- The 1st is that Volvo apparently is building very few XC40s so they are in very short supply. It is very hard to actually see/try one in person. Most are sold even before they make it to the dealer. As a result dealer was always pushing the XC60. The 2nd problem is reliability. The new breed of Volvos seem to be having a lot of issues. Go here: https://forums.swedespeed.com/forumd...C40-(CMA-2019-). By comparison, RDX forums hardly have anyone reporting any issues.
In the end, because of convenience (I actually got to drive the car) and expected reliability, I went with the RDX.
In the end, because of convenience (I actually got to drive the car) and expected reliability, I went with the RDX.
The following users liked this post:
quantum7 (10-15-2018)
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
nokiaman
Car Talk
30
11-04-2007 03:43 AM