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.
I admit I do not know much about the differences between Type-S and Type-R...only that Type-R is supposed to be more sport oriented than Type-S. I just learned a few months ago that A-Spec was a appearance package more than anything.
I'm a lot better with German branding. I just hope Acura actually tries with it.
Macan starts at 50K+ (with the base engine) and Cayenne at 65K+ (and they typically sell close to MSRP). RDX A-spec AWD is 46K (and it's possible to get amazing deals). There's plenty of room for Acura to introduce a Type S while still being priced very competitively, e.g. at an MSRP of about 52K, the competition cannot touch the RDX.
I seem to recall paying close to $50K for my 2019 RDX Advance SH-AWD, including accessories ( although some days, I try pretty hard to forget that... ).
I can't see Acura releasing a Type S without adaptive suspension and upscale sound system. Truth be told, the surround camera system enhances my overall driving experience much more than I would have guessed ( and probably more than another 40 bhp at WOT would do ), so I would hope they wouldn't leave that out. Basically, I don't think any Type S will be "stripped down and 'roided up", so price bloat could be a real issue.
I seem to recall paying close to $50K for my 2019 RDX Advance SH-AWD, including accessories ( although some days, I try pretty hard to forget that... ).
I can't see Acura releasing a Type S without adaptive suspension and upscale sound system. Truth be told, the surround camera system enhances my overall driving experience much more than I would have guessed ( and probably more than another 40 bhp at WOT would do ), so I would hope they wouldn't leave that out. Basically, I don't think any Type S will be "stripped down and 'roided up", so price bloat could be a real issue.
If you price a Macan with the base engine and similar equipment/accessories as the Advance, I’m pretty certain you will hit 60K+.
Perhaps a more realistic figure would be 55K. With BMW, the engine upgrade was typically around 3K but they would add in other equipment upgrades and list it at 5K more. That is before M Performance, so M Performance would add even more. A 328 would run about 50K and an M Performance 335 with similar equipment ran around 65K close to base M3 territory.
Acura needs to expand their line up to capture more market share. I feel like Acura has way less choices then Lexus, Audi, Mercedes, and BMW. I don't think Acura need new models besides a smaller CUV. But they could add a higher trim level to elevate the brand to more of a luxury class. The Acura NSX as a halo car alone isn't cutting it.
They need both a hybrid and Type S option. Many of the luxury makers already offer hybrids as an option, and Acura should be able to compete.
Type S can easily go to 55k and I feel people will be willing to spend it. As A RX350 starts around that price, and doesn't even come with blind spot monitor.
I'm starting to think RDX can compete with the R350 if they tried.
If you price a Macan with the base engine and similar equipment/accessories as the Advance, I’m pretty certain you will hit 60K+.
Perhaps a more realistic figure would be 55K. With BMW, the engine upgrade was typically around 3K but they would add in other equipment upgrades and list it at 5K more. That is before M Performance, so M Performance would add even more. A 328 would run about 50K and an M Performance 335 with similar equipment ran around 65K close to base M3 territory.
If (actually, when) I priced out a 540i the way I would want it, with the driving aids the RDX has, and other little things, it was about $20K more.
They need both a hybrid and Type S option. Many of the luxury makers already offer hybrids as an option, and Acura should be able to compete.
This can't be overstated enough. Not only do most other automakers offer hybrids, but they're offering full EVs in this category. Mercedes has the EQC, Audi has the e-tron, and BMW is rumored (long rumored I might add) to be coming out with an i5 or iNext or whatever they're call it. Hell, even Jaguar and Volvo are getting in on this market. Whether or not these cars will be a sales success is immaterial; Audi/BMW/Mercedes will gain invaluable learnings that will help them improve and iterate on the next generation of EVs. Honda/Acura is going to have a tough time keeping up if/when EVs sales begin to overtake ICE sales.
And before anyone says, "well, Honda is gaining experience building EVs like the Clarity"...the Clarity EV is incredibly underwhelming and the only reason it exists is to satisfy California compliance laws (https://www.hybridcars.com/why-honda...rity-electric/). Even if they're investing R&D dollars into EVs, not having any real-world production learnings is going to hurt bad as they play catch-up.
Acura needs to expand their line up to capture more market share. I feel like Acura has way less choices then Lexus, Audi, Mercedes, and BMW. I don't think Acura need new models besides a smaller CUV. But they could add a higher trim level to elevate the brand to more of a luxury class. The Acura NSX as a halo car alone isn't cutting it.
They need both a hybrid and Type S option. Many of the luxury makers already offer hybrids as an option, and Acura should be able to compete.
Type S can easily go to 55k and I feel people will be willing to spend it. As A RX350 starts around that price, and doesn't even come with blind spot monitor.
I'm starting to think RDX can compete with the R350 if they tried.
Good point! Lexus has the NX base, NX F-Sport and NX Hybrid. They generally cover all ranges of buyers in those three separate packages.
Originally Posted by R J Poseidon 6
This is a great poll!!!
So even!
Agreed.
Originally Posted by Madd Dog
If (actually, when) I priced out a 540i the way I would want it, with the driving aids the RDX has, and other little things, it was about $20K more.
And with depreciation being higher you'd likely really feel it later on.
Honda/Acura focuses on the North American market, and adoption of vehicle electrification has been slow in this region. They are playing to their market, for better or worse.
What's Audi asking for their e-tron? Those must be some pretty special electrons. Proletariat need not apply.
Honda/Acura focuses on the North American market, and adoption of vehicle electrification has been slow in this region. They are playing to their market, for better or worse.
What's Audi asking for their e-tron? Those must be some pretty special electrons. Proletariat need not apply.
You can pick one up for around $70K with some negotiating, but that's actually pretty price competitive. I test drove one last week, and it's head and shoulders more refined and better built than the Model X, which costs more. Granted, the Model X goes farther and is much faster, but for what it is the e-tron is a good package, especially once you factor in the tax credits that actually knocks the price down very close to Q5 territory, and a few thousand over an RDX Advanced. Considering that it's actually larger than the RDX (it's somewhere between that and the MDX size-wise) and the interior and tech that is much better than what Acura is currently offering, you end up with something that's pretty compelling.
You can pick one up for around $70K with some negotiating, but that's actually pretty price competitive. I test drove one last week, and it's head and shoulders more refined and better built than the Model X, which costs more. Granted, the Model X goes farther and is much faster, but for what it is the e-tron is a good package, especially once you factor in the tax credits that actually knocks the price down very close to Q5 territory, and a few thousand over an RDX Advanced. Considering that it's actually larger than the RDX (it's somewhere between that and the MDX size-wise) and the interior and tech that is much better than what Acura is currently offering, you end up with something that's pretty compelling.
LOVE the E-Tron! I think it's super attractive and very compelling. I strongly dislike the Model X and Jaguar E-Pace.
Wow. I didn't cross shop a Macan because of the limited interior space, but I just did a build on the Porsche website trying to match all the features in the Tech package that I got, and I came up with a price of $66,760 compared to my $41k I paid for the RDX. I'm not even sure that included nav. Granted $5k of that was just for the Espresso leather. Still, $20k difference without that.
Also surprising; the Macan is down by 24 horses. Of course, you can't just compare a Porsche on horsepower, but still, I hadn't realized that the base Macan was that low.
I fully expect that my next car will be electric. However, software for an electric is the be-all and end-all, and I will have to reorient my thinking when evaluating the cars.
With the RDX, I did a thorough test drive of the car with regards to the drivetrain, the ride, the space, and the music.. As a car, it is excellent. It does fall down in the software, however, and I did not really test that and software was not sufficiently on my radar at the time; I just assumed it would all work right, and I was wrong.
When it comes to electric, I will need a whole additional mindset. I hope my mid-70s mind will be up to it when the time comes in a few years.
I fully expect that my next car will be electric. However, software for an electric is the be-all and end-all, and I will have to reorient my thinking when evaluating the cars.
With the RDX, I did a thorough test drive of the car with regards to the drivetrain, the ride, the space, and the music.. As a car, it is excellent. It does fall down in the software, however, and I did not really test that and software was not sufficiently on my radar at the time; I just assumed it would all work right, and I was wrong.
When it comes to electric, I will need a whole additional mindset. I hope my mid-70s mind will be up to it when the time comes in a few years.
haha. I don't think we really have the ability to judge the quality of software any more than we do the ability to test the quality of the turbos that go into the car's engine. Just as transmission software does weird things under different circumstances, battery vehicles do really weird things too including but not limited to throttling the performance to save the battery from overheating, something which would be hard to test on a drive. Kind of the OS on a computer or a phone. You really can't tell what you're getting by test driving the device for a few minutes or even a few hours in the store.
haha. I don't think we really have the ability to judge the quality of software any more than we do the ability to test the quality of the turbos that go into the car's engine. Just as transmission software does weird things under different circumstances, battery vehicles do really weird things too including but not limited to throttling the performance to save the battery from overheating, something which would be hard to test on a drive. Kind of the OS on a computer or a phone. You really can't tell what you're getting by test driving the device for a few minutes or even a few hours in the store.
I agree. You can only hope that the manufacturer or dealership will step up to fix problems as they come up. Sadly, based on my past experiences that means I will not be buying any Acura or Volvo electric cars and will go with Mercedes, BMW, Audi, or Lexus instead.
haha. I don't think we really have the ability to judge the quality of software any more than we do the ability to test the quality of the turbos that go into the car's engine. Just as transmission software does weird things under different circumstances, battery vehicles do really weird things too including but not limited to throttling the performance to save the battery from overheating, something which would be hard to test on a drive. Kind of the OS on a computer or a phone. You really can't tell what you're getting by test driving the device for a few minutes or even a few hours in the store.
i disgree. If the software does not work as it should, it is poorly done. Does it matter if it is not up to the constraints of the hardware for which it is written? I don’t think so. The first word processer we got at the office used two floppy disks, and you could watch it stop at each word during spell check. As the hardware got better and better, that spell checking got better and better. The software was written for the hardware it used.
Right now, my auto stop-start does not work, my setting for reseting mileages for trip A does not work, plus there are the various infotainment issues that crop up. Sometimes I can’t use the steering wheel controls for music, and sometimes I can. Sometimes I get ‘drive mode unavailable’ and sometimes I don’t. The software is just not up to the task.
i disgree. If the software does not work as it should, it is poorly done. Does it matter if it is not up to the constraints of the hardware for which it is written? I don’t think so. The first word processer we got at the office used two floppy disks, and you could watch it stop at each word during spell check. As the hardware got better and better, that spell checking got better and better. The software was written for the hardware it used.
Right now, my auto stop-start does not work, my setting for reseting mileages for trip A does not work, plus there are the various infotainment issues that crop up. Sometimes I can’t use the steering wheel controls for music, and sometimes I can. Sometimes I get ‘drive mode unavailable’ and sometimes I don’t. The software is just not up to the task.
The point I was trying to make is that these would be hard to figure out on a test drive since you had mentioned you didn't really test the software and just assumed it would work. Given that most of us don't have the above problems, it means it would be very unlikely they would be found during a test drive.
You really can't tell what you're getting by test driving the device for a few minutes or even a few hours in the store.
Word. If there's anything I have learned from my forays into "early adopter" status, this is it.
In respect to cars, if at all possible, wait until the long-term reviews come out from people that test drive cars for a living. If that's not possible, well, bitch all you want, but you're the one that put on the beta-tester badge.
Having said that, beta-test phase shouldn't last until the next generation product is released and/or leases expire. That kinda crap could drive away loyal customers.
Ideally, beta-test phase should end BEFORE the thing is sold to the general public.
The point I was trying to make is that these would be hard to figure out on a test drive since you had mentioned you didn't really test the software and just assumed it would work. Given that most of us don't have the above problems, it means it would be very unlikely they would be found during a test drive.
Yeah, they're not selling well - not by comparison to its competition, and not by comparison to the NSX of old. Biggest problem I see is not performance (which is good) but price. It's $50k more than the first NSX (adjusted). If it had competed more directly with the Porsche 911 or Lexus LC in price, I think that would have helped a lot.
I think only top dealers get to show them on the lot, and even then it's not like they have a huge number. Anyone who buys an NSX is probably going to order it, not pick it up off the lot.
Right now the NSX is selling a few hundred a year. 2019 looks like it'll be better than 2018, but still only about 1/3rd of something like the McLaren 570s.
A halo only works if you can see it, and visualize yourself actually driving one. I'm no marketeer, but that's as close to a definition of "aspirational" as I can muster.
Everyone knows what a Corvette or an Escalade or a Silverado looks like, and they see people driving them.
Everyone knows what a Porsche 911 or a Cayenne looks like, and they see people driving them.
Nissan had the Z cars back in the day ( AFAIK they still make them, but who cares? ).
Jeep has, well, The Jeep! Iconic.
Acura has a ghost. I saw one at the dealer once, but I don't think I've ever seen one on the road. Ferraris pop up like daffodils in the spring, but nary an NSX.
I think it's quite telling that in an automative forum (which undoubtedly heavily skews towards enthusiasts) there are so many people who would prefer to see a hybrid version before a performance version. If it's a 50/50 split here, just imagine what that would be like if you polled regular mainstream (read: non-enthusiast) consumers.
I think it's quite telling that in an automative forum (which undoubtedly heavily skews towards enthusiasts) there are so many people who would prefer to see a hybrid version before a performance version. If it's a 50/50 split here, just imagine what that would be like if you polled regular mainstream (read: non-enthusiast) consumers.
Even on this forum, hybrid was winning until Type S caught up.
I went the hybrid route with my 19 MDX ADV sh-sh-awd. The A-Spec or PMC MDXs didn't offer any performance advantage over the other 3.5L MDXs. A little disappointed Acura didn't use the 3.5L engine+3 electric motors. The 3.0L + 7DCT + 3 electric motors do provide additional performance, responsiveness (low end TQ), and economy for a much wider range of driving conditions. Just adding the the 3 electric motor to the 2.0L turbo might produce hp/tq number higher than with the 3.0L because of the much lower and longer low end TQ of the turbo being added to the max TQ of electric motors a 0 RPMs.
One thing Acura always been very good at was driveability/handling; especially, with the intro of sh-awd. You really can't find a CUV/SUV that can handle like the RDX/MDX in ANY conditions at the same price range for +150,000 miles. The sport hybrid sh-awd is an even greater improvement over the mechanical sh-awd system.
I was set on replacing my 08 RDX (Hondata+ETS intercooler) with a +MMC 3rd Gen RDX if Acura had a Type S or R version. After +7 months with my MDX hybrid, my next vehicle will be either (if they are available by MMC) the 3rd Gen RDX hybrid or 4th Gen MDX hybrid. Acura will just need to increase the battery capacity and add a plug-in option to top off the battery for max EV mode (under 10 miles from work). It is sweet having all that extra performance and 475-425 miles between fill up compared to 300-325 mile range in my 11 MDX.
I think it's quite telling that in an automative forum (which undoubtedly heavily skews towards enthusiasts) there are so many people who would prefer to see a hybrid version before a performance version. If it's a 50/50 split here, just imagine what that would be like if you polled regular mainstream (read: non-enthusiast) consumers.
What is an enthusiast? Someone who only wants performance (why buy a crossover at all?) or someone who appreciates a sharp-handling car that's efficient? What about those who think that a hybrid would bring better performance than just adding HP?
What is an enthusiast? Someone who only wants performance (why buy a crossover at all?) or someone who appreciates a sharp-handling car that's efficient? What about those who think that a hybrid would bring better performance than just adding HP?
I don't think fiatlux meant to insult those of us who think a hybrid RDX might be a win-win ( if it's done right ).
Rather, I think he was commenting that the general motoring public might be more interested in a hybrid RDX rather than a suped-up, but presumably less efficient, ICE-only version. I agree.
OTOH anytime I start thinking people are capable of rational decisions, they prove me wrong.
10-23-2019, 02:33 AM
