Maybe we can make this thread a sticky. There are several tunes out for the RDX now. There have been test runs from the major magazines about the RDX. While I have no interest in tuning my RDX any time soon I did make some runs to find a baseline. I read the RDX was supposedly capable of 5.8 seconds 0-60 stock so I ran mine to see how it matched up. I've copied some info that I wrote for another thread and edited it a bit for this one.

I had 3/4 tank of fuel, 350 pounds of gear, 91 octane and density altitude of over 2300' above sea level. I am actually pretty close to sea level but it was a very hot day. I put it in sport + mode, and S for the trans. Here is my raw 1/4 mile data (uncorrected for density altitude. One thing to note is I did not brake torque the motor, I just nailed the throttle from a stop. I also had to letup a bit just before the end of the 1/4 mile as I came up on some traffic. So likely times would have been a bit better as well as trap speed.

Uncorrected
14.99@93.55 mph

Corrected
14.59@96.19 mph

My 60' time was a terrible 2.47. I believe this is because I didn't spool up the turbo before launch brake torquing and just mashed the throttle.

Corrected 0-60 time was 6.6 which is ok I guess under the circumstances. Raw data was 6.8. Compared to the Everyman Driver video on Youtube my car was running better than his test vehicle at about the equivalent density altitude best I can determine. His runs were 7.25 to 7.97.

What is encouraging for me is the trap speed is pretty solid. Based on the speed, I could be in the low 14's with a better launch. I also did some logging but haven't had a chance to look through it in much detail. Unfortunately the logger I used only captured once per second. It didn't look like the motor was pulling any timing. I don't know the PID for the gears and that would be helpful. There is a shift, I think the 2-3, that is very slow. I pulled peak boost of 19#'s.

Anyway hope some of this will be useful reference for anyone else tuning their car. A K-tuner stage 2, with a good lunch and correcting for density altitude would probably put me in the high 13's and trap speed of over 100 mph.

I used my Dragy tool to capture my runs. Go to dragy to learn more about. It is a great investment of $150 if you want to see how your car runs and don't have easy access to a track.

I am certain brake torquing to build more boost off the line would result in better times. I don't see how my car would ever get to the 5.8 sec 0-60 I read about. So that was a pretty good running RDX if it actually ran that.

Also something to note is that the shifts are inconsistent and never seem to shift at the same RPM between gears. Most of the time even in S mode (trans) and S+ mode for driving dynamics it was normally shifting about 6300-6400. There was nothing I could do to ever extend it out to anywhere near redline. If I used the paddle shifters it just shifted earlier (assuming I hit them before it would shift on its own) and then if I didn't touch them after the manual shift it would upshift automatically at about 6300-6400 again.

I have been using OBD Fusion (iPhone app) to capture data and do the logging. So far it has been helpful even though I like Torque for Android better yet as there is a more active group. Having said that though OBD Fusion is the closest I've found to Torque and is pretty darn close.

So if anyone can post their times from a Dragy run, track or G-tech it would be helpful for everyone. I plan to do some more runs when cooler and try different launch techniques. I didn't buy this to be a project car but a daily driver so I don't want to abuse it too much.

 

I had mine at a quarter mile track recently. It managed 15.36 at 93.13 mph. Straight off the paper ticket, no correction.
It made no difference whether I used Sport, Sport+ or S mode in the trans. Full tank of 94 octane, 2400 feet actual altitude, AWD Aspec, showroom stock.
The telltale spec was the 60' which was a sloth like 2.589 seconds. The off-the-line torque management is killing the performance of this vehicle. 93 mph trap speed is something a mid 14 second car would typically post, but the 2.6 second 60' is a full sized delivery van from the '70s with a carburetor. I didn't try spooling the turbo at the start because it didn't seem to help when I tried it in an alley months before. Jeff who writes for Temple Of Vtec confirms this and actually found it slows the car down a little. I may try it again in the future.

 

I thought my 60' time was bad... Yours is more like a sleeping sloth, mine is just a normal sloth. What were your temps?

Maybe they are limiting the torque to save the tranny and drivetrain off the line. The FWD Civic would likely spin and relieve some of the stress.

I had another car that was AWD but mostly biased toward FWD. If I launched it hard, and the front spun to much before the rear engaged it would just kill my run. I would go from high 11's to an instant 12.7. So I had to launch it perfectly and it would be a great run.

I'll try some other launches on the RDX when I have some time and see what happens. At least your trap speed is showing the car has some potential as well. I wonder if the tune will affect the rpms in gears as well as the launch. I did some other runs 0-60 today while running 87 octane. My 0-60 times were almost the exact same as running 91 octane. I didn't have enough room to run a 1/4 but obviously I am not getting much benefit from the higher octane on the stock tune. Maybe with Hondata or Ktuner it might pay some dividends. I checked the logs and it didn't look like it was pulling any timing either. Absolutely no hint of detonation and it as almost 100 degrees out when I was running. One run was slightly better at 6.75 (uncorrected).

 

I am interested in 87 octane results, for no other reason than to save a few bucks until I get a tune. Then it would probably require premium again. BTW it was around 70F at the track that night.

 

Thanks for reporting your personal test results. I have watched every RDX review I could find on YouTube, and I have noticed a large range in 0-60 times.

Did either of you try to disable traction control during your runs? I suspect that this might be limiting torque during the initial few feet.

 

Yes I had it disabled. I turn it off every time I start the car, drag strip or street.

 

To keep it consistent and helpful for everyone, I think the following format would help.

Year
Package - Base, Tech, Advance, A-Spec
Fuel type - 87,89,91,93
Fuel level - empty, 1/4, 1/2, 3/4, full
Load in car - how many people, any other heavy equipment
SH-AWD or not
Temperature
Altitude - this can impact what fuel you can buy as higher altitudes typically have lower octane available
DA (Density Altitude) if you can get it
How measured - Dragy, Gtech, Vbox, track, etc.
What was measured

• 60'
• 0-60
• 0-120
• 1/4 mile ET & Trap speed

Mods (Hondata, Ktune, downpipe, wheels, etc.)
Launch type - brake torque or floored the throttle
Traction control - on/off
Miles on car - <5k, 5-10, 10-20k,>20k (typically run better after a few miles on them)
Notes - did it bog on launch, any wheelspin, fell flat during shift, traction control engaged, etc.
Any logging -

I know not everyone will have this info but it can sure help if you can provide anything. I think the A-specs will likely be slower because of their fatter wheels with more drag and heavier too. Advance with AWD are the porkiest (like mine) so they are likely to be slower as well. In general I think the AWD cars will likely be slower since we can't seeming brake torque to launch so that negates some of the launch capability of the SH-AWD platform.

The RDX clearly has the power to be running low 6's but somehow Acura is really limiting it somewhere. I'd really like to see a video of the one that supposedly went 5.8 0-60 and in stock tune.

 

The only review that I saw, which stated 0-60 in that time range was in a video made by my favorite reviewer Sofyan Bey (Redline Reviews). He quoted 5.7 seconds based on Acura's claim that it was about a half second faster than the previous generation, which was 6.2.He did not perform an actual test, but he did state that it felt close to that value.

The only reviewer that made an actual measurement was "Everyman Driver" who obtained a reading of 7.25. Personally I feel that this reading is too slow, as the RDX feels closer to 6.7 which is more in line with your experience.https://www.youtube.com/watch?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1W8S...outu.be&t=1125

 

Yea, I saw the everyman driver after I bought the car. I referenced in some tune thread. It was pretty depressing to see. I want to find out how they are limiting the acceleration off the line.

 

I would guess its just a torque management (reduction) indexed to speed. For example below 5 mph they will only allow 100 ft-lbs, then above 5 mph full beans. Protects the drivetrain, eliminates drama if the vehicle is bogged down or stuck etc. There should be another mode in the center knob thing that selects "DRAGSTRIP" and allows full torque to be developed.

 

Alex on Autos did 0-60 5.7. He test all under the same environment (temperature, varies from sea level.etc,) That is the only way to compare to others.

 

I call this as I see it. Acura lied. You can't put lipstick on this pig and make it anything it isn't. I don't know how anyone got 5.7 sec 0-60 out of this turd. The only way I can see that happening is if it is downhill, off a cliff or with a major tune. Acura obviously is limiting torque somewhere. Based on my runs, it takes almost .5 seconds to go from 0-5 mph. The SH-AWD is basically neutered at launch.

There is no way in hell this is a 1/2 second quicker than the old RDX. Hell the full size Honda Pilot will likely beat you to 60 with a few people on board. Don't bother running a Passport, they'll run away from you and hide. Even the Ridgeline has your number. The only safe thing to stalk is likely the Rav 4 with the hybrid motor or maybe a CRV. You are probably safe lining up against a Sentra. Based on my runs, I don't think there is anything slower in its class that at least I can think of.

You would need to chip this thing just to get it to where Acura allegedly says it should be stock. See my best run info below. No times are adjusted. Straight from the time box.

Year - 2020
Package - Advance
Fuel type - 91
Fuel level – 1/2
Load in car – 350 pounds of pilot and gear
Drive mode - SH-AWD
Temperature 75F
Altitude – 23’ (almost sea level)
DA (Density Altitude)- 1076’
How measured - Dragy

What was measured

• 60' – 2.45 -
• 5-60 – 6.13
• 0-60 – 6.63
• 20-40 – 1.98
• 40-60 – 2.97
• 60-80 - 4.13
• 1/8th mile – 9.64@75.25
• 1/4 mile – 14.85@94.83

No mods - bone stock, turd slow
Launch type – floored the throttle
Traction control – off (no wheelspin anyway)
Miles on car - <5k
Notes - A little bit of hesitation and then it goes when I floor the throttle from a stop. Compare the 5-60 and the 0-60. It took almost ½ second to get to 5 mph. It needs to hold the gears longer. Making 3 shifts on the way to 60 mph doesn’t help anything. I tried a bunch of different launches. Brake torquing is limited to about 1900 rpm and then it just bogs of the line and is the slowest launch of all. Not a single peep out of the traction control.
Data logging – My logging isn’t granular enough. It is only capturing data about every half second. I did see sustained boost of about 19 psi though for over 2 seconds in the top of about 5th gear.

Observations - The 60's time is clearly sloth like. For the non geeks/gearheads - this is an idea of how hard the car is launching from rest. This time would be typical of a car running about an almost18 second 1/4 mile! Or to put it another way, it launches about as hard as a Toyota Prius. On the flip side, the trap speed says the RDX if dialed in could be a high 13 second car. So Hondacura has clearly screwed us somewhere. Most likely in torque limiting the drivetrain off the line. We should be closer to a sub 2 second 60' time. Also then need to let it rev out a bit more in each gear.

 

There was one at the track that night, a few lengths ahead of me in the staging lanes. He ran a 16.4.

 

Does it matter? 5.7....6.7...whatever. The car is plenty fast. The fastest...no. The slowest....no. "Turd slow"? Hardly.

 

Well, umm, they have electric motors to help them launch.

https://priuschat.com/threads/prius-...-yours.190037/

 

Actually it does, at least to me. I bought it partly on the fact that it was supposed to be faster than the previous model. You can't really push it hard during a test drive on a new motor to find out.

My complaint is not when it is rolling as much as off the line. That is where the real slowness is. I have to deal with really heavy stop and go traffic. The ability to even merge or go across the 6 lanes of traffic I need when exiting my subdivision is really impacted by the incredible slowness off the line.

I put it in context, it is basically Prius slow off the line. That is pretty terrible. What is the point of having all the HP/TQ if you just neuter it? It isn't about bragging rights it is for real usability in the traffic I have to deal with. You can probably sprint 60' faster than the RDX can under ideal circumstances. My 6.6 second run was the absolute best out of several tries. That was with cool morning temps, intercooler pretty cool and stars in alignment apparently. That was in sport + mode, S for the transmission and the AC off.

I would say the typical run would probably be in the low 7 second range and likely the 60's times closer to 2.7 - 3 seconds.

 

As for the Prius and electric motors, I have 2 electric cars and am familiar with the launch capabilities. Still a Prius doesn't have quick 60' times. The times you have posted are not for a typical Prius. That was a modded one. The guy was running the battery packs out of a later version in an earlier model car. Typical times are 10 seconds 0-60. I've owned every generation since the original POS one that looked like an Echo.

Point being is the RDX is slow as heck off the line. It isn't like I expect Testa S or model 3 0-60 times. It should at least be as quick as the old version, if not quicker. It is pretty clear Acura did something to it. I bought the RDX with the intent to tow a small trailer and sold my tow vehicle as I wasn't going to tow anything really big anymore. Add another 1400 pounds to the back fo the RDX and it is going to make it really challenging to merge on some of the roads I'll be towing on.

Not to mention if they really did limit the torque, it might be a challenge going up some of the boat ramps I planned on. It may just sit there and stall out. Almost like when you brake torque it for a launch but this will be due to the load behind it. There are 2 pretty steep ramps that I take my boat or jetskis to. I am still waiting for the hitch to come in so I haven't had a chance to try it yet. May need it chipped just to make it up the ramp...

 

I suggest you try not going WOT immediately, but roll in the throttle to WOT in the first second or so. Why? My theory goes like this:

I feel in the beginning when the engine is building boost, the drag from turbo slows down the rpm climb. Gradually feeding in throttle helps control the e-wastegate. At first, the ECU does not see the need to build boost, so wastegate is open and the exhaust gas is unrestrictive. The engine therefore pulls normally like a NA engine. As throttle input increases, ECU closes wastegate to build boost. By then the volume and speed of exhaust gas are ample enough to quickly spool up the turbo. As a result the power is more seamless going from pure NA to boosted.

 

why not just get the hondata flashpro or Ktuner tune and have these issues fixed?

 

Yes it will likely be a tune that gets this fixed IMO. In fact there is a brief blurb about throttle lag mitigation on the Hondata page under the "Dyno" tab.

OP brother, the Prius comments were meant as empathy, not to go against or poke in the ribs. I felt your pain on the concrete pad at the track. It felt like an 80cc air cooled two stroke dirt bike. The RDX is definitely "off the pipe" during launch.

 

TBH though im leaning towards Ktuner for the tune if what has been mentioned that the stage two feels more like a stage 3 from hondata. and for the cost of the v1 ktuner, i think its a no brainer. but i just wish people would upload vids and update forums with more info on the two. i feel like no has bother to tune the rdx.
i im for sure im going to pick one up and go on a dyno and do a before and after and post it so there is some kind of info.

 

Ok, tried rolling into the throttle this morning. I didn't think anything would make the launch slower than it already is but this was even more like kryptonite. I have done a bunch of runs. It literally takes .6 seconds (minimum) to move this thing from 0-5 mph. I have done 20 launches so far and they average of all of them is .63 seconds. Not a single time has 0-5 mph been under .6 seconds.

Several times today the trans decided to shift from 2-3rd gear at WOT at 5300 RPM. WTF?!?!?!?!? The car just fell flat on its face to put it mildly. This was while the throttle was held to the floor after launch. From 1-2nd it shifted at about 6200, 3-4th about 6100 and 4-5th at 6100. DIdn't pay attention to the other gears. So why the heck isn't it even remotely getting to redline? Maybe this isn't surprising based on Hondata's dyno plots where power is all done by 6100. This has to be the lowest revving 2.0l motor honda makes... I am joking, there is probably some 2liter tractor motor somewhere that someone will drag up from the internet.

My best runs this morning 0-60 never broke 7 seconds.

From 0 - x mph
10 - 1.17
20 - 2.0
30 - 2.93
40 - 4.03
50 - 5.35
60 - 7.03

60's time was 2.58

If the tune gets rid of some of the lag (I hate to use that term in this context) it could really unlock the car. I found someone a few hours a way who has tuned theirs. I may go drive it, test it (if they'll let me) and report back.

It is really dicey merging with traffic here with so a terrible launch. Balls to the wall max speed launch is still very slow. I used our rental car again to run to the store since one of our others is in the shop and that beat to death corolla seemed positively sprightly compared to my RDX.

 

Sorry to hear that. Well I also experimented a bit today, and felt I described the sequence in a bad way. Definitely not roll in the throttle from 0-100% in the first second. Basicall, need to find out from standstill how much throttle input would make the engine feels bogged down initially, then back off a little. That is how much you give the car off the line, then go WOT when rpm is between 1.25k-1.5k. I feel this range is where boost starts to kick in effectively.

 

I'll give that a try but I don't expect any miracles. Not to mention trying to find the "sweet spot" to merge with traffic seems a bit crazy. The RDX literally launches like a car that does 0-60 in 10-11 seconds. My full-size pickup truck, with only a 3 liter motor towing a 5,000 pound trailer (more than the weight of the RDX), would typically do that sprint (0-60) in about 10 seconds flat. Yeah, I know it is a bit of comparing apples to oranges but when a 6,000 pound truck towing a 5,000 pound load launches at least as hard as my RDX unloaded, there is obviously an issue with the RDX.

Anyway I found out more info on the tuned RDX. With any luck sometime tomorrow I'll get a chance to drive it. It is a Ktuner tuned one. A high chance of rain tomorrow so don't know if we can do any good runs or not but at least I'll see how the drivability and general responsiveness is. If he'll let me I'll slap on the Dragy and make a few runs.

 

While looking up some specs for the Accord 2.0T with the same motor as ours, I found something pretty interesting. Here are the measured test results from Car & Driver for the Accord.

Zero to 60 mph: 5.5 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 13.6 sec
Zero to 120 mph: 20.9 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 6.1 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 3.4 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 4.4 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.1 sec @ 102 mph

Look at their 0-60 vs th 5-60 times. See how much quicker they are from 0-60 than 5-60? It is obvious that somehow they were able to build boost before launch as it is .6 seconds quicker even though it has to cover and extra 5 mph. My times are reversed and are just about in line when you factor in the heavier weight of the RDX vs. the Accord. From 5-60 I am about .4 seconds slower than the Accord when on a roll.

From a stop I am almost well over 1 second slower. Again this points to something hampering the launch. I have tried everything I can think of it and is just a dog off the line. I tried flooring it, brake torquing it, loading it just before it stalls out against the brake, as well as mild brake torquing it. No matter what I am far slower from a launch than rolling. The advantage of AWD is totally neutered in this car from a stop. I really want to get to the bottom of this. Unfortunately I didn't get a chance to drive the tuned RDX to see how it launched.

 

Found some interesting info when looking for octane specs for other Hondacura models.

Stock boost on the RDX 20.5 psi. The Civic Type R is running 23.2 (and takes regular). The Accord 2.0 is 20.8. What I find interesting is not in a single run did I ever see 20 psi of boost and only saw 19 for a fleeting second or so.

I also found the original dyno plot of the 2nd Gen vs 3rd Gen RDX and the motor is clearly pulling to 6500 and looks like they pulled it all the way to redline. So WTH with our cars? It is probably ok based on the gearing and the dyno plot to shift at 6k if it could pull that in 9th (never could) but if it is shifting at 6000-6200 in any of the first 3 shifts it is killing the performance as falling to a lower HP/TQ point in the rev band.

Something I read is the new trans is supposed to be quicker shifting than the old one. So I am even more certain they have invoked some sort of electronic nanny to reel in the fun. Can anyone confirm on their 2019 models if the same?

 

For my car I feel the engine opened up around 4k miles, mainly on the top end. What is your engine's mileage?

My engine also runs better with Chevron than on Shell, if that matters.

At the end of the day, I feel if you focus 0-60 on this car, you are going to be disappointed. Even if the stars are aligned perfectly, this is at best a high-5 car and nothing special. If you step back and look at the ample mid-range punch and downshift by yourself more often, this car has enough power for everyday duty.

I myself is sitting on the fence waiting for TypeS, to see if I should buy FlashPro or not. And mainly to improve throttle response or throttle mapping, not necessarily the slight power increase.

 

I am not looking for this to be a project car or try and make it something it isn't. I appreciate all the good things it offers. The problem is the major deficiency I see is one that it shouldn't have had according to Acura and it affects me almost every day.

My subdivision basically has 2 exits. One is onto a 6 lane main road where everyone is driving at least 55 mph (posted limit) and usually more. The other is basically the on ramp to a major freeway where everyone is accelerating pretty hard to merge and again it is 55 mph posted but people are often doing 65 mph + by our entrance/exit area. So at rush hour you have to really nail it in most any car and with the very slow off the line response it is pretty dicey sometime getting in with the flow of traffic.

Or if I have to go a different way, and go across the 3 lanes to a median area, and then usually brake hard and wait for another gap if I have to go left out of our subdivision. Every day this shows up the flaw the car has. It just drives it home with an exclamation point. The 0-30, 40, 50 mph sprint is pretty crucial for either exit I have to deal with. Every day on the way to work I am stuck waiting for an opening that is enough to get the RDX in. If I have a little bit of a roll it isn't as bad but i almost always have to come to a complete stop.

So many other things I really love about the car. I hung pretty well with a Mercedes AMG GLC 43 when rolling. So it isn't as is if the RDX is terrible slow, well it is, just from a stop. I have about 2,000 miles on it now and it is better than it was at first. I am generally quite happy with how it runs and drives other than every morning when I have to leave the subdivision. Anyway enough beating a dead horse. I did drive the last gen RDX and it is much quicker off the line but didn't like driving it overall near as much.

 

Do any of the tunes remove the top end limit? I don’t know why Acura Limited the RDX to only 113 mph when most others go to 130. The RDX should easily be able to cruise at 120+ and still be relatively stable.

 

Unfortunately I don't know but I've written to both Ktuner and Hondata and they've been quick to respond. I'd suggest doing that. I am sure it is all about liability.

On a separate note it took some time but I setup a Kindle Fird 8" HD tablet with the Torque Pro app to have a nice little monitoring station for the info on the RDX. It took some time to find a bluetooth adapter and to get the settings tweaked for it all to work together but for less than $100 for everything (tablet, BT adaptor, Torque Pro app, case). It beats using my phone as the larged display allows me to have more and/or bigger gauges which are easier to read in the car.

When I am not using it, it will be handy for passengers as well. Handy to have a bigger screen for somethings. One downside is no GPS but that is ok. I am going to try and setup my Dragy BT testing device which has a very accurate GPS in it.

If anyone wants to go this route let me know. I'll post the BT adapter that I found works and what settings I needed in Torque to work with it. I also found the BT adaptor works with the iPhone as well. I tried 4 of them for the iPhone and this one works and stays connected. It also works well with Torque on my Android phone.

 

i have a BT adapter setup in my Civic SI with torque pro app, so im going to try to set it up for the rdx as well, mind if you can tell me your settings for the torque pro app?

 

Are you using an Android phone or tablet? I was able to use high speed communication on my android phones but not the Fire Tablet. With Torque you have to adjust it for the boost to be accurate. Under boost calculation mething (in OBD2 adapter settings) use "Prefer ALT" to get the accurate readings. Otherwise the boost indicated is less than half the real boost settings.

 

Came across this website that calculates the theoretical performance numbers for FWD A-spec:

https://www.automobile-catalog.com/p...wd_a-spec.html

0-60mph: 6.1s

 

I saw that earlier when I was trying to find info to do some other calculations on the car. I used to use a great program called "car test 2000". You can find it here: https://www.cartestsoftware.com/

It was surprisingly accurate when I put in accurate info. You could tweak a lot of options as well as play "what if" scenarios such as launch rpm. I would run scenarios and find the optimal range and try them at the track. Usually they were quite close. You can change launch rpm shift points, etc. If can then give you the optimal shift points and launch technique for each gear. Normally it was within a hundred rpm or so based on what I found at the track. If you have an actual dyno plot of your car it is VERY close.

 

Using this as a reference, I feel OP's car seems to lose more time in the upper part of 0-60. This suggests the engine may not have opened up yet, or simply the transmission shifts too early and thus 60mph is reached in 4th gear.

 

I read through all the post I could find on VTEC and no matter how you launch it, it is slow off the line. It doesn't build boost at launch if you brake torque it so obviously some nanny is at work.

A definite issue with my car, other than taking over half a second to do 0-5 mph, is the inconsistent shifts. Even at full throttle it almost never goes anywhere near redline in any gear. In addition it ALWAYS takes 4 shifts to get to 60. Would be interesting to see if anyone's else makes it to 60 mph in 3rd. On paper it has enough RPM in 3rd before redline but it always shifts into 4th about 56-58 mph and that slows it down a little.

It is still the horrendous launch that I have the biggest issue with. That is what is absolutely killing the 0-60 times. It also means the FWD likely can be as quick, if not quicker (less weight) to 60 than the AWD ones.

I had a chance to run a Honda Passport (latest version). He easily pulled me off the line and those things by default seem to start in 2nd gear, at least all the ones I drove unless you put it in one of the offroad modes. He pulled me all the way to 60 and then I started to run him down and just nosed him by the end of about 1/4 mile. So likely a good running Honda minivan (aka Pilot) will run close to heads up with the latest gen RDX at least from a stop.

 

This summarizes drag strip performance of Gen III RDX.

 

Just an FYI, the RDX is speed limited to 110 MPH. What that has to do with anything in this thread? I haven't a clue.



Carry on.

 

No harm in knowing that, but I doubt this vehicle would ever hit that speed in the quarter mile.

 

It might with a running head start.