I have an RL which I love and was all set to replace it with an RLX until I saw that it's FWD, not AWD as the RL is. At first that seems like a giant step backward but I'm willing to be open minded about it. What was their thinking on FWD rather than AWD?

(Yes, I know there will be an AWD/Hybrid RLX late this year but I'm looking now.)

Thanks.

Peter

 

I believe that most are assuming that the technology for the Sport Hybrid SHAWD is still being tested/perfected and thus not yet available for market. There may be a marketing play here related to the release of the new NSX as well, but I think it is more likely that Acura are perfecting the Hybrid technology.

I'm on record as saying launching without the breakthrough SH-SHAWD technology was a mistake on Acura's part, but considering the sales numbers that the RL had dwindled down to, I guess they figured that they had nothing to lose. On the positive side for those of us waiting for the AWD version, all of the other technologies/features of the RLX are being tuned/tweeked/perfected on the FWD version. Hopefully, the RLX launch 2.0 this fall?? will generate more excitement and passion for what appears to be a really great car.

 

P-AWS is supposed to mitigate the challenges of a FWD platform under extreme handling. Check out the Car and Driver review in the Acura RLX thread (I think around page 9). I read the print version today. The article said that while P-AWS helps, it does not substitute for an AWD or RWD platform.

 

..... especially in the wet and the snow.

 

Couldn't substitute for an AWD, especially in the wet and the snow.

 

Accord to Jeff (Founder of TOV, TOV is a Honda/Acura online forum), the handling of the RLX is actually pretty good especially on the back roads/twisties. Objectively speaking, the RLX is also delivering some relatively good numbers. Here's a quote from him,

"The RLX is pretty legit in terms of sportiness and driving dynamics, particularly considering its roominess and mass."

Without AWD though, it won't do as well in the snow for sure.

For normal driving though, the benefits of P-AWS is more accessible. In order to "feel" SH-AWD, you pretty much need to be driving at the limit, pushing the gas pedal while turning to feel it. With P-AWS, it works whether you are decelerating, coasting, or accelerating through a corner. It also helps manoeuvring in a tight area like a parking lot.

Cost wise, I'd bet that P-AWS is cheaper to implement than SH-AWD. The money saved here can be used elsewhere such as additional features. Not everyone wants AWD, so having FWD is a great option.

If you really need AWD, then there's the hybrid version coming up. That AWD system is supposed to be much better than the old SH-AWD system. It's better for fuel efficiency, it works in all situations (i.e. decelerating, coasting, or accelerating), and I heard that it's also lighter.

 

I still think they should have had SH-AWD in all but the base and if need be offer SH-SH-AWD at the high end. I have to say I do agree with the statement about SH-AWD really only being felt at the extremes. When I had my 4G AWD TL you could watch the AWD mid and see that even in hard corners you really had to lean into the gas to get AWD to do anything. I think much of the perceived benefit of AWD, in the TL at least, was due to the very firm suspension and heavy bolstered seats which made the car feel like glue on rails in the corners.

 

The problem is, a lot of customers equate AWD with snow and did not get the RL as a result.

 

"For normal driving though, the benefits of P-AWS is more accessible. In order to "feel" SH-AWD, you pretty much need to be driving at the limit, pushing the gas pedal while turning to feel it. With P-AWS, it works whether you are decelerating, coasting, or accelerating through a corner. It also helps manoeuvring in a tight area like a parking lot."

Thats a good point. Plus, wouldn't you rather have FWD versus RWD in wet/snow if you can't have AWD?

 

They need a better name, look at all the Quattro Audi's most people equate that to handling, even though technically SH-AWD is better.

 

^Agree - been mentioned on other threads

SH-SH-AWD is even worse!

 

While all of these are good points, I think one of the biggest factors is fuel efficiency. Honda clearly wants all of their new vehicles to be top of the class in gas mileage and they can do that with P-AWS and still provide good handling. While it does cut costs, it also costs money to implement P-AWS and I think they are just choosing to go with it on this car instead.

 

with respect to the name SH-AWD, it just doesn't do it justice. If you ask what SH means and sales person says "Super Handling", it sounds gimmicky. I said on another thread they could have used something with Torque Vectoring. Could have used "AWD with TV". Then if you ask what TV is and sales person says Torque Vectoring, you would probably want to know more.
My .02

I think PAWS sounds gimmicky as well, but at least it really does stand for something that describes what it is rather than super handling

If they had started with AWD with TV, then with RLX, they could have evolved to AWD with ETV

 

That is fine, but to exclude SH-AWD from all trims and then have SH-SH-AWD at such what will likely be a high price tag actually hurts them because it leaves them without AWD models at price points some of us would have entertained.

 

If I were Acura, I'd just call it "Sport AWD Hybrid" and call it a day. SH-SH-AWD is too fricking hard to type out.

 

Audi has already caught up with Acura with it's own torque-vectoring Quattro AWD.

Care to elaborate how the SH-AWD is technically better than the "Quattro with torque vectoring" ?

 

A lot of people are waiting until the SH-SH-AWD-Hybrid RLX arrives so that we may move the discussion to "It is way too expensive and the competition is too great". Only then will some people think that PAWS is a great option.
I do not think that the SH-SH will be under 70K (Advance of course).

 

True, but that is still an option to Quattro for now and I believe only on the S models.

 

Yea I also think SH-SH-AWD sounds weird and very difficult to say. I like the idea of just calling it Sport Hybrid AWD, or AWD with ATV, or come up with a new name for such system (like Quattro, 4-matic, etc).

I also think having the regular SH-AWD as an option is good for consumers.

 

Agree.

There's also a "sport differential" option for the Quattro system too.

Without the torque-vectoring option, the Quattro system is then comparable to the regular AWD system as used on the new RDX.