Hi all - bear with me, I'm sure most of you have seen my other threads looking at SUV's/Trucks for my next ride.

So I've started to look at the RDX. In doing so, I've read several reviews, and what stood out to me were the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times reported by such rags as Motor trend and C&D.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...est/specs.html

Now, a 6.2sec 0-60 for an SUV is quite impressive to me. However, around the same time is reported for the TL SH-AWD. I just can't believe it. Less horsepower, taller center of gravity, about the same curb weight, what gives?? Now I did read in one review that the RDX comes standard with Michelin Primacy tires, is that the missing piece? The Michelin Pilots stock on the TL are anything but impressive, but I remain shocked that the RDX is posting the same or better times than a "sport" sedan

Anyway, I don't want to stir a heated debate, but was shocked to read those figures. I do plan to take a test drive soon. I've eliminated most of the other SUV's I looked at before (I still absolutely love the beauty of the Grand Cherokee, but the drivetrain is crap)

 

0-60 times are not really what you should be judging either of these cars by. The TL is balanced for handling and refinement, not straight line acceleration. Take a SH-AWD down some twisty roads and you will see how the RDX pales in comparison. That said I am sure the RDX is still a respectable handling SUV, but it is no sports sedan.

Also don't take magazine performance numbers too seriously, they are not exactly known to be that accurate or consistent. They work as a baseline but thats about as far as I would take it.

 

I just got a 14 MDX shawd for my wife and am quite impressed with the ride, handling and acceleration. It is taller than my 10 TL, but a lot quieter and much better in ride quality.

 

I currently drive a '12 TL SH-AWD. I'm well aware of its capabilities; I'm also very aware that those capabilities are rarely used in my day to day driving. My needs have shifted to utility vs sporty handling.

However I don't want to drive a dog, which is what I've experienced test driving several SUV's of late. I haven't had the opportunity yet to drive the RDX, but at least on paper it looks like a great vehicle. The MDX is simply too large for me. I have no need for 3rd row seating.

I hope to get in a test drive soon. I will see if the butt dyno thinks its as fast as the TL. I simply can't believe that this SUV is posting the same numbers as the SH-AWD TL. While handling is important to the enjoyment of a vehicle, here on Chicago interstates speed is crucial. Other drivers are ruthless when it comes to on-ramps...

 

Similar output & similar weight... should get similar performance no?

I mean something like Jeep Grand Cherokee is about 5000lbs so it should be a dog but RDX is pretty light considering it is a SUV.

 

As an owner of both, I'd rather drive the TL. The high center of gravity in the RDX is a real buzz-kill. Who cares what the 0-60 is if you are only going to and from Sam's Club/Costco.

 

Motor Trend reviews about the 2012 TL Read more:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...#ixzz2lm3RW6um

 

Fuck Motor Trend

C&D FTW

 

That's the manual tranny

 

Comparing RDX vs. TL is more than numbers. The gf just got a 14 RDX AWD Tech and it is a nice ride, but it is an SUV and rides as such. I hate a hig center of gravity and the handling that comes with that. I would take a TL over RDX any day.

 

The V6 RDX doesn't have the more advanced SH-AWD, only the low-tech conventional AWD.

Handling-wise, the SH-AWD TL is a lot more capable than the AWD RDX.

 

Have you considered TSX Wagon? Not as quick, but probably more rewarding to drive then the RDX.

 

However, if 4wd is part of your equation it is not available on the TSX.

 

They are both great vehicles in my opinion. My wife has a 2010 RDX and I have a 2010 TL SH-AWD. When we go on long trips with the baby we take her RDX based on its practicality (More cargo space, better fuel mileage, a more comfortable ride). For everyday driving though, I prefer the TL (sportier ride, more fun to drive).

 

Thanks, I think the RDX is off my radar for now. I'm really digging the Audi SQ5

 

I test drove RDX and MDX. The rdz is not sporty at all, yes there is power the direction, suspension are not sporty. The MDX, even is bigger it s a real Sport UV

 

^^^^^

Is it because of the RDX losing the SH-AWD, but gaining a low-tech conventional AWD system ?

 

The Audi SQ5 is a nice choice! However, you will have to shell out between $55,000 and $61,000 for a well equipped one.

 

Yea The Audi Is Pricey But I Gotta Spend Money On Something Ill Most Likely Lease Due To German Reliability. I Think That Extra 10K Over A TL Gets U A Lot Between Quattro And The More Powerful Engine. I Want A Powerful, Practical Ride And I Dont Think I Can Do Better Than The SQ5 For The Price. Plus Have You Checked Out The 21" Wheel Option? SICK!!!!

 

RDX has flashpro availability. Not sure what your desires are but that is a big factor. Personally, I've driven the RDX as a loaner and was less than impressed with the handling. CG is too high for me.

 

^ RDX w/Turbo.

Again, nice sporty little SUV, but not the kind of vehicle that is worth blowing money on mods. Been there, done that.

 

Just bought a TL Tech. Looked and drove an MDX Tech, just too big and $$$, took RDX Tech out for spin, it's quick, but not near as comfortable and no where near the handling of TL, learned I couldn't drive a SUV, until I can afford a Cayenne S (and maybe then) so went with TL.