Costco

Colin, in many cases even if I disagree with you I'll still tend to agree with you on many points but in this case I cannot. Honda indeed should go back to its roots, I agree. Honda needs to bring back some of the flavor that made so many people reminisce fondly of its cars.

That would be the problem that Acura is suffering from.... there are people think the TL or RL is a tarted up version of the Accord, or will cross shop them. If anything, Acura wants to distance itself from Honda, don't they? If they want to compete with the big boys, I don't think anyone up there at Acura Corp. wants consumers to start confusing the Honda lineup with the Acura lineup. I'm not too sure, but I don't think Acura has every had the aim of being the most economical luxury automaker, nor do I think economy and luxury should be mentioned in the same sentence.

And it's true, the J-series is not that far behind technologically as people make it out to be. But regardless of age, why would you want to brag about the J-series merely keeping up with the competition? You're supposed to brag about how it gets better fuel economy than its competition.... how it makes more power than the competition.... not that "[the TL] is the most powerful Acura yet," which in itself is laughable because its not all that powerful and its false (how soon we forget the NSX).

The more I think about it, the sadder I get.... has Honda/Acura already forgotten the NSX? A car that made other Honda/Acura owners speak proudly of their own cars? Unfortunately I feel that Honda/Acura is going the Toyota route with the aim of higher sales numbers at the expense of satisfying their enthusiast fanbase. Yes I know we're smaller in number and yes I know they may alienate some of their new customers.

Colin

Personally, I think people view that days through rose colored glasses. Nobody here would be satisfied with 200 hp Preludes or if you go further back, 130 HP CRX Si's. Then again, a return to those vehicle weights is simply not possible with today's safety requirements. Realistically, as cars get safer, they get heavier. This means they need more power and thus get lower fuel economy. Sadly there is no 'easy' answer.
First off, I don't see anybody bragging, unless you're talking about advertising. But what advertising doesn't put their best foot forward? (is this really the 'funnest' iPod ever?) Second, the J actually is a little behind technologically, but despite this handicap, the end result (Hp, Torque and FE) is remarkably similar. This is some good engineering and a fact often overlooked here. Finally, all I can say is that I've been around cars long enough to understand engineering and product cycles. The J replacement is surely under development and yes, the current engine is getting old. However, nobody has the best engine ALL THE TIME. There is a natural ebb and flow as other manufacturers make advances and you counter them.

I don't want to sound 'ageist' and my thoughts are not directed at you specifically but I see so many 20-somethings on the forums complaining about how Honda has "lost it". The point is, they might have grown up with a Honda on the upswing and are shocked to see Toyota or Nissan "pull ahead." However, I have personally owned some of the best engines Toyota ever fielded: 4-AG, 4A-GZE, 3S-GE and 3S-GTE. From my point of view, Toyota once had the finest 4 cylinder Japanese engines. Honda responded with B's and K's but I fully expect Toyota to be working on their response. Ebb and Flow.

Finally, it is worth noting that the last version of the NSX had a 3.2 liter V-6 making 290 HP. So yes, the TL is the most powerful, (if by a slim margin) but obviously loses on a power per liter measurement.

knavinusa

I like the sound of a J-series engine at WOT. It definitely has a lot of potential, but Honda/Acura needs to start looking at forced induction. If they really want to keep the engine around for this long it's the only way they're gonna be able to keep up with their competitors without increasing displacement.

dom

But many of their competitors engines also get ULEV Teir II certification. Including some V8's.


Not accusing you. Just pointing out what many argued in defense of Honda when even Honda knew they needed more than 5. You like to talk about Honda's heritage and we all grew up with it and now expect them to change. Did we forget about what probably brought most of us to Honda to begin with? Their terrific engines and manual transmissions. How they make the best engines in the world. We expect them to be ahead of the curve in that department and while the J is adequate, its certainly not class leading.

But your point about cycles is well taken. I just hope they're at the end of the cycle.

Costco

Funny you should mention Toyota because I think they've had the largest fall from grace with regards to cars made in the interest of the "enthusiast". I planned on getting a 2G MR2 Turbo myself, and if anything, merely entertained the idea of dropping in a BEAMS in a shell. As much as I bash Honda (Acura more-so), when I look at Toyota's line-up today I find it difficult to choose a Toyota over a comparable Honda. For car shoppers I've always pointed folks out to both cars, but in the end my recommendation almost always goes to Honda, especially after test-drives. Those iron-block 4-cylinders Toyota used to have were impressive. Though I have to add, the latest direct-injected V6 in the IS350 is worth mentioning too. Just a shame that its not available with a 6-speed manual because the Lexus 6AT is a dog, even in S mode. Speaking of which, direct-injection is another technology that Honda has yet to harness the potential of.....

I'm not expecting Honda to be on top of the game year-in and year-out. Yeah, the 90's were their glory days, but no one is expecting the exact same cars (or at least they shouldn't), since today's Hondas/Acuras are safer than ever and as you said, that results in extra weight. Its just that their reputation as an engine maker precedes them (perhaps unfairly at times) and I feel like they aren't using the best engines they have in their stable. IMO they fudged it up with the K23.... they could have easily just fitted it with a front-mount intercooler, and maybe made it possibly to fit under the hood of other Honda models. The K23 and SH-AWD would do a whole lot better in another car. How about a Civic Type-R sedan on NA soil?

Kind of off on a tangent but I love how Mazda has stayed mostly true to the original Mazda formula for their Miata even with the newest NC generation. Still lightweight, still a bargain, and most important, still a blast to drive.

Indeed the TL SH-AWD is the most powerful Acura yet, no doubt about that. But it just went over my head because it simply doesn't seem that way. It took Acura 12 years to finally be able to say that they topped their best effort, and even then it's nothing special compared to the competition. Take the VQ series for instance, which was in use before the even the earliest J-series.... it puts out more power in its most powerful incarnation (350 horsepower for the NISMO 370Z) and is also the basis for the twin-turbo VR38DETT in the GT-R, which needs no further introduction.

Until their next cycle of engines I hope Honda/Acura can return to being a surefire choice in many peoples minds again. I know I'm digging up a beaten dead horse and beating it again but I think the first step is changing the styling to be worthy of beautiful interiors.

Yumcha

Yeah, no...I may be in the market for a crossover-esque vehicle. But, the ZDX goes with the -X6 in the no-thanks pile for now.

Autoblog's drive of it seems to confirm that for me. If I'm putting that much $ into something that has some storage space, it better be at least SOMEWHAT fun to drive.

cp3117

How true....

You made me remember when my family owned a Toyota dealership back then an I recall droooling over a Supercharged MR-2 in the showroom.

Like you said Toyota used to make some great cars and now its embarrassing when you drive onto a Toyota dealership. With the exception of the very limited market of the IS-F, Toyota or Lexus has nothing that interests me anymore. When it comes to Toyota or Honda I will usually recommend Honda with the exception when it comes to the Acura and Lexus as Lexus still has Acura beat hands down in the luxury department.

Kia and Hyundai offer more exciting vehicles than Toyota these days.

Costco

Ah, fond memories of the past. I had a light blue 1G MR2 die cast toy which was scratched to all hell when I wasn't even old enough to walk. I don't know how but most of the blue paintjob had scratched off to reveal the "primer" underneath but I had the car with me everywhere I went. My old coworker had a supercharged one which was a pretty fun to drive (though I still prefer the 2G, just preference), and heck, you reminded me of the first time I saw an Electron Blue Civic Si in the dealership while my mom was shopping for cars

My experience mirrors yours, and I too like a couple of Kia models and especially Hyundai's Genesis coupe and sedan more than Toyota's lineup. I still really like the GS and LS though.... pure luxury. I actually did help my cousin shop for a car, she initially wanted a Yaris since it was cute, cheap and economical. I did not like it (steering wheel/interior in general is super cheap for a new car) but she didn't mind. The dealer would not budge on the price though, and it was marked up so we ended up going over to the Honda dealer and getting a 09 RBP Accord LX, which I took delivery of for her. We both liked it more than the 4-cylinder Camry also.

I ended up putting together a list with pictures, prices and brief descriptors for my sister, who initially was interested in the 3G TL and VW Eos. Suggested the C70, ES350, A4, 3-series, G35 sedan and basically everything else in the segment which I won't mention because she didn't care for them. She liked the ES a lot, along with the atmosphere of the Lexus dealer, so ultimately she got one. I actually nudged her a bit towards the TL, whereas with my cousin I just mentioned I liked the Accord more and she agreed completely. Its always interesting to see what the regular folks like.

Anyways, I'd have a hard time recommending the ZDX to anyone, over anything, especially the X6. Looks? X6. Prestige factor which mostly likely will indeed be a factor when it comes to a niche, image vehicle like this? X6.

TSX69

2010 Acura ZDX Road Test

Our road test for the 2010 Acura ZDX includes a full evaluation of the 2010 Acura ZDX from the inside out. We evaluate not only engine and handling performance for the 2010 Acura ZDX, but also interior cabin and cargo space. Let our comprehensive road test ratings for the 2010 Acura ZDX help you decide if a 2010 Acura ZDX is right for you.

ACCELERATION
Technology 6
Advance 6
Class Average 5.9
ZDX's V6 offers enough power for just about any situation; only long hill climbs fatigue it. The transmission is smooth and furnishes prompt downshifts.

FUEL ECONOMY
Technology 4
Advance 4
Class Average 3.5
No opportunity to measure. Acura recommends premium-grade gas.

RIDE QUALITY
Technology 6
Advance 6
Class Average 5.8
A ZDX with the standard suspension and 19-inch wheels provides the best results. The Advance Package includes driver-selectable Sport and Comfort suspension modes. Comfort softens the ride for better absorption; Sport mode delivers stiffer tuning, making some bumps jar.

STEERING/HANDLING/BRAKING
Technology 6
Advance 7
Class Average 5.4
Overall, ZDX is fairly car-like with well-checked body lean and decent cornering ability; it deftly handles narrow twisties. When selected, the Advance package's Sport suspension mode firms up the steering and provides crisper handling.

QUIETNESS
Technology 7
Advance 7
Class Average 6.5
The cabin is impressively hushed and well isolated from wind and road noise. In certain driving conditions, low levels of tire thrum are present. ZDX's 3.7-liter V6 emits a fairly muted, but still sporty note on acceleration and fades during cruise.

CONTROLS
Technology 5
Advance 5
Class Average 5.5
The audio and climate controls are easy to use, but the sheer number of them takes some getting use to. The fact that the buttons are dark until the car is turned on only highlights the vast number of controls and cluttered look of the panel. The navigation screen is large, mounted high on the dashboard, and decently removed from glare. It is fairly simple to use and only absorbs iPod audio controls. The control nob, however, is mounted low near the center console, which forces eyes off the road until functions are mastered. iPod integration is nearly seamless, even custom playlists are easily controlled. The navigation system's Doppler-style real-time traffic function is neat. The multi-view camera's 180 degree view is very similar to the regular angle, and the top view displays a straight-down picture of the rear of the car. The Advance package's adaptive cruise control and blind-spot-detection systems are helpful tools. The blind-spot system illuminates an icon on the C-pillar rather than the side mirror, making it less distracting than other systems.

DETAILS
Technology 8
Advance 8
Class Average 6.6
The cabin is trimmed in top-notch materials, including supple leather with detail stitching. Non-leather surfaces are nicely grained, soft-touch plastics.

ROOM/COMFORT/DRIVER SEATING (FRONT)
Technology 7
Advance 7
Class Average 7
Front seat headroom is adequate for average-size testers, but those above 6 feet will need a bit more clearance. The seats are all-day comfortable, but taller occupants may need a longer seat for more thigh support. Thick C-pillars, a small rear window, and sharply raked roofline combine to impede visibility straight back and to the corners. The Advance Package's ventilated seats are a nice touch on a warm day, though the fan noise is louder than expected.

ROOM/COMFORT (REAR)
Technology 5
Advance 5
Class Average 5.6
The sloped rear roofline cuts into headroom, but there's enough room for smaller adults; most everyone will require more legroom. The small second-row door opens wider than expected, but the opening is fairly narrow, hindering ingress and egress. The low roofline also requires some hunching to get into the backseat.

CARGO ROOM
Technology 8
Advance 8
Class Average 7.6
Small items storage is decent and comprised of a fairly shallow glovebox; a deep, two-tiered center console; and several small cubbies. The rear seats fold completely flat. The trunk features hidden side-panel and underfloor storage spaces.

VALUE WITHIN CLASS
Technology 7
Advance 7
Class Average 5.9
If standout styling is high on your list of attributes a car in this class must possess, move ZDX to the head of the class. With standard AWD and plenty of amenities, ZDX is a comfortable, capable choice, but lacks practicality with its small backseat and poor rear visibility. If you're looking for a sporty, yet practical SUV in this class, Acura's own MDX likely will better fit your needs.

Total Score
Technology 69
Advance 70
Class Average 65.3

mrdeeno

So what is considered in this "class"?

Moog-Type-S

X6

Infamous425

i dont get that review. what does technology/advance have to do with quietness/accel/etc...

TSX69

Technology & advance refers to the trim levels that the ZDX is offered in. They tested both of them in the different categories like quietness & reported the results ... the advance model scored 1 point higher overall.

SpicyMikey

Whatever they consider "Premium Midsize Sport-utility Vehicles". They don't explicitly list them. Here's the article.

http://consumerguideauto.howstuffwor...-acura-zdx.htm

biker

Talk about totaly making up numbers (for the "class") - there's nothing other than the X6 you can compare this thing to.

SpicyMikey

Based on the description "Premium Midsize Sport-utility Vehicles", I am assuming they are including all unibody luxury SUV's. RX, MDX, M Class, FX, etc. It's not just these new odd station wagon like SUV's in the "class"

Colin

Hard to define this class, but I think Popular Science considers these an off-shoot of the unit body SUVs. I think Brian Cooley at CNet called them CoupeUV's. Could these be defined as: All-weather vehicles that bridge the gap between an SUV with a high driving position, and a sedan? I'd say that the EX35, X6 are the luxury competitors that come to mine, and the Crosstour and Venza are examples of 'mass market' versions.

Colin

I still miss my Supercharge MR-2. I liked that one more than the '03 Turbo. I was too young to drive it, but I did get to ride around in a 2000 GT a few times.

Fishy

I test drove the SC MR-2 back in the day and boy did that thing oversteer.

You guys should test drive the Volvo XC60. Its looks great, handles great when set to the firm suspension setting but the interior is not up to par and fuel economy sucks. And of course who knows where Volvo is going.

Colin

As I recall, '88s had no rear sway bar for the SC models. For '89 they put it back. No doubt that they wanted to spin though. I never autocrossed the SC, but I was autocrossing with the Turbo. A very hard car to drive. As I recall, I was leading the points in A Stock when I replaced the Turbo with our 2000 S2000. What a difference! Compared to the snap oversteer in the MR-2, the S2000 would actually RECOVER if you fed in opposite lock!

Costco

The 91+ MR2 was my introduction to mid-engined RWD cars. I thought I had it all down pat until I drove my brother's 91 Turbo. The first time I went a little too hot into a turn, I let off the gas and the car quickly spun me around once or twice. It was the first time I spun around that much, so I had to check my underwear afterwards.

A friend of mine who has owned a couple of serious MR2Ts told me you're supposed to keep the throttle planted when you feel the rear starting to lose grip. I really wanted to try it but ultimately I lacked the testicular fortitude maybe if it was my own car and I had some more seat time.

Love the S2000 also.... more balanced than the MR2 and much more forgiving. I drove an AP2 recently, which was a little bit easier to sort out than an AP1.... needless to say I think the salesman had to check his underwear after the test drive

The ZDX too, I'm sure will handle quite well for a vehicle its size. If it's at least as good as the MDX, it will be great. I really think Acura should offer SH-AWD on more of their lineup, because its a great feeling when the car rotates with the gas pedal.... even ordinary customers can feel the difference. I've never had so much fun driving an SUV/crossover as I did with the MDX. Granted, the X5 still feels more planted to the road. I just don't think enough people know how SH-AWD works, otherwise they'd be curious to try it out.

Colin

Ha Ha, I was looking for pics of my MR-2 on track but found this instead. It's a copy of our local chapter SCCA newsletter that I used to edit. Check out the results page. Look in GS, that guy in the Type-R could drive! (I'm in AS).

http://www.sccahawaii.org/2001results/scca_hu9.pdf

cp3117

I agree.

I know Acura wants this to be an X6 competitor, but to me its like comparing a VW CC to a Mercedes CLS. They look kinda the same but they arent.

I will hold out my final judgement though untill I can actually sit in a ZDX.

jhr3uva90

How does Acura want to be an X6 competitor when the ZDX was in development before anyone outside of BMW knew what an X6 was? And the ZDX's advantage over the X6 is the same as Acura's advantage over BMW in general: it costs less.

Costco

Yes, this has been discussed before... I can't say for sure that Acura made the ZDX to be an X6 competitor. But the way the cards have fallen, the X6 happens to be a luxury crossover with a "four-door coupe" profile..... and correct me if I'm wrong here but the ZDX also happens to be a luxury crossover with said coupe profile. It just worked itself out to be that way, whether or not Acura planned it.

Personally, at first I had no idea what the purpose of the X6 was.... is it an X5 with half the utility? I actually really liked it in pictures though.... but then I saw it in person and it was very awkward looking. It just didn't work but we'll see how the ZDX does.

SpicyMikey

Yes, I've seen the X6 in person also. It's worse in person. The back end is way out of proportion compared to anything else on the road. Makes it shocking when you first stand next to it. The ZDX is no where near as radical of a design (from the pictures). Also, it's probably going to be $20k cheaper when comparably equiped. BMW has a loyal following that will buy almost anything they make, but the X6 is really struggling. I am willing to bet the ZDX does much better with the sales numbers

juniorbean

iTrader: (5)

^ I don't know. One of my neighbors has a white one (X6) and it is pretty damn sexy!!

Colin

Which only illustrates how difficult it is to debate 'style'. I will say that when I stand next to the X6 tail, it seems as if the trunklid as at shoulder height. It seems really massive.

Moog-Type-S

We can all agree the Acura beak is horrible

SpicyMikey

Nope. Can't even do that. I think it looks ok. Not great. But not horrible. Sorry. Colin's probably right. Useless to debate style.

Yumcha

Beak? It's a baking pan...

Belzebutt

I agree. Every time I see and X6 I can't help staring at it, and not because I find it repulsive. I think it's a cool-looking butchy SUV, kind of like the original FX, minus the utility.

Legend2TL

, good writeup

Legend2TL

Been busy and catching up reading some of these posts. As typical another excellent from Colin.

SpicyMikey

Was this posted already? Didn't see it anywhere so here you go. Mixed reviews. Biggest complaint seems to be the back seat for these guys. Not sure it's too much of a problem. if you need to carry people, get an MDX. This is more of a "personal" utility vehicle. As far as seating, I see it more like a 2+2

http://blogs.consumerreports.org/car...acura-zdx.html


First impression: 2010 Acura ZDX

The ZDX is a combination of an SUV and a coupe-like four-door sedan (think Mercedes-Benz CLS and Volkswagen CC shape), with Acura MDX underpinnings. This genre-crossing vehicle is an attempt to merge usability and all-weather ability in a package that still retains the driving enjoyment of a sporty coupe. When it goes on sale in late 2010 the ZDX will feature the same 3.7-liter, 300-hp V6 found in the MDX, combined with Acura’s first-ever six-speed automatic transmission.

Like its SUV sibling, the ZDX is fitted with standard all-wheel drive. Called SH-AWD (for Super Handling), the system usually sends 90 percent of the power to the front wheels, but it can send up to 70 percent to the rear wheels for “sporty” driving. SH-AWD also can send 100 percent of the rear-wheel torque to one side of the vehicle. We found that this system added little value in the RL and RDX on the road but reduced understeer when pushed to its cornering limits on our track.

A new feature that is being introduced on the ZDX is Acura’s Integrated Dynamic System (IDS), which offers a Comfort and Sport setting. By rotating the large (and somewhat out of place) switch on the dash to Sport, the steering response is firmed up and the suspension dampening rate is stiffened.

Behind the wheel

Consumer Reports staffers had a chance to drive the upcoming Acura ZDX at a recent media event outside New York City. We drove it in heavy Manhattan traffic, as well as on twisty secondary roads in the towns and counties north of the City. Below are our first impressions:

At first glance it is obvious that style has trumped utility in some aspects of the ZDX, and Acura representatives haven’t been shy in stating that the main purpose of the vehicle is to carry a driver and a single passenger—and their belongings—to their destination in comfortable luxury. The targeted DINKs (dual-income, no kids) and empty nesters often have friends, so there are seating positions for three rear-seat occupants. However, it’s best if those passengers are well shorter than six-feet tall and don’t mind close-quarters seating.

The low-roof and close-quarters seating contributes to a cave-like feel, which is offset somewhat by the full glass roof. The front part of the panoramic sunroof opens and closes like any other, while the fixed panel above the rear seats has a retractable sunshade. Cabin materials are first rate, with plenty of soft-touch surfaces and high-quality materials.

One interesting feature is an available multi-view rear camera. Users can toggle through three views, including a wide-angle fisheye view and a top-down view--handy for parking or trying to exit a parallel-parking situation without tapping the vehicle behind.

The ZDX will be available in three trim levels. Moving from the base model, the Technology package will include the rear camera, real-time traffic and weather information in the navigation system, and keyless entry. The top-level Advance package includes IDS, adaptive cruise control, and the blind spot warning system. Pricing hasn’t been formally announced, but Acura says the base price will be in between the $41,000 MDX and the $47,000 RL sedan, and they are expecting sales of no more than 6,000 units per year.

Jeff Bartlett: The ZDX is an appealing idea. I favor the versatility of a hatchback and can appreciate the sure-footed confidence AWD can provide in northern regions. In person, the car is quite attractive—more so than in the flat lights at auto shows. However, my enthusiasm waned once I sat in the vehicle. The simple showroom experience will deter many buyers. Up front, the high floor puts the driver and passenger in a lounge-like seating position, with legs extended, rather than a more natural and comfortable bend. The rear seat is more like a subcompact coupe than a midsize sedan. The sloping roof and high door sill make it difficult to even enter the back seat. Once there, head room is so limited that at my modest stature, I would have to bend forward allowing the back of my head to touch the headliner, or lean far to the side. Sure the target may be affluent couples, but empty nesters likely have grown, full-sized children and/or friends. The rear cargo area is disappointing as well, with a high load floor and narrow width. Looks like a hard sell, given that the much more functional MDX has a lower base price.

Jon Linkov: I liked the ZDX a lot more than I thought I would, particularly after driving versions with and without IDS. The IDS-equipped car did nothing for me in comfort mode, where the steering felt overly-boosted and disconnected from the wheels, and the suspension floated over bumps to the point of being unsettling. But the sport mode was much more enjoyable—until I drove the non-IDS car. The steering in that model was fine, well-weighted and giving plenty of feedback. I’m still on the fence about the styling, and wonder if the ZDX (and the similar BMW X6) is an answer to a question that made sense before $4.00 gas, a financial meltdown, and plummeting car sales. As a fan of sport wagons, I’m worried that this type of vehicle is the future, as manufacturers and buyers (or vice versa) shun the efficient small/midsize wagon in favor of these larger, more CAFE-friendly/avoiding SUV-like vehicles.

(Cj)

Pretty low sales outlook. Looks like their expecting this to be another RL/RDX type vehicle. We'll see if it even meets the already low sales forecast. It's a decent looking $50K luxury vehicle, but the low level of practicality may hurt sales. I've read that the X6's back seat (which is tight for the class) is bigger than the ZDX's.

vybzkartel

^^^^^He's baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack!!!

LessisBestmakingendsmeet

I can appreciate your thoughts but I disagree here. One of the reasons the NSX was so great was it was all new, didn't share anything, had its own platform, aluminum etc. It was the pinnacle of their technology at the time. What you are proposing, a "shared" NSX, is insulting to what the NSX was about. Moving the engine up front was insulting enough, as well as adding AWD.

If we look, there is NO supercar that shares its platform with sedans and GT coupes. NONE.

Lets look at the GT-R. It is not platformed shared with other Nissans and Infinitis. The R8 is not platform shared with other Audis and VWs. Unless you want to hamper the next NSX, there is no way it will share its platform with much larger and heavier vehicles.

As for the ZDX, it seemed like a smart move at the time it was proposed/approved. A more expensive car based on the MDX. A way to make a profit on existing mechanics. The main investment was in the interior and adding one simple gear. Outside of that, its simply a sportier MDX similar to what BMW does with the X5 and X6. It is a smart business decision from bean counters.

The thing is BMW can go into niches because its product line is so vast. There is no confusion what BMW is, they are THE sports luxury brand. Acura continues to confuse with the new message and now will have as many SUVs as Sedans, one which rarely sells. Range Rover is supposed to have a SUV for a flagship, what other luxury brand has a SUV for a flagship?

SpicyMikey

Tend to agree. Nice looking car. Also, I sense this will be a growing segment. Just don't think this should have been Acura's next product to expand the lineup. Now they are 50% utility vehicles? Are they trying to compete with BMW or Land Rover?

(Cj)

yup