Philbert

Through a fair amount of e-mail and phone work, I've worked out a nice price on a base RDX (afraid to share until the paperwork is signed). A few things went into the Base/Tech decision:

- less of a discount means the premium is more than the $3,500 sticker

- navigation system is cool, but the lastest crop of portable systems (such as Tom Tom, Garmin, etc) offer almost all the functionality at a price around $700-800, and have the added benefit of being able to move to our other car. plus, the rotary controller seems a little more cumbersome to use than a touchscreen, though voice-commands are a cool idea. not sure how well they work in practice though?

- upgraded stereo is nice, I'd like it, but car is primarily for my wife, and she doesn't care. plus, while I made a small investment in SACDs, I don't have a single DVD-A, and probably won't buy any just to use in the car.

- backup camera is another feature that would be cool to have, but at this price?

- bluetooth, really wished this was just a standard feature.

Am I missing something? Anyone else have a base RDX and wish they had gone with the Tech?

Does anyone have pictures of the base RDX interior, specifically the center console screen? All the magazines and websites only show tech package interiors, and both cars I've test driven had the tech. Sat in a base model in the showroom, so have an idea of the button layout, but only got a brief look at the screen.


Cheers,
Phil

SolidState

If you don't see the need in the Tech Package then why get the RDX? You may be better off with the Mazda CX-7. I would look at that before getting the base RDX. The CX-7 is a lot cheaper and looks just as good as the base RDX if you ask me.

omgacuralol

huh? How does the base RDX look any different from the tech, other than the screen/dash area?

Philbert

i test drove a CX-7, then drove a few of them at the Mazda Zoom Zoom Live event. i just didn't find it to be at the same level of refinement as the RDX. the turbo has a more noticeable lag, and i felt it drives "bigger" than it is, while the RDX drives "smaller." also the seats in the RDX are fantastic, while the CX-7 were ok.

i previously drove an acura integra, and now have a mazda miata w/ hardtop (autocross car), so i don't have an anti-mazda bias. in fact, through motorsports involvement, i can buy the CX-7 under the S-plan pricing, and still prefer the RDX.

SPUDMTN

Sounds like you honestly would prefer to have the technology package.

Let me just say this: many Acura people go back and forth as to whether or not they should get the navigation system. Many people who did not get it wish that they did. I cannot say the same for the other way around--most people who get the navigation don't wish they did it any other way.

If you don't get the technology package, you'll probably regret it sometime down the road, but if you do get the tech package, I almost guarantee you'll never regret it.

As for ease of use--the central control knob is VERY intuitive and quite easy to use. You get used to it very quickly and it is WAY better than touch screen, trust me. The finger prints on a touch screen are obnoxious and the rotary dial is easier to use while driving.

But you are the one who will be making the payments and dealing with the vehicle regularly. The ball's in your court.

SolidState

My point was the RDX doesn't seem like it's worth getting without the Tech Package. That may just be me. If you just want a functional sporty like small SUV there may be other cars to consider like the CX-7.

dwest1023

If you plan on keep the car for some years, you will regret not having the tech package. As new technology slides down to the cheaper vehicles your car will seem old and less desirable, if you sell. Glad I got varible winshield wipers on my 84 Pickup. Get my point?

schuchmn

I drove both the RDX and the CX-7. I ended up going with the RDX with tech. But if money had been tighter, my first choice would have been the RDX non-tech over the CX-7 (BTW, I'm stating a personal opinion and not intending to start an RDX vs CX-7 debate -- there already is a discussion on that issue). On the basis of the engine and handling dynamics alone, the RDX was the clear winner.

My reasoning was much the same as Philbert -- I looked at all the features of the tech package and decided that I could live without any of them. But I did like the package a lot and my budget allowed it.

$3500 is not an insignificant sum and you have to decide if it's worth it to you. In my case, the dealer was offering me a discount on the tech that was $200 better than on the non-tech. And I could easily have spent $800 on a nav system, so the cost of the tech was really $2500.

BTW, I was looking at nav systems before I decided on the tech RDX, and here are some of the considerations I chewed on:

A non-OEM nav system can, as you said, be moved from car to car. You can even take it on a vacation where you drive a rental car over terra incognita.

Updated maps are generally a lot cheaper for the non-OEM units.

If you study the units carefully (and I downloaded and read over some of the owner's manuals) you'll find some, but not a lot of things that the Acura system can't do.

A non-OEM system means somewhat awkward mounting and a dangling cord for power, as opposed to the totally integrated system on the tech RDX. But some of the non-OEM systems can run for hours on an internal battery, so that partially obviates the dangling cord issue.

The RDX's system can be controlled by voice and it does it well. A week or so ago, I was driving down a highway and saw a lot of brake lights up ahead. I gave the system the "detour" command and it directed me off the highway and recalculated the route. I'd hate to have to deal with a touch-screen while I was driving.

If you haven't already, ltake a ook at www.gpsinformation.net and www.gpspassion.com.

OK, i think I've meandered all over the place here, but to sum up, in my opinion the non-tech RDX is still a very desireable vehicle.

acurardx

Are you from US or Canada ?

I think most buyers from US go for the tech package, I guess that's why you could negotiate the price for base model from dealer. I am not saying it is a must to get tech in US, but at least all tech packages functions are fully functional there.

In Canada, I personally would select base as several tech functions are not available in Canada (e.g Satellite radio, traffic report, etc). For GPS, I totally agree. I am currently using TomTom on my cell phone, way cheaper and way more convenient. And TomTom software is better too, I could change the voice prompt into any languages I want to. And most importantly, it is PORTABLE. It means I can move it to other cars I own and rental cars when I am out of town (which I need GPS the most. Who needs GPS daily to go home from work daily )

In terms of interior, base is almost exactly the same as tech. Except you will see 4 more speakers around in tech, and an extra long thin display on top of the regular LCD display.

ELS is nice but unless you are listening to orchestra music in the car all the time, I doubt you can notice much different from listening to radio or regular pop music.

Just my

By the way, CX7 is not same class at all ! Don't forget. Ford owns 1/3 or Mazda. Not sure if the Ford's quality will become Mazda's standard as well

rdx4fun

I think you should go with the tech package. Just eat out one less time a month. You wont regret it. You also get a 6 disc changer, upgraded dash intergration, more customizable settings as well as better resale down the road. People can say what they want about residules but numbers speak for themselfs. When I bought mine the dealer had a waiting list for techs and about 12 or so bases just sitting on thier lot. I dont know your financial position but to me an extra 60-70 a month in payment for all the extra features is well woth it. I work allot and get allot of enjoyment out of my car so I would do it again in a heart beat. But in the end it is a great vehicle either way so if you go with the base and get a garmin or tomtom I am sure you will be happy as well. Do what makes you happy life is to short and we cant buy time but we can buy tech packages.

kwhitw5500

I just purchased a non-tech this weekend and I am very happy with it. I can send a picture of the interior dash if you'd like.

gomboy60

Seems to me that the only visible difference along the center console area is the size of the main control knob. With tech pack, it is larger.

acurardx

Just want to share a story about tech package. A friend of mine bought a tech package, but he has no clue what bluetooth is. Not to mention whether his cell phone has bluetooth to use this BT feature.

I guess some people (like my friend) just bought the tech package because they thought it is cool to have the "tech" package in the car and it is "only" several thousand bucks or it is only $70 buck a month.

But I think if you don't really know what the tech package can do for you or you don't really need those features. Why wastes the money on it ? It might sound small with $70 per month. In reality, it is more than 10% of the car sales price. Bottomline is that would you even spend 5% more of your car price to get an accessory on it which you don't need.

flags

I've had my RDX Tech for about a week now. Like others have said, get it if you will use the features. Will you use the Navi? Bluetooth? Do you like features such as a better stereo and rearview camera? If yes, it is worth it. It is a signifcant amount of money (10% added to the car), but if you can afford it I would say yes to get it. Nothing worse than wishing you had it after the fact. It's not something you can add later like a roof rack...

dwest1023

A person may not need the features now, but later as one gets more tech savoy, then they wish they had it. Look at all the people who buy non- navi, only later to wish they had bought it. In the begining I did not know what bluetooth was all about, now I would not buy a car without it. Sometimes you don't know what you need until later. I say if you can afford it, get it! my last two 06's I got every single option. Like my mom use to say, better to have and not need, then to need and not have

aaronf

I agree with others here that the tech package is DEFINITELY worth it. I'm not sure I would have bought the RDX without the tech package, I probably would have went with a CR-V.

But in any case, the tech package is roughly $70.00 per month extra at 6 year financing and 7% APR.

The tech package will also increase the resale and/or trade in value of the vehicle as well.

I find the voice commands to be crucial to the Acura nav system, considering how easy it is for drivers to get distracted these days.

acurardx

Yes, if I live in US, I would probably go for the tech package even I have a portable GPS unit and bluetooth headset. That USD3200/CAD4000 is a good price for all those gadgets in tech package

But I would not say base RDX would be anything near 07 CRV.

Different brand and different class (one premium and one basic), different oultlook (I still don't like the CRV from 1st generation to 3rd generation, even I used to have a 97 CRV), different horsepower (240 vs 166), turbo vs no turbo, SH-AWD vs none (one of the major thing I like RDX), etc, etc.

Philbert

That would be great. If you have any shots of the center display (showing temp, radio, etc info) that would also be appreciated. I don't seem to have a private message capability setup, so hopefully it's ok for me to post my e-mail address here:

gounu2001-cars@yahoo.com

Thanks,
Phil

oblio98

When the 1999 TL came out with the Navi, we debated over and over about its merits.
"I have a map", "I have Map Quest", etc etc.

I will say this. Once you have a NAVI, you will never want another car without one. Even my wife, who gave me hell about my first Acura TL with Navi, giving me the "You know where you are going, why do you need this for $2000 more?", now has a car with a NAVI and she loves it.

Do you NEED one? Not really. Are they nice to have? You bet.

I will never buy another car without one.

The Tech Pack is well worth it, and will probably do a lot for you on resale.

acurardx

Of course, GPS and Mapquest, no comparison ! A electronic device vs paper printout !

But built-in GPS in your car vs portable GPS unit. Another story

Philbert

that's where I still get hung up. a portable unit, such as the $750 Garmin nuvi 660, would appear to offer sufficient navigation, bluetooth compatability with my wife's phone (which is not listed as compatible with the RDX bluetooth system), and traffic data through an FM connection that costs $60 for a year following the trial, vs. $10-15/mo through XM. all in a package that's less than 1" thick, and can be moved between cars.

while i am somewhat of an audiophile, i've never understood trying to implement an audiophile level system in a car, unless the sound deadening is to the level to make road noise non-existant. thus, how much better can the ELS system really be (for standard media... i conceed DVD-A would sound much better, but how many of those will still be available in stores once music is released on Blu-Ray and HD DVD)?

as for the depreciation argument, i don't buy that the tech package will depreciate at a lower rate than the car. thus, if after 3 years the car is worth 60% of value, i'd expect the base and tech to both be around that range of original msrp (in fact, the residual values assume a greater depreciation for the tech package car), but none of this is a science.

the fact that i can get more off retail now on a base also gives me a better starting ground on the depreciation hit.

not to knock the package, or those who bought it. i'm sure that if a $36-37k car was in the comfortable or lower part of my car buying range (ie, a similarly equipped X3 was in reach), i'd get the tech package and not think twice. it seems most "early adopters" are in that camp. the reports of low tech package availability vs base model (doesn't seem to be as severe here) would support that. and perhaps explain why i'm looking at a base RDX for under $31.5k.

ravemother

you have a very good point with the sound quality for DVD-A and blu-ray

Digits

If you search this forum you will find pictures posted of the non-tech dash. They have been posted previously.

schuchmn

Herein lies the key, I think. The question is not whether the tech package is "worth it" to any of us, but how big a hole in YOUR budget does $3500 make and are any of the features of the package worth that much to YOU?

omgacuralol

base model has 6 disk as well

newteez

Phil,

As someone who has just bought a non-tech RDX I can say I am a little sorry I did not get the tech package. (Although the car on its own without the tech is still great.) A couple things that I miss are the milage range (How much milage left in the tank), Non-Tech only has mpg/kmpg as estimated by tank and distanced traveled. A backup camera (Already hit something while backing up) and of course the navigation system. While you may only realistically use it once or twice a month, the value added by the other features will offset the higher cost of the vehicle.

I Wished I consulted with dwest1023 before buying...

Agreed.

JD

acurardx

Backing Assistance - Rear sensors can do much better job. Cost $341 + installation http://handaaccessories.com/rdx.html

Personally, when I back my car, my head is looking at the back. I am not sure how good it is to just look at the small LCD display for back parking. Hope the camera has a wide angle. Also, it will not show clear image if something get on the camera len, such as snow, rain, dirt, etc.

Navigation system - have mentioned many times, portable GPS is way better, way cheaper and way more convenient than the built-in one.

How much gas left in the tank, not sure how useful is this estimate..... I guess the normal gas tank indicator serves the purpose unless you don't pump gas unitl it is completely out. Normally, even the gas tank light is on, you can drive at least another 50 miles.

Philbert

really? that seems like a rather random thing to have eliminated from the non-tech.

Gadgets

That is really cheap on Acura's part. Just like packaging Blue tooth with the Tech pkg.

schuchmn

I like the camera when I'm in a parking lot or garage, sitting, say, between an Expedition and a Suburban. Without the camera, backing out is blind -- I have to back out slowly and hope that there's no Excursion whose driver's on the phone barrelling along down the aisle. The camera's angle of view is wide enough so that I don't have to back out very far to get a good look.

But you're right -- if you're backing up to a wall or another car, the sensor would probably give you better feedback.

As far as portable GPS systems, I looked into those before deciding on the tech package. I even went as far as to download and read the owner's manuals, which give you much better information about what a device can and can't do than any other source.

Way cheaper -- yes.

Way better -- I'm not so sure. Looking at top-of-the-line Magellan and Garmin units, there's very little that they can do that the RDX's system can't.

Way more convenient -- a matter of opinion. I'd like to be able to take a portable with me, in someone else's car, a rental car, etc. But the RDX has a larger screen than most portable nav units and and the display is in a good position -- it's easy to see and it's not where it obstructs any displays or controls or air vents or your view through the windshield. And I really like the voice control system -- you can use it while driving without taking your eyes off the road. And with a portable unit, I wouldn't want it visible when I left the car -- no use inviting theft. So it'd be mount and unmount every time.

But even if one likes the Acura's system better, there's still the question of whether or not it's worth the extra bucks.

The question, of course, is how much

crazymjb

I don't know your exact financial situation... However, I would be inclined to guess that if you wanted it, it wouldn't kill you to get the tech package, afterall, their are many decent CUVs for much less than this, such as the CRV. No its not an RDX, but you are in the market for a nicer crossover, so make it the one you really want.

As for all of you advocating portable units, yea they are nice, but they are nothing like what is in the car in terms of convienience, look, etc. I'd know, I use my fathers 3G TL a lot, and I have a roadmate 760 hardwired into my truck. Without the hardwire kit I'd never use my roadmate as the window mounts are crap as well as the built in antenna. I personally have used the nav in the TL multiple times, especially when going somewhere for the first time, no need to even ask directions, an no more fumbing with maps in your car. ANYONE who says a portable unit is better than the units Acura uses is wrong(some other car companies do use crappy nav systems), the Acura integrated systems are much more worth it.

As far as the audio, even if you don't use DVD-A regularly, it is fun to get a few disks and put them on just to listen to on occasion, the sound is amazing and it makes some classical music actually sound good.

As far as bluetooth, that is very useful in terms of not fumbling durings dialing or pickup, but I find a phone call to be distracting either way.

The backup cam is a given, thats excelent. I know some may be trying to justify not purchasing it, but their really is none. Backup cams are brilliant, simple as that.

What I say is this: If you are even considering the tech package, get it. If this means waiting another couple of months to get the car, so be it. It isn't worth it to spend 33K on a car and have regrets you wouldn't have if you shelled out 3K more.

Mike

acurardx

In terms of financial situation, I paid cash for deal, not financing nor leasing. I guess you should know whether I can afford another 3K. But I would only buy those stuff I want and I need.

GPS, I am not sure how good is the Acura one and how many satellite signals it can get. So no further comments. I am not using any mount on portable GPS unit, I am using GPS with my cell phone which I carry all the time, with the TomTom software installed. Actually, I don't really use GPS very often. I guess for those really need the GPS direction on a daily basis, then yes, get the built-in GPS from whatever car offers it. It will be more convenient.

ELS, yes, as I said on earlier post, it is great for classical music.

schuchmn

The Acura nav system impresses me and, like I said, I did a lot of GPS research. I get a signal anyplace within my company's 9-level parking garage so I think the sensitivity is good.

And just this morning on my way to work, one of the streets I take was blocked off by the police. Given time (and maybe a look at the map) I'd have found my way, but since my work location is in my address book, I called it up by voice and got directions. Way cool.

crazymjb

schuchmn, you likely aren't getting signal in the garage. The navigation computer uses gyroscopes and wheel speed sensors to predict where you are should you lose sattelite signal. Excelent for tunnels, especially here in Boston.

Mike

schuchmn

Mmm, hadn't thought of that. And I wasn't aware that the Acura system had gyros; not all systems do. If so, that's another advantage it has over a lot of of the portable units.

sasair

It is a cool feature, but certainly not a necessary one. How many places where you'd lose satellite signal could you get lost in? Parking garage? tunnel? Underground car maze? I'm not too familiar with driving in skyscraper cities, but do you lose signal on the streets of new york city? If so then that may be the best use of it. I've never had a problem driving in washington DC with my portable nav unit, but there aren't any tall buildings in DC.

crazymjb

VERY useful in the Boston Central Artery... I'm speaking from my experience. Also keeps everything more fluid if you lose the sats for some unknown reason and the car is in the process or re-aquiring them. Occasionally if I stop under a big tree with my Roadmate 760 in the truck, even with the roof antenna, I wont move on the map until I get the sats back.

Mike

schuchmn

You're absolutely correct -- it isn't essential. Like I've said, it depends a lot on how much that $3500 is to you personally. The decision comes down to:

1. How much do you like it?
2. How much are you willing to pay for it?

These are personal decisions we each make. No matter how many opinions you get, it still comes down to the same thing. (But that's not to say that you shouldn't get other opinions. Collecting information is an essential part of the decision making process.) And, of course, the decision on this particular issue is complicated by the fact that the Acura nav system can only be had by buying the whole tech package, which is pretty pricey.

On the subject of signal in big cities, even though I live about 45 minutes outside of New York, I haven't had the occasion to take the nav system into the concrete canyons yet.

SolidState

Have you been through lower Wacker in Chicago? If not, then you will appreciate the feature. Also, I've notice the Nav knows I'm on lower Wacker driver but it will still give directions as though I'm on upper Wacker. The Nav wanted me to turn right on LaSalle but you can't on lower Wacker or else you will run into the Chicago River.

neo1738

As for the depreciation, Supply and Demand, if there is more demand for tech packages than for Base Models, you can charge more. My two cents