Disappionted with RDX economy?
02-28-2008, 04:42 PM
#41
Instructor
Join Date: Sep 2006
Age: 38
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by heffergm
How can anyone, having bought the vehicle, claim disappointment over the fuel economy and not expect people to think them a complete moron?
There's a big sticker in the window of every new vehicle. It rather clearly states that in EPA testing loops, observed mileage for City and Highway driving were 17/22.
So aside from admitting you can't read and shouldn't be buying a new car at all, what did you expect, that the EPA figures were blatant lies and everything would be great because your 4 cylinder turbocharged 4000lb car really COULD get 30mpg?
I'm convinced this country is going to hell in a handbasket, and the current mortgage situation goes a long way towards proving it. People being upset over fuel economy figures they were told to expect before buying the car cement it.
There's a big sticker in the window of every new vehicle. It rather clearly states that in EPA testing loops, observed mileage for City and Highway driving were 17/22.
So aside from admitting you can't read and shouldn't be buying a new car at all, what did you expect, that the EPA figures were blatant lies and everything would be great because your 4 cylinder turbocharged 4000lb car really COULD get 30mpg?
I'm convinced this country is going to hell in a handbasket, and the current mortgage situation goes a long way towards proving it. People being upset over fuel economy figures they were told to expect before buying the car cement it.
Don't get me wrong, the numbers still aren't bad for the power/weight/AWD, but it would have been nice to have had a more accurate estimate going in.
02-28-2008, 04:49 PM
#42
Instructor
Join Date: Sep 2006
Age: 38
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by sl_33
But very few of us buy a vehicle with only one criteria in mind.
--
True enough. And obviously fuel economy is a consideration in any vehicle purchase. But I still contend that the typical RDX buyer is not out looking for optimum fuel economy. It probably doesn't even crack the top ten items in most buyers' criteria. So what if some other vehicles in its class get a little bit better mileage? You're still talking about a difference of maybe a few hundred dollars a year....and if a few hundred dollars a year makes or breaks you, then you should probably be shopping for an entirely different type of vehicle. It may be interesting to see if the Lexus or whathaveyou is better or worse on gas, but it certainly doesn't make me wish for a second that I had purchased a different car.
You bought a turbo. Use it and stop worrying about the cost of gas everytime you hammer down on the pedal.
--
True enough. And obviously fuel economy is a consideration in any vehicle purchase. But I still contend that the typical RDX buyer is not out looking for optimum fuel economy. It probably doesn't even crack the top ten items in most buyers' criteria. So what if some other vehicles in its class get a little bit better mileage? You're still talking about a difference of maybe a few hundred dollars a year....and if a few hundred dollars a year makes or breaks you, then you should probably be shopping for an entirely different type of vehicle. It may be interesting to see if the Lexus or whathaveyou is better or worse on gas, but it certainly doesn't make me wish for a second that I had purchased a different car.
You bought a turbo. Use it and stop worrying about the cost of gas everytime you hammer down on the pedal.
Somewhat unrelated note, I've found improved mileage when using the sport shift to hold lower gears slightly longer going uphill, preventing the turbo from kicking in at all.
02-28-2008, 06:35 PM
#43
Advanced
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by omgacuralol
I'm not sure where you live, but here in BC where gas is currently $1.17 CDN /litre, ($4.53 USD/gallon) for 87 octane, fuel economy is somewhat of a consideration. That's just under $5 US/gallon for 92 octane.
Somewhat unrelated note, I've found improved mileage when using the sport shift to hold lower gears slightly longer going uphill, preventing the turbo from kicking in at all.
Somewhat unrelated note, I've found improved mileage when using the sport shift to hold lower gears slightly longer going uphill, preventing the turbo from kicking in at all.
Not to beat a dead horse since heffergm and MMike1981 so eloquently covered this already but....
You know the price of gas before you buy the car. You know what the fuel economy of the car is before you buy it. It doesn't take a genius to figure out how much you're going to spend on gas. If the numbers bother you so much, then you should purchase a car that makes you feel more comfortable about the fuel economy. The RDX, quite simply, is not a car that should be bought by someone who is overly conscious about fuel economy.
And I don't want to hear about how when you bought the car gas only cost $2/gallon or whatever. If you didn't consider that gas prices fluctuate (mostly in the up direction) then that just compounds the mistake of buying an RDX.
And again, everyone likes good mileage. It would be great if the RDX had the same performance and got 50mpg and I only had to fill up once a month. And I wouldn't be happy if the RDX got 5mpg. But realistically, I knew what I was getting and it lives up to what I expected.
By the way, I live in Texas and generally pay about $3.15/g right now. However I visit Canada frequently and I know gas prices have been somewhere around $1/L for quite some time, so $1.17/L can't be that much of a shocker.
02-29-2008, 12:42 AM
#44
Cruisin'
Join Date: Feb 2008
Age: 42
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by heffergm
How can anyone, having bought the vehicle, claim disappointment over the fuel economy and not expect people to think them a complete moron?
There's a big sticker in the window of every new vehicle. It rather clearly states that in EPA testing loops, observed mileage for City and Highway driving were 17/22.
So aside from admitting you can't read and shouldn't be buying a new car at all, what did you expect, that the EPA figures were blatant lies and everything would be great because your 4 cylinder turbocharged 4000lb car really COULD get 30mpg?
I'm convinced this country is going to hell in a handbasket, and the current mortgage situation goes a long way towards proving it. People being upset over fuel economy figures they were told to expect before buying the car cement it.
There's a big sticker in the window of every new vehicle. It rather clearly states that in EPA testing loops, observed mileage for City and Highway driving were 17/22.
So aside from admitting you can't read and shouldn't be buying a new car at all, what did you expect, that the EPA figures were blatant lies and everything would be great because your 4 cylinder turbocharged 4000lb car really COULD get 30mpg?
I'm convinced this country is going to hell in a handbasket, and the current mortgage situation goes a long way towards proving it. People being upset over fuel economy figures they were told to expect before buying the car cement it.
Because I'm getting an average mileage of 13 mpg, way off that of the 19 mpg EPA combined estimates, and that's the revised 2008 estimates no less.
02-29-2008, 11:20 AM
#46
Three Wheelin'
It's also very relevant what conditions one drives in. My RDX sees 75% highway and I am usually gentle on the gas pedal and try to be smooth in accelerating. The roads around here are also mostly flat. This is how I get 21-22 MPG avg.
Jackrabbit starts, aggressive driving, hilly terrain will all certainly contribute to seeing sub-20 MPG.
Jackrabbit starts, aggressive driving, hilly terrain will all certainly contribute to seeing sub-20 MPG.
03-01-2008, 02:33 AM
#47
Cruisin'
Join Date: Feb 2008
Age: 42
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MMike1981
so, you only read the big black bold numbers and not the smaller print about variation.... and or what to possibly expect?
03-01-2008, 03:55 AM
#48
Cruisin'
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by KraZy007
You just don't get it do you? More than 33% less than what is advertised (6 mpg less). Regardless of variation, less than 66% (13 mpg) of advertised is pretty disappointing.
"EPA Fuel Economy Estimates"
"Your actual mileage will vary depending on how you drive and maintain your vehicle"
"City MPG
17
Expected range
for most drivers
14 to 20 MPG"
I don't think they can spell it out for you anymore than that.
Now, if you can honestly tell me that you live in Kansas, drive a 30 mile round trip to work at a steady state 55mph with no traffic, and you're still getting 13mpg, then you've got an issue to bring to your Acura dealer because something isn't right.
Otherwise, you're wasting your breath.
03-01-2008, 08:47 PM
#51
Advanced
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you're getting 13mpg and the EPA said 17mpg, I can understand your beef.
You do have to account for driving style (ie how much you use the turbo) so if you're racing between stoplights, then you can't complain about 13mpg, but if you legitimately get 13mpg driving a constant speed on the highway something is wrong.
I was told by my dealer before I bought the car, he had one customer (younger guy) who guns the engine all the time and gets about 12mpg and he has another customer (old lady) who drives like the grandma she is and gets 25mpg. Driving style is key.
You do have to account for driving style (ie how much you use the turbo) so if you're racing between stoplights, then you can't complain about 13mpg, but if you legitimately get 13mpg driving a constant speed on the highway something is wrong.
I was told by my dealer before I bought the car, he had one customer (younger guy) who guns the engine all the time and gets about 12mpg and he has another customer (old lady) who drives like the grandma she is and gets 25mpg. Driving style is key.
03-01-2008, 10:33 PM
#52
Burning Brakes
The mpg played absolutely no part in my decision to by the car. The differences are down in the noise. All it takes is one breakdown out of warranty and "poof" there goes the difference. This thing is going to cost about $55K over five years with everything--mainenance, tires, breaks, gas, insurance, car washes, inspections, speeding tickets, etc. $275 a year is 2%.
The Toyota gets good mileage because it is so light for its size (about 300 lbs less than an RDX IIRC). The mediocre handling, downscale interior and goofy 1970 powerwagon swinging tailgate ruins it for me.
The Toyota gets good mileage because it is so light for its size (about 300 lbs less than an RDX IIRC). The mediocre handling, downscale interior and goofy 1970 powerwagon swinging tailgate ruins it for me.
03-02-2008, 01:45 PM
#53
Instructor
Join Date: Nov 2006
Age: 47
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by heffergm
How can anyone, having bought the vehicle, claim disappointment over the fuel economy and not expect people to think them a complete moron?
There's a big sticker in the window of every new vehicle. It rather clearly states that in EPA testing loops, observed mileage for City and Highway driving were 17/22.
So aside from admitting you can't read and shouldn't be buying a new car at all, what did you expect, that the EPA figures were blatant lies and everything would be great because your 4 cylinder turbocharged 4000lb car really COULD get 30mpg?
I'm convinced this country is going to hell in a handbasket, and the current mortgage situation goes a long way towards proving it. People being upset over fuel economy figures they were told to expect before buying the car cement it.
There's a big sticker in the window of every new vehicle. It rather clearly states that in EPA testing loops, observed mileage for City and Highway driving were 17/22.
So aside from admitting you can't read and shouldn't be buying a new car at all, what did you expect, that the EPA figures were blatant lies and everything would be great because your 4 cylinder turbocharged 4000lb car really COULD get 30mpg?
I'm convinced this country is going to hell in a handbasket, and the current mortgage situation goes a long way towards proving it. People being upset over fuel economy figures they were told to expect before buying the car cement it.
Like I said many times before, love the car, but this sort of crappy mileage is really inexcusable.
I generally get about 300km per tank, and don't think I have ever been over 350.
03-03-2008, 04:44 PM
#54
Racer
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Toronto
Age: 44
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've logged in around 4,000km with my RDX and, while the mileage isn't bad, it is a bit disappointing. I'm consistently averaging 17mpg with mixed driving. The X3 I used to drive averaged 18mpg (with the same driving habits) and it drove smoother to boot (getting a little tired of the RDX lag in drive mode. sport mode is awesome...but drinks more fuel).
As a first time car buyer, I know I could do a lot worse than the RDX...but I can now see how more experienced drivers would get a bit frustrated with this car.
As a first time car buyer, I know I could do a lot worse than the RDX...but I can now see how more experienced drivers would get a bit frustrated with this car.
03-04-2008, 10:55 AM
#55
10th Gear
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am curious if $4 gallon gas will change any minds or if the price of gas will never matter.
From what I can see we are not in a temporary oil spike. The demand from China and India is going to keep it going higher.
From what I can see we are not in a temporary oil spike. The demand from China and India is going to keep it going higher.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
joflewbyu2
5G TLX (2015-2020)
105
08-18-2019 10:38 PM
joflewbyu2
5G TLX (2015-2020)
139
10-08-2015 11:16 AM
