pickler

well my lease on the rdx is ending and when i was talking to a sales rep at my dealer he told me that the upcoming rdx will have a more efficient v6 engine (because i was complaining about the k23a1 fuel economy). i decided to google this and came upon this little piece of info from insideline:

http://www.insideline.com/acura/future-vehicles.html

this kind of makes me wanna buy out my rdx for a few reasons:
1. A factory turbo four honda kicks ass
7. i will get to keep the car forever and save paying 30,000 more for a new car
2. It will be rare in the future. kind of like how previous corolla and celica xrs with yamaha engines are hot right now. It will always be remembered as honda's first turbo car.
4. it will keep its resale value since it will be rare
5. i got a good deal on it with tech package for free and sh-awd standard
6. the v6 RDX will have poor weight distribution compared to now's 52f/48r

R*D*X*

I also agree with you, if Acura will get rid of the current turbocharged four-cylinder engine it will become rare RDX with turbo...

rare = high price!!!!

MMike1981

and my guess is higher repair costs as well, especially if the RDX goes down as the only engine to use this turbo....maybe the CR-Z in the works may keep it alive who knows.

i also saw that blurb about the RDX/V6 engine....not sure if i believe it, i do however thing the RDX will get some sort of V6. Id be stunned if it did not get 6 gears, less upset over the V6 if it didnt happen, the turbo adds character, is fun, and is powerful. I am not a fan of Honda's V6's because they refuse to unleash them where it matters. Low on TQ, restricted power till upper revs (yea VTECH, great...) but make it count when and where it matters. I would not think a truck like the RDX would be as fun to drive w/o the turbo.

valleverde007

hmmm... so wait for RDX 6 cyl or go with MDX or even current RDX - i didnt realize how fun our current RDX are until i guess i read some comments re: honda's 6 cyl vehicles. truth be told, ive never owned a honda 6 cyl vehicle.

wrestrepo

Not always the case.......

DateTSX

The turbo-4 provide plenty of power, does it need a V6? does the TSX really need a V6?

Honda should stick to the 4-cyl but improve it by adding direct-injection and more gears or a double-clutch tranny. And also adding a fully active dampering system and manual transmission will help too. If they want a nice comfy ride...get a CR-V!

wrestrepo

It's not about how much power is produced, it's about how it's delivered and the cost (fuel economy) of it.
I agree with you, a 4 turbo improvement would be better than a 6, and I don't know why people don't see that.

But what the RDX lacks is engine options. There should be something like the TSX NA 4 with FWD for fuel economy, a 6 cyl for towing and families to cruise on and a 4 turbo for the people looking for a sporty ride. What you want in terms of double clutch and adjustable suspension will not happen as it will price the car waaaay out of the targeted people's budget.

Mr Marco

1.What repair costs?
2. Honda's VTEC design is specifically tuned for no comprimise between low- and high-rpm performance (See flat torque curve on the S-2000).
Agreed with you and pickler, the joy of our little RDX is the car's ability to take the corner with more poise than an X-3. Add a 100lbs to the front and all that fun will be gone. (See X-3 xDrive35i)

DateTSX

Regardless of price, Honda needs to step up on their R&D! It surprise to me to see some of the Hyundai packing 6-speed auto a few years ago and Honda is making a big deal on the MDX and Odyssey having it. And when are they going to replace the J and K-series motor? I say it’s been long enough…give us something to go crazy about again, Honda!

wrestrepo

I couldn't agree more with you about Honda dropping the ball. But you can't just say "regardless of price". Price needs to be competitive, and the car offerings should also be competitive. One of the best/worst things about Acura is that they give you two flavors (in most cases) tech and non-tech. I personally like that, but some people are looking for more options in terms of engines

MMike1981

the best feature about the RDX, is that its basically the only Honda/Acura ive driven in recent memory THAT HAS BALLS.

In regards to price...have you seen the sticker on the TL SHAWD in TECH/Advanced dress? If Acura thinks they are going to pull that kind of money on the TL, they need to deliver more or increase the price to do so, which in a sense, they have. At least they have things now that you cant get in Honda trim.

To take the brand further, its all about options. Although Acura likes to and still does separate itself by offering well nothing but a happy meal package, they need to start offering equipment a la carte. i do not want to drive your RDX. Thats what makes real upper brands distinguishable, its customization, features, options and the ability to make it your own. it comes with a price. Id be willing to pay for it with acura reliability. id venture others may, unless you just like chocolate and vanilla.

pickler

speaking of delivering more i was hoping acura was going to offer a 8 speed automatic much like the bmw and Chrysler. a speed auto is an improvement but that should be offered on the honda vehicles by now.

wrestrepo

Heck, 6 speeds would be just fine if they had the proper ratios

mrgold35

It doesn't seem a 3.5L V-6 + 6AT will fit in the current engine bay of the RDX. The RDX engine bay looks about the same size or maybe smaller to the 04-08 TSX. I'm leaning toward a larger 2013 RDX to make room for the 3.5L engine.

It would be nice to give us the 2.3L turbo type-S (direct injection) with +300HP and the 3.5L with +280hp. The 3.5L will be the normal engine for all models with or without sh-awd. The 2.3L turbo would be a sh-awd model with a 6MT or 6AT option.

The RDX would be the perfect vehicle for hybrid system with the 2.3L turbo w/ direct injection 87 octane. The electric motor would improve the 0-30 speed and give the turbo time to spool up for extra power from 30-60 mph. The engine could use a stop/start system at stops and travel at low speeds just using the electric motor. The RDX could get 21-23 city and 25-27 hwy with the 6AT. If they copy the Benz S400 hybrid system, it could only add 120lbs or less to the RDX.

Mr Marco

+1^

There are many paths in the road ahead that Acura may choose to follow, however given the history of the brand it will be the easy road.

theART

Current motos has a tarrible fuel economy, I get 17MPG tops with 60% city and 40% hwy. I rather have V6 and no turbo lag.

Mr Marco

Look back to the oil crisis of the 1970's and you will find that a motor the size of our little RDX has come a long way.

Take the 1974 Ford Mustang 2.3ltr for example:
It produced a whopping 88hp, enough to pull that 2,700lbs piece of shit to 60mph in 14 seconds. I'm sure the mileage was comparable.

Now take the RDX numbers for example:
Currently 240hp, mine weights 4,900lbs and gets up to 60mph in less than 7 seconds.

I will take those numbers anyday, even if it does cost me a quarter (25cents) per mile in gas to get my groceries.

bg905

Take the 1974 Ford Mustang 2.3ltr

My mom had one of those. What a P.O.S.

+1 on the rest of the comments

MMike1981

Today, we do more with the same in a sense. If you look at car mags reviews from the 80's and forward. They did similar mileage with a lot less output. Now, we may have marginally increased mileage but just with alot higher outputs. The point is that today, we need to do more using less. That really hasnt happened. Ok you want to make a 300hp engine? do it and get 40mpgs out of it to. That is called progress. The fact that we make 300hp engines that are more efficient than something made in the 90's is great, but is that really progress in todays world. I am of the opinion that there is no way on earth im walking out my door and blowing cash on something as ugly, under-performing and stupid as a prius. Advance the common car in the form of a common car, not a prius or a rolling egg. Improve materials, improve weight, improve everything, i mean, if direct injection and more gears is as far as the common brand has taken their engines (or Hondas cylinder deactivation which is well whatever) i mean where has any of this gone in the last 20 years? Maybe im missing this entirely and thats cool, but id like to think that the world can come up with something. Nissan built the GTR under 100k and it smashes things twice or 3 times as much money. Its all about profit and nothing will change.

Mr Marco

^What I said.

tktommy

Can we get this thread back on topic? A V6 in the RDX

princelybug

iTrader: (16)

What are the drawbacks of offering both the current powerplant and the V6?

I think that would be a viable possibility since there are no extras costs involved with developing the current engine because it's already in production.

pickler

the V6 will be smoother while the turbo has better low end grunt. so very little difference between powertrains. im sure that 70% will optout for the turbo just because of its low end torque during test drive. The rdx doesn't need a v6 right now in my opinion. Acura just needs to introduce direct injection on the engine to improve horsepower and fuel economy.

I think that the hyundai santa-fe is right now the greatest threat to the rdx. With 270hp and 29mpg highway on regular fuel the santa fe offers more for less.

so acura should target hyundai and produce a 28-30mpg rdx with +270hp engine. im guessing this is why they are moving to a v6 because they do not want to produce an all new engine utilized only by one of their cars. This raises production costs. They could just produce more J35s and drop one in the RDX. With a 6AT & 3.5L V6 i can't see why the RDX wouldn't score 28mpg highway.

However with current fuel costs and poor state of the economy acura has no choice but offer more for less. So the 23mpg turbo with 240hp is out and a 28mpg v6 with 280hp is in.

Atopra

What you are suggesting will add 20K to the price. Honda will never do it.

wrestrepo

They better do something like that soon....there is Lexus with a ton of hybrid models, there is Infiniti coming in hot with their true sport hybrid M, and Acura?....[cue crickets]

kingkong222

a twin turbo v-6 with 300 hp and 300 lb/ft torque would be nice.

merlot

I thought turbo 4's were all the rage now; V6 power with better fuel economy. In any event, Acura's problem was not designing the new TSX to accept the RDX motor. That was a huge mistake IMHO.

pickler

not really, not everyone is a huge fan of turbo engines. some people like smooth powerful V6 engines and i personally don't think the K23 belongs in the FWD TSX. if it was SH-AWD then sure. So honda's biggest mistake was not adding SH-AWD w/k23 to the new TSX. the tsx is acura's competitor to G37, BMW 3, Benz C and Lexus IS since the TL has grown in size and is challenging the infiniti M, BMW 5, and lexus ES...

With these kind of competitors the TSX is probably the worst in its class. it is behind in horsepower, AWD option and handling. anyway this is all a dream since acura is getting rid of the K23 soon anyway.

mau108

After owning and driving my 3.5L TL around I would have loved it if the RDX came with the 3.5L. Much quieter, smooth power delivery, lots of torque!

I drove the RDX yesterday after doing an oil change after a long time, it felt a lot less refined then the TL which is of the same age and similar mileage. Sure in sport mode reving it up to high revs really does put the power down no doubt but its still not as great as the 3.5L.

I'm also getting a lot better mpg numbers out of my TL (which is 6MT not 5AT) then the RDX is averaging and similar driving pattern.

merlot

Your getting better gas mileage because your TL is about 400 pounds lighter, has better aerodynamic properties, and is FWD.

jasonwdp10

I compared my late 2010 TL SHAWD Tech to my cousins 2007 RDX SHAWD Tech.

Same weight (the TL SHAWD is actually slightly heavier), but the TL was faster, smoother, and got better gas mileage (13 for his rdx vs 15-16 for my TL SHAWD).

Why would you want an engine that is slower, less efficient, and less refined?

Even if you argued that the RDX's aerodynamics can't be compared to the TL, which could possibly be the cause of the difference in mpg, it's engine still isn't refined. Both the 3.5L and 3.7L are extremely refined, the 3.5L is downright buttery.

MMike1981

this is where I differ.

I find the TL a SNORE to drive. The power band of the TL is dissimilar to the RDX. The RDX lays out power where it counts the most. I have to FLOG my TL to rip the performance out of its restrained V6. Yes its more refined and quieter, but it also has no balls. The RDX is much more fun to drive, maybe thats due to the powerband/turbo/tq curve, or simply because of the elasticity of its power delivery for fun. Call it what you will, but with VSA off and the RDX in S, nothing in the Acura lineup delivers as fun of driving experience. Thus, I would love to see the turbo 4 somewhere again, but it needs 6 gears which would give it an additional 1-2 mpg, better drivability, and probably relax many people here that are unhappy with it.

The TL V6 feels like a typical Honda V6 to me: restrained for reliability purposes, no fun till you are at 5k + rpms, and boring inbetween. The RDX couldnt be any more different. At least its fun, which is hard to say about Acura these days.

Mr Marco

^ WTF? You must own a 2005. The 3.7 is screaming fast and can't be matched by my RDX even in S. A V-6 RDX would suffer from front plow and lets face it, the RDX is too top heavy to be anything more than just a better grocery getter.

Not to mention that Acura engines are stronger than Hondas on the dyno...

mrgold35

Smaller CUV or 5 door hatchbacks are on the hot list right now. Anything that looks like it has utility with decent MPGs is all you see with advertisement. Maybe Acura is going to pull a fast one and introduce something we never thought of? It seems every Acura model has grown in size, weight, and HP. I'm expecting the new RDX to be around 4200 lbs with 3.5L and a few inches shy of the current MDX dimensions (no 3rd row seat option for RDX).

The luxury brands are now slotting an entry level sedan or mini CUV (Audi A1, BMW X1, MB A and B-class). Acura might just add a new entry level sedan or crossover to snag those younger buyers. They already have the all new CR-V ready to hit the road that drive just fine with the 2.4L. Acura could have 3 CUVs in the lineup with the all new RDX in the middle. No one has complained in North America about driving the overseas Accord dressed up in a TSX Tuxedo for the last +8 years. Then I can see Acura adding a sport model RDX to the lineup down the road with an optional 3.7L like the middle child for the sedans, the TL Type-S.

jasonwdp10

Well the next vehicle(s) that are supposed to be coming from acura are a new entry level sedan, slotted below the TSX, and the new RL. I'm not sure if the rdx will follow the mdx 6 year cycle or the cr-v 5 year, but it shouldn't be out before the two i mentioned above. We're also still missing the TSX hybrid which was slotted to come out around the same time as those new sedans.

If you haven't noticed, acura doesn't really follow the rest of the premium brands. I'd love for them to create a new 5 door (like the A5 sportsback), or a new 3 door (like the RSX) but there is no indication of them wanting to bring either one. If acura was really following the other brands, they would have already brought out coupes and convertibles, along with high performance trims of a few of their vehicles. They won't, not for awhile.

Expect to see the new sub-tsx sedans, the tsx hybrid (rumored), and the RL to come out before anything else.

I also like your idea of a slightly larger rdx. I occasionally sit in my cousins rdx and the rear seating area could use more knee room. It also wouldn't hurt to allow the rear seat backs to recline a bit like the CR-V.

I hope they either preserve or improve the center console storage. It has got to the most useful spot in the car outside of the cargo area. If they remove it, I will remove the next RDX from my consideration.

pickler

of course the TL is faster, it weighs nearly 300 pounds less and has much smaller frontal area. But i disagree with everyone who firstly compares the J35 with the K23 and secondly claims the J35 is stronger than the K23. this is WRONG. the K23 is the most understated honda engine on the planet. it produce the same if not more horsepower than the J35:


I have lost count of number of times i have pasted this image to prove that the K23 produces more horsepower than the J32/35 at most of the power band (eg. +200 WHP at 4500 RPM while the J35 produces 160 WHP). Only at +5500 RPM does the J35 maxes the K23 in power and that can be fixed with the hondata reflash.1

I think the K23 is a step in the right direction for acura, for years BMW has developed engines that give you maximum torque at ~2000RPM while honda does this at 4500+ revs. I know honda rates k23 max torque at 4500rpm but this is again wrong, look at the chart, clearly the k23 devliers high amounts of torque at low rpms due to its forced induction and long stroke properties.

Im not writing this to defend the K23 to remain in the RDX, as i said above, some if not most people like smooth powerplants. I personally achieve 6.1s 0-60 with my RDX and other people match this with the much lighter 06-08 type-s TLs.

There is a new RSX underway.

MMike1981

exactly. nothing delivers power like the RDX. Not any sedan. total different feel. TL is boring, own a 2010.

SinCity

And the quality and styling of their new products is really nice. I remember the Accents back in the 80s and look at Hyundai now with amazement.

vybzkartel

Fixed it for ya.

x2lacrosse

Do you have any further details? I have an '04 Type S and have been itching for a new car, but Acura is just getting too big and heavy for me. I hope that new sub-TSX brings back something very similar to the RSX-S in terms of performance/potential, MPG potential and size.

As for the RDX, I think that they should keep the K23 for the FMC. They should then re-do the ECU to match (if not better) the current Hondata reflash and then put in a 6 speed auto w/ shorter 1-3 and stretch out 6th for better highway MPG. I really like the RDX as is, just wish for a bit more MPG's, even when pushing it a bit. If they want to invest more $$ into it, think mating a turbo to the K24 with DI would be even nicer.