2013 RDX vs. 2011-2013 X3
05-06-2012, 12:05 AM
#1
2013 RDX vs. 2011-2013 X3
OK, there are plenty of comments comparing the 2013 RDX to the Q5.
Has anyone driven both the RDX and 2011-2013 BMW X3 (new model style in 2011) and care to comment on any advantages and disadvantages? I've driven both the 2013 RDX and 2012 X3 and am torn between the two for various reasons.
Thanks for the thoughts and help.
Has anyone driven both the RDX and 2011-2013 BMW X3 (new model style in 2011) and care to comment on any advantages and disadvantages? I've driven both the 2013 RDX and 2012 X3 and am torn between the two for various reasons.
Thanks for the thoughts and help.
05-06-2012, 03:25 PM
#2
OP...The vehicles you are comparing (RDX, Q5 and X3) are all fantastc vehicles and each have their strength and weaknesses. I can appreciate your desire to get some input from others but I think that there are so many factors that comes into play that its hard to get a definite answer. I mean if you were comparing the RDX with the Hyundai Tucson, you'd get an answer pretty quick.
The RDX is not as sophisticated and as refined as the Q5 and the X3 but there is also a price difference when you get them equally equipped. It boils down to what you, as a driver and owner, are willing to pay. I have seen people pay 20 000$ for a set of speaker...do they sound that much better than 1000$, some would say yes and other would say no.
I have driven the Q5 and the RDX. Is the RDX better than the Q5...probably not. For me, in Canada, the difference with a moonroof and upgraded stereo was about 52k vs 43k for the RDX. Sure, the Q5 had alot of extra features but they didn't come free. For me, the RDX had great styling, good comfort (except still pissed off at passenger seat not height adjustable) and enough luxury to make me stand out over the CR-V, Rav4 etc and still have some spare change compared to buying a Q5. You have driven both and ultimately, you will have to make the list of prox and cons and decide which one wins. For ME...and I am talking about my situation, the RDX was the clear choice.
Best of luck but its not an easy decision nor is it a black and white so don't expect to have someone say something that will make it obviously clear and easy
The RDX is not as sophisticated and as refined as the Q5 and the X3 but there is also a price difference when you get them equally equipped. It boils down to what you, as a driver and owner, are willing to pay. I have seen people pay 20 000$ for a set of speaker...do they sound that much better than 1000$, some would say yes and other would say no.
I have driven the Q5 and the RDX. Is the RDX better than the Q5...probably not. For me, in Canada, the difference with a moonroof and upgraded stereo was about 52k vs 43k for the RDX. Sure, the Q5 had alot of extra features but they didn't come free. For me, the RDX had great styling, good comfort (except still pissed off at passenger seat not height adjustable) and enough luxury to make me stand out over the CR-V, Rav4 etc and still have some spare change compared to buying a Q5. You have driven both and ultimately, you will have to make the list of prox and cons and decide which one wins. For ME...and I am talking about my situation, the RDX was the clear choice.
Best of luck but its not an easy decision nor is it a black and white so don't expect to have someone say something that will make it obviously clear and easy
05-06-2012, 03:25 PM
#3
OP...The vehicles you are comparing (RDX, Q5 and X3) are all fantastic vehicles and each have their strength and weaknesses. I can appreciate your desire to get some input from others but I think that there are so many factors that comes into play that its hard to get a definite answer. I mean if you were comparing the RDX with the Hyundai Tucson, you'd get an answer pretty quick.
The RDX is not as sophisticated and as refined as the Q5 and the X3 but there is also a price difference when you get them equally equipped. It boils down to what you, as a driver and owner, are willing to pay. I have seen people pay 20 000$ for a set of speaker...do they sound that much better than 1000$, some would say yes and other would say no.
I have driven the Q5 and the RDX. Is the RDX better than the Q5...probably not. For me, in Canada, the difference with a moonroof and upgraded stereo was about 52k vs 43k for the RDX. Sure, the Q5 had alot of extra features but they didn't come free. For me, the RDX had great styling, good comfort (except still pissed off at passenger seat not height adjustable) and enough luxury to make me stand out over the CR-V, Rav4 etc and still have some spare change compared to buying a Q5. You have driven both and ultimately, you will have to make the list of pros and cons and decide which one wins. For ME...and I am talking about my situation, the RDX was the clear choice.
Best of luck but its not an easy decision nor is it a black and white so don't expect to have someone say something that will make it obviously clear and easy
The RDX is not as sophisticated and as refined as the Q5 and the X3 but there is also a price difference when you get them equally equipped. It boils down to what you, as a driver and owner, are willing to pay. I have seen people pay 20 000$ for a set of speaker...do they sound that much better than 1000$, some would say yes and other would say no.
I have driven the Q5 and the RDX. Is the RDX better than the Q5...probably not. For me, in Canada, the difference with a moonroof and upgraded stereo was about 52k vs 43k for the RDX. Sure, the Q5 had alot of extra features but they didn't come free. For me, the RDX had great styling, good comfort (except still pissed off at passenger seat not height adjustable) and enough luxury to make me stand out over the CR-V, Rav4 etc and still have some spare change compared to buying a Q5. You have driven both and ultimately, you will have to make the list of pros and cons and decide which one wins. For ME...and I am talking about my situation, the RDX was the clear choice.
Best of luck but its not an easy decision nor is it a black and white so don't expect to have someone say something that will make it obviously clear and easy
05-06-2012, 05:42 PM
#4
Drifting
hawkeye, if you plan to keep your vehicle for a long time, then you would probably do much better with the RDX....
I have driven both the X3 and Q5 - both are great and I would be happy with one of them. But the reliability issue still makes me nervous for these German cars.
Oh, and by the gas mileage that people have reported here so far, you should get better mileage with the RDX, even though the official numbers were similar for the X3 and Q5.
I have driven both the X3 and Q5 - both are great and I would be happy with one of them. But the reliability issue still makes me nervous for these German cars.
Oh, and by the gas mileage that people have reported here so far, you should get better mileage with the RDX, even though the official numbers were similar for the X3 and Q5.
05-06-2012, 07:57 PM
#5
hawkeye, if you plan to keep your vehicle for a long time, then you would probably do much better with the RDX....
I have driven both the X3 and Q5 - both are great and I would be happy with one of them. But the reliability issue still makes me nervous for these German cars.
I have driven both the X3 and Q5 - both are great and I would be happy with one of them. But the reliability issue still makes me nervous for these German cars.
05-06-2012, 10:55 PM
#6
Drifting
Listen, I am particularly sensitive to to a car's reliability because of WHERE I live! I would NEVER want to get stranded in our lovely Calgary winter! ROTFLOL! Yeah, it's only -30C out there, there's nothing to worry about! LOL!
Seriously though, if I were to get a new vehicle today, I am sure that my shortlist would include the new RDX, X3 and even the Q5. Why did I say "even" the Q5? That is because I had a rather unfortunate experience at our local Audi dealership here in Calgary. They were not so friendly to me when I was looking for a car when I arrived in Calgary last year, as they probably thought that I was not serious and I did not have $$$ - BIG MISTAKE!!! ROTFLOL! On the other hand, the BMW, MB and Acura dealerships were nice to me. Oh well, in the end, reliability won and so I went with Acura again....!!!!!
05-07-2012, 11:38 AM
#7
think you guys need to update your perceptions on reliability.
OP - consumer reports rates the NEW X3 with almost PERFECT reliability (half-red circle) and is ranked in 2nd overall, to the Q5. Only one vehicle bests that reliability rating, the 2012 RDX. I have not seen an estimated rating for the 2013 yet, or at least, its not posted on their online subsciption stuff.
OP - consumer reports rates the NEW X3 with almost PERFECT reliability (half-red circle) and is ranked in 2nd overall, to the Q5. Only one vehicle bests that reliability rating, the 2012 RDX. I have not seen an estimated rating for the 2013 yet, or at least, its not posted on their online subsciption stuff.
Trending Topics
05-07-2012, 11:56 AM
#8
I drove and researched the Q5, X3 and RDX. I had them rated as 1 - RDX, 2 - Q5, 3 - X3.
The X3 felt very solid and well built. I felt like I sat a little higher in it (more SUV height than CUV height). It handled well, even with the height.
A couple of issues that dropped it to the back of the pack - I was annoyed by the sun glare off the wood interior pieces. Also didn't like the slightly smaller cargo area and the weird controls (putting it in Park and Reverse, the turn signal stalk). The real killer was the lag off the line (on the 28). I'd push on the gas and it felt like 1-2 seconds before the engine would rev and the car would move. That's not something I want to live with for the next five years. Online forums indicate the only fix is to start in Sport mode, which kills the gas mileage.
Cars are such a personal choice - drive them and see what fits you the best. I don't begrudge anyone for buying a Q5 or X3, but I'm thrilled with my 2013 RDX.
The X3 felt very solid and well built. I felt like I sat a little higher in it (more SUV height than CUV height). It handled well, even with the height.
A couple of issues that dropped it to the back of the pack - I was annoyed by the sun glare off the wood interior pieces. Also didn't like the slightly smaller cargo area and the weird controls (putting it in Park and Reverse, the turn signal stalk). The real killer was the lag off the line (on the 28). I'd push on the gas and it felt like 1-2 seconds before the engine would rev and the car would move. That's not something I want to live with for the next five years. Online forums indicate the only fix is to start in Sport mode, which kills the gas mileage.
Cars are such a personal choice - drive them and see what fits you the best. I don't begrudge anyone for buying a Q5 or X3, but I'm thrilled with my 2013 RDX.
05-07-2012, 01:54 PM
#10
Advanced
The real killer was the lag off the line (on the 28). I'd push on the gas and it felt like 1-2 seconds before the engine would rev and the car would move. That's not something I want to live with for the next five years. Online forums indicate the only fix is to start in Sport mode, which kills the gas mileage.
05-07-2012, 02:46 PM
#11
Cruisin'
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: the o.c.
Age: 64
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We test drove the new RDX, Q5 turbo, and X3.
Out of all of them, we disliked the X3 the most. For me, the brakes were just horrendous. My wife really disliked the shifter that acted like a video game (it doesn't have normal gates).
In the end, we selected the Q5.
As for reliability, and Consumer Reports, I am a subscriber to CR, and I have experience that their advice isn't reflective of real life all the time. My 2002 Passat has black circles in many places in CR's review, yet I've driven mine 135,000 miles with just normal maintenance. Nothing the described bad happened to me. Had I followed CR's advice, I should've never bought the Passat.
10 years later, I'm happy as a clam!
Out of all of them, we disliked the X3 the most. For me, the brakes were just horrendous. My wife really disliked the shifter that acted like a video game (it doesn't have normal gates).
In the end, we selected the Q5.
As for reliability, and Consumer Reports, I am a subscriber to CR, and I have experience that their advice isn't reflective of real life all the time. My 2002 Passat has black circles in many places in CR's review, yet I've driven mine 135,000 miles with just normal maintenance. Nothing the described bad happened to me. Had I followed CR's advice, I should've never bought the Passat.
10 years later, I'm happy as a clam!
05-07-2012, 05:30 PM
#13
Bobz
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Palm Springs Ca
Age: 84
Posts: 188
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I like the fact that Acura makes it easy to get the features you want without spending an hour checking off "options". That always annoyed me when looking at German autos. Acura has a value proposition that is hard to beat, if money is a concern. I say the latter because if money is no object than Audi and Lexus might be better alternatives. But as many have already stated, driving one, is the ultimate test. Does a Q5 drive $ 15,000 better than a 2013 RDX?
05-08-2012, 08:37 AM
#14
I have driven the 2013 RDX FWD, 2012 Q5 and X3 (with non-turbo inline 6 engine). I updated my notes from the Q5 vs RDX thread to include the X3.
My impression:
Ride: RDX seems softer at low speed while the Q5 seems a bit stiff. At high speed, the Q5 seems more steady, not that the RDX wasn't, but Q5 was impressive at highway speed. X3 rides similarly to Q5 in low speed, but highway speed ride wasn't as impressive - feels pretty regular to me.
Acceleration: All 3 appear to be similar.
Steering: Q5 has the edge, the steering felt sharper with better feedback. RDX steering was quick as well and responsive, but felt short on feedback. X3 had the best steering - sharp, excellent feedback, quick.
Noise: hard for me to tell as the road conditions were different. What do you think?
Interior fit and finish: Q5 seems to have higher quality leather and interior finishing. X3 interior looked dated, and seem of cheap quality.
Controls: RDX is much much better. Controls were intuitive, while simple things required several steps for the Q5. However, there was not rear vent for the RDX, an obvious sign of cost cutting. X3 controls were better than the Q5, except for the shifter, which was very confusing. RDX hands down has the best controls.
Seat comfort/space: Driver side felt similar. Passenger side on the RDX has no height adjustment, a rather disappointment in my view for a car at this price. Rear area - more spacious for RDX, while Q5 has more of an upright position. Big center tunnel in Q5 is the major downside. So, each has its plus and minus. X3 rear seating position is very low - I personally don't like it.
Driving position/visibility: Q5 drivers seats high, while RDX seats low. Q5 visibility to rear is really poor. RDX D pillars were thick and blocked view to the rear, thought slightly better than Q5. Navigation camera system on Q5 has park assist guide (steering guide) while the RDX has an almost 180 degree wide angle view, which is very helpful. X3 has a very useful 360 view camera - hands down the best camera system by far. View to rear is the best as well, but not much. X3 sun visor does not extend or slide on the rails, so sun could be beating on left side of face.
Cargo area: Bigger for RDX with lower loading high.
Front and rear access: Front access seems easier with RDX and X3. RDX rear access, door does not seem to open as wide as needed. I am not sure on the Q5.
Spare tire: somewhere between and donut and a full-size for RDX. What was it for the Q5? Run flat for X3 - very expensive to replace.
Dealership experience: Acura and Audi treated me excellently. BMW made me feel I don't belong there. (I tested the Audi and BMW on the same day.)
My impression:
Ride: RDX seems softer at low speed while the Q5 seems a bit stiff. At high speed, the Q5 seems more steady, not that the RDX wasn't, but Q5 was impressive at highway speed. X3 rides similarly to Q5 in low speed, but highway speed ride wasn't as impressive - feels pretty regular to me.
Acceleration: All 3 appear to be similar.
Steering: Q5 has the edge, the steering felt sharper with better feedback. RDX steering was quick as well and responsive, but felt short on feedback. X3 had the best steering - sharp, excellent feedback, quick.
Noise: hard for me to tell as the road conditions were different. What do you think?
Interior fit and finish: Q5 seems to have higher quality leather and interior finishing. X3 interior looked dated, and seem of cheap quality.
Controls: RDX is much much better. Controls were intuitive, while simple things required several steps for the Q5. However, there was not rear vent for the RDX, an obvious sign of cost cutting. X3 controls were better than the Q5, except for the shifter, which was very confusing. RDX hands down has the best controls.
Seat comfort/space: Driver side felt similar. Passenger side on the RDX has no height adjustment, a rather disappointment in my view for a car at this price. Rear area - more spacious for RDX, while Q5 has more of an upright position. Big center tunnel in Q5 is the major downside. So, each has its plus and minus. X3 rear seating position is very low - I personally don't like it.
Driving position/visibility: Q5 drivers seats high, while RDX seats low. Q5 visibility to rear is really poor. RDX D pillars were thick and blocked view to the rear, thought slightly better than Q5. Navigation camera system on Q5 has park assist guide (steering guide) while the RDX has an almost 180 degree wide angle view, which is very helpful. X3 has a very useful 360 view camera - hands down the best camera system by far. View to rear is the best as well, but not much. X3 sun visor does not extend or slide on the rails, so sun could be beating on left side of face.
Cargo area: Bigger for RDX with lower loading high.
Front and rear access: Front access seems easier with RDX and X3. RDX rear access, door does not seem to open as wide as needed. I am not sure on the Q5.
Spare tire: somewhere between and donut and a full-size for RDX. What was it for the Q5? Run flat for X3 - very expensive to replace.
Dealership experience: Acura and Audi treated me excellently. BMW made me feel I don't belong there. (I tested the Audi and BMW on the same day.)
Last edited by Opus360; 05-08-2012 at 08:43 AM.
The following users liked this post:
ostrich (05-08-2012)
05-08-2012, 01:32 PM
#15
I've been looking at new cars for a while now, and now that the RDX has been released, I've been waffling on the RDX and X3 myself. I was planning on the X3 last year but decided to wait on the N20. The RDX threw a wrench in the plan and the longer I wait, I'm sure the RX350 F-sport and X1 will be something else to consider. But just like others have stated, everyone's situation and priorities are different so each car will need to be evaluated against your own criteria.
For perspective, I was looking for something more sporty then what I currently drive, which is an RX. Pretty much anything in the luxury SUV category does that so it opened up a lot of options. Anyway, as I mentioned I decided to go full bore and get an X3 M-sport. I figured the M-sport would drive better than the standard tester, the dashboard/nav were the best, the shifter wasn't run of the mill (I'm sure after a while I'd get used to it), the styling, the tech, panoramic sunroof to name a few. At the time, the Q5 Premium + was the runner up but what really hurt it for me was the second test drive I took (first in a 2.0T) the interior was disappointing in that it really looked worn and older than it was. It just didn't hold up as you would expect. And the dashboard just seemed so dated compared to the X3.
The cons for BMW (and Audi for that matter) is that the TCO in my opinion will be higher. I plan to purchase my vehicle and keep it for a long time. So not only is the upfront premium much higher, the overall costs hurts the X3 in the long run. Even though BMW covers maintenance for the first 4 years, the cost after the warranty runs out is high, too. I discount to some extent the notion that one brand is more reliable than another, as I feel overall reliability has improved, but all cars will still need maintenance. Brakes, tires, oil, coolant, complicated electronics, etc. all need to be tended to over the life of the car. RFT on a BMW will probably be nearly 2x to replace versus standard tires on the RDX. This is where the Japanese manufacturers have a better reputation. Their reliability is good and the cost of maintenance, at least in my opinion, tend to be lower. Some specific cons for the X3 other than TCO are transmission tunnel in back seat, use of interior plastic pieces, no spare / RFT.
The RDX is overall a very nice vehicle. Drives nice, decent tech, right size for my needs. Feels like it has more interior space overall. MPG is good with the redesign so closes some of the gap with the X3. On the downside, the interior is nice but it could be much nicer if they didn't cheap out by using a lot of plastic pieces. Sport seats are better in the X3 and the exterior styling is a bit plain. I don't think it stands out and isn't much different than what's already on the roads today. And the color choices are limited at best. Still not sure which color combo I'd ultimately select yet.
Either way there's good and bad points for either car. I feel either will be a great new car but there will be compromises no matter which way I go. There's just not the perfect vehicle out there for me to buy but either of these would be a fine choice if I decided to purchase now. And just to give you a feel for where I stand, I'd say 75/25, maybe 80/20, for the RDX.
Good luck on your decision.
For perspective, I was looking for something more sporty then what I currently drive, which is an RX. Pretty much anything in the luxury SUV category does that so it opened up a lot of options. Anyway, as I mentioned I decided to go full bore and get an X3 M-sport. I figured the M-sport would drive better than the standard tester, the dashboard/nav were the best, the shifter wasn't run of the mill (I'm sure after a while I'd get used to it), the styling, the tech, panoramic sunroof to name a few. At the time, the Q5 Premium + was the runner up but what really hurt it for me was the second test drive I took (first in a 2.0T) the interior was disappointing in that it really looked worn and older than it was. It just didn't hold up as you would expect. And the dashboard just seemed so dated compared to the X3.
The cons for BMW (and Audi for that matter) is that the TCO in my opinion will be higher. I plan to purchase my vehicle and keep it for a long time. So not only is the upfront premium much higher, the overall costs hurts the X3 in the long run. Even though BMW covers maintenance for the first 4 years, the cost after the warranty runs out is high, too. I discount to some extent the notion that one brand is more reliable than another, as I feel overall reliability has improved, but all cars will still need maintenance. Brakes, tires, oil, coolant, complicated electronics, etc. all need to be tended to over the life of the car. RFT on a BMW will probably be nearly 2x to replace versus standard tires on the RDX. This is where the Japanese manufacturers have a better reputation. Their reliability is good and the cost of maintenance, at least in my opinion, tend to be lower. Some specific cons for the X3 other than TCO are transmission tunnel in back seat, use of interior plastic pieces, no spare / RFT.
The RDX is overall a very nice vehicle. Drives nice, decent tech, right size for my needs. Feels like it has more interior space overall. MPG is good with the redesign so closes some of the gap with the X3. On the downside, the interior is nice but it could be much nicer if they didn't cheap out by using a lot of plastic pieces. Sport seats are better in the X3 and the exterior styling is a bit plain. I don't think it stands out and isn't much different than what's already on the roads today. And the color choices are limited at best. Still not sure which color combo I'd ultimately select yet.
Either way there's good and bad points for either car. I feel either will be a great new car but there will be compromises no matter which way I go. There's just not the perfect vehicle out there for me to buy but either of these would be a fine choice if I decided to purchase now. And just to give you a feel for where I stand, I'd say 75/25, maybe 80/20, for the RDX.
Good luck on your decision.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
