designer

Did anyone own a CRV and upgrade to a RDX or viceversa?
What are your objective experiences between the two cars?
I'm looking at a pre-owned RDX but the CRV is attractive too because of cheaper gas and maintenance and repair fees. But I would miss the V-6 power.
What are your thoughts?
thanks, D

Clickit02

If 2018 CRV has 1.5L turbo, I would definitely stay away from it. Do some search about CRV engine problems.

Comfy

Decide what you want brother. If you want more utility at a lower price point and lower maintenance, there is nothing much to beat the CRV. It has more cargo space than RDX.
RDX on the other hand is oriented towards more luxury, quietness, smooth power, and cushy interior. Both should be similar on reliability, being from the Honda family.

Tech

Turbo and the CVT is what killed the CR-V in 2017 when I bought my RDX.
Plus the RDX got better mileage than my previous CR-V by almost a gallon.

iHondaGuy

+1 to the CRV's cargo space.

I had a 2011 CRV and I was able to pack more luggage than on the RDX. Keeping in mind the 2011 CRV was 5" inches shorter than the 17 RDX.
The CRV also had rear seats that can slightly recline. It's something the RDX lacks. But I never sit back there anyways.

I had 90k+ miles on the CRV and they gave me 11k for trade in. I'm a sucker so I took it for 17 RDX tech AWD The power is awesome though. I think that is about all it has over the CRV. Hope I am not being harsh on the RDX? I think both the RDX and CRV are solid cars.

I've always been a Honda fan especially fond of the CRV but have ya seen the 2019 RAV4 ? Upon first glance, I would give it another.... Compared to the 2018 CRV I like that is it has a bigger engine and it also uses an 8 speed tranny. I don't know anything about the differences in transmission but I've been advised to stay away from CVTs.

bmtrbz2002

I just bought a 2016 RDX Advance 3 days ago and already owned a 2017 CR-V EX-L. I traded a '13 TL for the RDX. We have two young kids and a dog, so the trade was partially due to the increased utility of the RDX over the TL, and also because we drive the CR-V everywhere as our "family" car, but due to the outstanding oil dilution issues with the 1.5T engine, I wanted to spread the miles out a bit more in the hopes that Honda will find a resolution (or perhaps provide some insight into what's normal) before my warranty is expired. If they don't, I'll probably be trading in a year or two. So on that note, if you're concerned with the potential longevity concerns of the 1.5T or with how Honda has handled the OD issues, that's an easy reason to not buy either of these vehicles. Given every manufacturer has some problems and Honda's in general retain their value quite well, I decided to give them another chance.

Another way to make the decision easier... If you need nearly twice as much cargo space as what the RDX has available (roughly 40 cu. ft vs. 26 cu ft.), then get the CR-V. I thought the difference was closer, but comparing the difference side by side, the numbers don't lie. This is probably the area of greatest disappointment for me and somehow I missed this discrepancy (even though I read reviews that noted the smaller cargo area in the RDX). The cargo area in the CR-V is really almost a class up from the compact SUV class. We traded a Jeep Grand Cherokee that had less cargo area for the CR-V in 2017.

Okay, so if you've made it this far and both vehicles are still in the running (i.e. the RDX still has "enough" cargo area and the CR-V's OD issues don't scare you), I will draw some more conclusions:

Interior - CR-V feels more modern and stylish (that's of course subjective, but it is the newer design). The RDX feels slightly more "plush" and feature-rich. What I mean is that the seats feel deeper, for example (although the leather doesn't feel as nice and they are not quite as deep as in my TL). Comparatively, the seats in the CR-V seem shallower, but I think they provide great support. We'll see which one does better on a long road trip, but I've had no complaints with the CR-V. On the RDX, the dual screen infotainment layout offers more ability to customize and there are different settings for different drivers. Infotainment in the CR-V is more straightforward and it has Apple CarPlay/Android Auto, which overall is a positive, but sometimes doesn't work intuitively or consistently in the CR-V. The audio quality in the RDX is far superior to the CR-V (although again, not sure it's better than the TL), and I rate the CR-V as just barely passable... I can make adjustments and tolerate it. The RDX has more storage ahead of the gear selector (it has plenty of room for my iPhone XR and wallet, whereas the CR-V does not have enough room for my phone to lay flat at any angle. Most of the switch gear and surfaces feel more premium in the RDX, but there are some that feel cheap to me at this price point and compared to my TL, which is disappointing (e.g. sliding cover over front storage isn't damped and glove box door requires you to push the button to release the latch upon closing, which seems odd).

Exterior - I really like the look of the CR-V and even seeing so many on the road, I think they look handsome and definitely more macho than previous generations (it's important to protect my fragile male ego ). It's probably Honda's best design of any of their current generation vehicles. The RDX is acceptable in my opinion. I definitely like the wheels on my Advance model better than the lower trims. Feature-wise, I like having the front and rear parking sensors and the LED headlights are supposedly very good. You can get those on the CR-V Touring, however, but that will cost more than what I paid for my '16 RDX. One thing to note... the mirrors on the RDX are goofy... they have this convex shape towards the outer edge of the mirror (there's a line that denotes where this transition occurs) and the blind spot indicators are on the door pillar instead of on the mirror like on the CR-V. Which reminds me that the CR-V also has a better implementation of the LDW system as well. RDX beeps at me all of the time, but the CR-V just gently vibrates the wheel, which is nice. Another big thing in favor of the CR-V is that the power tailgate lift height is adjustable, but it's not on the RDX. The remote start range on the RDX is FAR superior to the CR-V. You basically have to be able to see the car in order for the remote start to work.

Driving - Okay, this is where it gets hard and you have to determine what you want to prioritize. I'm still forming my opinions somewhat here... In general, I think the RDX has an edge. In some ways, it's closer than I thought and in others, it's not. The RDX certainly pulls away from a stop with more authority and confidence. You won't feel like your have to bury the accelerator to get going. The CR-V does fine, especially once you get used to it, and there's just such a certain "ease" to the feeling of driving it that makes you not care if other cars are pulling away from you at a stoplight. But a lot of times I just wish it had a little more punch off the line. Not like I'm trying to race anyone, I just don't want to have to push the pedal as far to get going or listen to the engine groan quite as much. Speaking of engine note, I'm sure most will say they far prefer the V-6, and it is nice, but the CR-V sounds "zesty" in it's own way and isn't unpleasant, even with the CVT. I actually don't mind the CVT most of the time, but prefer a conventional automatic, so for me that was a plus for the RDX. The CVT does however always have the right ratio and makes the car feel more powerful than it is, but I'd say the RDX is still more confidence inspiring. The CR-V does have a nice ride. It's nicely damped going over bumps, never harsh, and I don't feel that handling ability suffers. I think the RDX is a little sharper, but at the expense of ride comfort. That being said, some reviews I read made it sound like it rides hard, and compared to my TL, it definitely does not. For the most part, I feel like it strikes a nice compromise.

Ultimately no vehicle purchase I've ever made has been without compromises and even when replacing with a newer vehicle, there have always been things I liked better about the car I traded or another car that I already owned, regardless of price point. I really admire the CR-V for what it is. I think without the OD issues and if it had the 2.0T w/ 10-speed automatic, it would be a no-brainer, but that would be a $35K+ car, which is almost to the base price of the new RDX (which was out of my budget). To me, those were pretty big considerations, however. Plus I didn't want to own two of the same vehicle. I did consider several other vehicles (mostly 3-year old pre-owned so I could research reliability), but with a 6-week old at home right now, it was just too hard to get out and drive many of them so I tried to narrow down to the safest choice and then validated it would meet my needs:

• Honda Pilot - Drives like a boat, didn't feel like anything special inside, don't necessarily need three rows of seats, silly lane-watch system instead of BSI on lower trims (prior to 2019)
• Acura MDX - Could probably afford a 2016, but this was the first year of the ZF9 which I want to stay away from and 2015s with decent mileage were impossible to find
• Jeep Grand Cherokee - Kind of miss this vehicle (I had the Hemi which at the end of the day doesn't cost much more in fuel since the RDX recommends premium) but too many problems
• Kia Sorrento (new) - Seems good on paper, but looks kind of minivan-ish to me. Good value for money and Kia has 100,000 mile warranty, which is a big plus.
• Hyundai Santa Fe (new) - Similar to the Kia, good on paper, but actually looks decent. It's really a category up from the CR-V. Some have said it's kind of slow.
• Mazda CX-5 - Seems to be compared to the CR-V most frequently. I drove a CX-9 before I changed my buying strategy and it impressed me, but packaging isn't as impressive as the Honda (somehow they make vehicles larger than the exterior dimensions would suggest). I think that this vehicle with the new 2.5T would have been almost perfect, but new ones are too expensive. I've heard the naturally aspirated 2.5 is slow, so it wasn't the first vehicle I wanted to test drive. I didn't realize it at the time but it actually has more cargo space than the RDX (still considerably less than CR-V). Wish I could have test drove this for myself as I could have saved some money on a pre-owned CX-5 over the RDX if the engine was adequate. I am not sure resale on the Mazda's are as good, though, and figured I'd get a better trade value on my Acura from the Acura dealer.

Sorry, lots of info and opinions here! Good luck with your decision.

Midnight Mystery

Do you feel the RDX handles better than the CR-V?


And can the daul screen be used as Nav on one and Audio on the other? I'd love to have that!

bmtrbz2002

Midnight Mystery

Ok, that sounds cool! I still love the 2G RDX, but I washed a black 3G RDX A-Spec today, and my god, that thing is a work of art!

captainh00k

bmtrbz2002

slavuta

Problem with CRV - its a Honda. In a typical Honda fashion, a low trim will be too cheap, denied of useful features. Case in point - LX has Intermittent Wipers and not Variable Intermittent Wipers. And I can continue. If you want good base car with all useful features - get Mazda cx5. But if you go higher with CRV - hello 1.5T+ CVT + DI. We still don't know extent to which these cars will be failing components. Lets recount in 4 years.

RDX is opposite - it has proven v6. Premium fuel is only recommended, you will not brake it using regular gas. It has long list of features for the price even on base model. I think, RDX wins this round hands down.

Comfy

The RDX wins this round for you and me. But may not apply for others who value different characteristics in each car. For many others the CRV is a no- brainer. There is no single answer, pick what you want, don't look back, and enjoy the car.

Rustle

I didn't even consider the CR-V (didnt want a honda, or a 4 cylinder, cvt, poor sound system, etc.). Bought a 2017 RDX Technology primarily for the V-6, 6 speed. Not as common as the Honda, more upscale, etc. Good luck.

WalSpritz

We had a 2018 Honda CR-V LX, purchased new. It was a great SUV albeit the engine was a bit noisy under mid-to-hard acceleration. We also had the recall performed for oil dilution (read up on it if not aware).

We now have a 2016 RDX Elite with less than 20k miles and the overall driving experience is is much quieter, V6 is smooth, better stereo, etc... The drawback is the lower fuel economy and higher maintenance cost (differential, belts, etc...). We also miss Apple CarPlay and might roll the dice on NavTool...most people had bad experiences but a few in recent times are happy with it.

If I were to do it all over again, I would have gone with the RDX from the start. We are particular about driving feel, acceleration, quiet cabin over having the latest gadgets in the car.

Comfy

Exactly the way I feel about it too. A noisy, unrefined and less powerful engine will be a huge damper for me regardless of whatever latest tech gadgets it has. If someone is looking to maximize the tech gadgets for the money, the Korean cars may be the default choice.
Some say that I’m old school in prioritizing a plush interior, soft drive feel, great engine smoothness and power, but that’s what feels like a quality car to me. In this scenario, even the American luxury cars such as Lincoln and Cadillac don’t fare too bad for me.

WalSpritz

For America brands, I would typically never consider since we have always stuck to Toyota, Honda, Acura, and Lexus but the new Buick Regal GS looks good, made in germany, and awesome looking sport seats with a reliable V6. I'm hoping it depreciates quickly and can pick-up a gently used one in a few years for half the price.

We have tried a few Korean cars and huge improvements made over the last 10 years but I still wouldn't buy. Although, the Hyundai Kona EV drives nice but a bit on the small side.