Notices

2nd Generation RDX Reviews

 
Old 09-02-2012, 01:15 PM
  #121  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by Rocketsfan View Post
The 0-60 times I hear for this vehicle are all over the place. I've seen everything from mid 6's to now 8? Weird.
This car's acceleration can be inconsistent, it just doesn't want to go sometimes. With the air on, it definitely loses too much power for my taste.
MGP999 is offline  
The following users liked this post:
cnctoolman (07-07-2019)
Old 09-03-2012, 07:44 AM
  #122  
Registered Member
 
TampaJack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Clearwater, FL
Posts: 63
Received 9 Likes on 9 Posts
This WSJ review is a great example of why professional critics (in any industry) frustrate me so much. Instead of reviewing a product for what it's really intended to be, they view it through their own myopic lens.

The review was almost entirely about the old RDX and it's targeted audience which was very different from the '13 model's target audience.

He wrote: "It might not be the car I once loved, but then, as my wife frequently observes, it’s not all about me. The less and more of the new RDX adds up to more of what a lot of people want."

Uh, yeah. What she said.

Is it so hard for reviewers to actually think about what their reading audience might like or dislike? I bet we can pretty much assume that 90% of WSJ readers would prefer the new RDX over the old one.

But instead he writes as if his reading audience were millions of "himself". His review basically trashed the RDX while admitting in the end that its target audience will likely love it. Something's wrong with that picture. It's almost like he's trashing the target audience rather than the car.
TampaJack is offline  
Old 09-03-2012, 11:46 AM
  #123  
Registered Member
 
musty hustla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 986
Received 101 Likes on 88 Posts
Originally Posted by wizardjjr View Post
8 has got to be an error. Most reviews are posting mid 6's. This WSJ review stinks.
I'm not confident the reviewer even drove the vehicle.
musty hustla is offline  
Old 09-06-2012, 08:03 AM
  #124  
Registered Member
Thread Starter
 
TSX69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC
Posts: 4,287
Received 1,179 Likes on 558 Posts
Post Associated Press


Redesigned for 2013, the Acura RDX compact sport utility vehicle is slightly larger, with a more compliant ride, than its predecessor and has more power than ever while beating the popular Lexus RX 350 in fuel economy ratings.

The new RDX also has more front- and rear-seat legroom than a Mercedes-Benz GLK SUV and much more cargo space.

Better still, the revamped-for-2013 RDX is a recommended buy of Consumer Reports magazine, where it ranks above average in expected reliability.

Pricing is increased an average $1,013 across the 4 2013 RDX models from 2012 prices, and the top RDX — with all-wheel drive and technology package — now is just over $40,000.

Specifically, starting manufacturer's suggested retail price, including destination charge, for a base, 2013 RDX is $35,215. This is a front-wheel drive RDX with 273-horsepower V-6 and all the standard amenities, such as leather-covered seats, heated front seats, moonroof, rearview camera, keyless access, push-button start, 360-watt audio system, Pandora Internet radio interface and SMS text messaging system. The lowest starting MSRP, including destination charge, for an all-wheel drive, 2013 RDX is $36,615.

But even with the price increase, the RDX remains one of the most affordable of smaller-sized, 5-seat, luxury-branded SUVs.

As an example, the starting retail price for a 2013 Lexus RX 350 with 270-horsepower V-6 and front-wheel drive is $40,205, while an all-wheel drive, 2013 RX 350 starts at $41,605. The RX 350 is the best-selling, smaller-sized, luxury SUV in the United States. Meantime, the 2013 Mercedes-Benz GLK has a starting retail price of $37,995 and comes standard with 302-horsepower V-6 and all-wheel drive.

Some fans of the 1st-generation RDX, which came to market in 2006 with a turbocharged 4 cylinder and a firmer ride that lent itself to sporty handling, might grumble over the changes for 2013.

But sales of the RDX peaked at 23,367 in 2007 and totaled just 15,196 in calendar 2011, which indicated that there's not a big market for a sporty-handling, turbo, compact SUV.

And by making the RDX more mainstream — with a smooth-performing V-6 instead of sometimes jerky turbo power and with a comfortable, refined ride that makes everything from city streets to concrete highways more tolerable — Acura is broadly expanding this SUV's appeal.

The pleasing ride was 1 of the 1st things noticed in the test RDX AWD Tech model priced at $40,315.

The new RDX suspension, along with slightly wider track and longer wheelbase, managed even potholes with ease, removed the sharpness of speed bump undulations and smoothed out the "whomps" of expansion cracks on bridges.

A 3-hour drive on highways and country roads in the quiet RDX interior was fatigue-free on nicely supportive but not overly firm front seats. Driver and passenger remarked the trip could have gone on without a problem.

The suspension —MacPherson struts up front and a multilink design in back — use new dampers that will be put in other new Acuras.

These amplitude-reactive dampers are new to Acura and have a 2-valve design that basically acts like 2 suspension systems. One is "soft" in situations such as small bumps and smooth roads and the other is firm, for big bumps and during aggressive cornering.

The driver, however, does nothing to activate these dampers, which work automatically.

Horsepower is boosted by 33 in the new RDX because of the 3.5-liter, single overhead cam V-6. This is the same engine that's in the Honda Odyssey. Honda is Acura's parent company.

Peak torque of 251 foot-pounds at 5,000 rpm from the V-6 is a bit less than the 260 foot-pounds at 4,500 rpm from last year's 2.3-liter, turbo 4 cylinder.

But the test 2013 RDX moved forward with spunk and merged well into traffic. Power came on smoothly through the new 6-speed automatic transmission that includes paddle shifters on the steering wheel for drivers who want to experience some sporty shifts.

Sounds from the V-6 also were quieter and less frenetic than those that came from the turbo 4.

Most impressively, the tester with AWD delivered nearly 24 miles per gallon in combined driving that was some 70% at highway speeds and 30% on city streets.

This is in part because of a fuel-saving, engine cylinder deactivation system that worked seamlessly in the test RDX to shut down cylinders that weren't needed at times.

Plus, the new RDX is more aerodynamic in its styling and weighs some 600 pounds less than the Lexus RX 350.

No wonder, then, that the federal government's fuel economy rating of 19/27 mpg for a 2013 RDX FWD is better than the 19/24-mpg rating for last year's 4-cylinder RDX. And it's higher than the 18/25-mpg rating for the 2013 Lexus RX 350 FWD.

The tester's mileage gave a 380-mile range on a single tank, and while premium gasoline is recommended, it is not required.

Inside, the new RDX instrument gauges are a bit less sporty and more mainstream than before, which fits nicely with the new personality.

Most notable are the sizable buttons and controls on the center part of the dashboard. There's no hunting to find tiny knobs or subtly indented buttons.

The rearview camera comes standard with yellow lines that depict the width of the RDX along its projected, rearward path as the vehicle backs up.

Front and rear legroom of 42 inches and 38.3 inches is better than what's in the Mercedes GLK, especially the GLK's 35.1 inches of back-seat legroom.

The RDX bests the GLK in cargo space, too, offering 76.9 cubic feet behind with rear seats folded vs. just 54.7 cubic feet in the Mercedes.
TSX69 is offline  
Old 10-15-2012, 08:07 PM
  #125  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thumbs up New York Times Likes 2013 RDX

BEHIND THE WHEEL | 2013 ACURA RDX
Now Less Interesting, and All the Better for It

THE most interesting thing about the 2007 Acura RDX compact crossover was that, unlike most of its luxury competitors, it didn’t have a 6-cylinder engine. Instead, it used a turbocharged 2.3-liter 4-cylinder engine. The most interesting thing about its successor, the new 2013 RDX, is that the turbo 4 has been dropped in favor of a V-6.

The 240-horsepower turbo engine made the first RDX quick but not all that fuel-efficient. Inside Line, the online enthusiasts magazine of Edmunds.com, clocked an ’07 RDX ripping from 0 to 60 in 6.8 seconds. But calculated with today’s methodology, the E.P.A. rating of that all-wheel-drive RDX was just 17 miles per gallon in town and 22 on the highway. (A front-drive version was added for 2010.) Owners who regularly revved the engine hard enough to keep the turbocharger spooled up could experience considerably worse fuel economy.

The old RDX had the dumpy body of a grocery cart and the frantic heart of a sports car. In contrast, the new RDX and its 273-horsepower 3.5-liter V-6 are perfectly matched. It’s a more handsome and tightly tailored machine than the departed model, but not so handsome or tailored that anyone would notice it in a sea of crossovers. And it’s now a better, easier-going instrument of family utility.

The V-6 is a version of a silken, effortlessly athletic, single-overhead-cam engine found in several Honda products, including the Odyssey minivan and the Acura TL and TSX sedans. It is mated to a new 6-speed automatic transmission (an upgrade from the old RDX’s 5-speed) and includes a cylinder-management system that lets two or three cylinders loaf when engine loads are light during, say, highway cruising. The new all-wheel-drive model is rated at 19 m.p.g. in town and 27 on the highway and the front-drive RDX at 20/28.

The five-seat crossover is based on the same unibody structure that underpins the immensely popular Honda CR-V — which comes only with 4 cylinders — and assembled alongside the CR-V in East Liberty, Ohio.

The engineering is strictly conventional. The engine sits crosswise in the nose, the suspension has MacPherson struts in front and a multilink independent system in back. An antilock disc brake sits behind every wheel, and the rack-and-pinion steering has an electric assist. At 182.5 inches over a 104.3-inch wheelbase, the RDX is nearly four inches longer than the CR-V on a wheelbase that’s 1.2 inches longer.

Every 2013 RDX will be, from the outside at least, virtually indistinguishable from any other. The $35,215 front-drive model includes perforated leather upholstery, power front seats, a rear backup camera and several ways to jack personal electronics into the sound system. Adding all-wheel drive lifts the price to $36,615. Adding a “technology package” — which includes a power tailgate, navigation system, a wicked loud stereo and high-intensity headlamps, among other things — pushes the front-driver’s price to $38,915 and the all-wheel-drive machine’s to $40,315. Other options are dealer-installed items.

The RDX performed flawlessly on a Huffman family trip from the District of Columbia to New York City. The V-6 was powerful when it had to be and transitioned seamlessly to 4- and 3-cylinder operation. The transmission shifted almost without notice, and the deep overdrive sixth gear let the engine run at barely more than an idle while cruising at 65 m.p.h.

There’s an avalanche of buttons and knobs to master in the cockpit, but the learning curve is shallow and each operates with precision. The instrumentation is straightforward and easy to scan.

In fact the RDX drives so similarly to its big brother, the seven-passenger MDX, that it’s hard to come up with a reason, other than the MDX’s third row of seats, to buy the larger, more expensive crossover. The ride is controlled, the 18-inch Michelin Pilot tires are quiet if not particularly grippy, and the seats are about as ergonomically accommodating as those in any vehicle not made by Gulfstream Aerospace.

The RDX isn’t exciting to drive, but it’s reassuring, confident and a bit muscular. Inside Line timed it at 6.5 seconds from 0 to 60 m.p.h. — 0.3 second quicker than the old model, with less turbo drama.

The old RDX had one of the best all-wheel-drive systems, which Acura calls Super Handling All Wheel Drive. First used on the flagship RL sedan, the system is truly full-time and features torque vectoring that sends power to the wheels with the most traction, improving handling through corners. The system made the original RDX a great-handling crossover, but few crossover customers seemed to crave it.

The new system is simpler. Most of the time the RDX operates in front-wheel drive, but when the system senses wheel slippage, up to half the torque can be diverted to the rear wheels. During a cloudburst in Maryland I think I felt the system kicking in, but I can’t be sure.

For how most people use their crossovers, all-wheel drive may be irrelevant. Almost all new vehicles have electronic traction and stability controls, and these have been refined to the point that they can keep almost anyone out of trouble when the weather turns slushy.

All-wheel drive adds about 120 pounds to the weight and $1,400 to the sticker price. It also shaves the fuel economy ratings. And while it might be a desirable asset for an RDX that will spend its life in Alaska, Vermont or North Dakota, it could be harder to justify where the winters are milder.

Up against excellent competition like the BMW X3, Audi Q5 and Infiniti EX35, the RDX stands out by blending in. It has a low-key, unpretentious personality that works for it. Interesting, it turns out, isn’t for everyone.



INSIDE TRACK: Conventional wisdom done right.
chaukka is offline  
Old 10-30-2012, 08:54 AM
  #126  
Registered Member
Thread Starter
 
TSX69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC
Posts: 4,287
Received 1,179 Likes on 558 Posts
Post TFLcar


The 2013 Acura RDX and the Lexus CT 200h F-Sport and Volvo S60 T5 AWD all cost about $40,000 USD.

They also represent 3 very different types of affordable luxury cars.

The second generation RDX is a entry level luxury crossover, while the Lexus CT 200h F-Sport is an entry level luxury hybrid and the Volvo S60 T5 is an all wheel drive entry level luxury sedan.

We of course wanted to know what the best afford luxury car was for $40,000 USD.

Is it the Crossover, the Hybrid or the sedan?

In this fun TFLcar Mashup review we put all 3 cars to the tests and find out that even for $40,000 USD you still have to make compromises when buying an affordable luxury car.

TSX69 is offline  
Old 02-27-2013, 05:20 AM
  #127  
Registered Member
Thread Starter
 
TSX69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC
Posts: 4,287
Received 1,179 Likes on 558 Posts
Lightbulb TruckTrend


We recently called on the 2013 Acura RDX AWD for a winter-time trip to the Rocky Mountains. While the weather cooperated for nearly the entire trip, the added ride height and all-wheel drive came in handy in a few off-beaten snow-covered roadways during the 1700-mile five-day trip.


With a new 273-hp 3.5-liter V-6 under the hood, the 2013 RDX has plenty of power for onramp merging and passing at highway speeds. On the highway, the RDX rode smooth and tackled curves well despite vague steering feel. In our 2013 Acura RDX AWD Arrival, we noted that the new V-6 engine outshined the previous 240-hp turbocharged 2.3-liter I-4 at the drag strip with 0-60 mph arriving in 6.3 seconds. While the RDX handles highway curves well, the new model's basic all-wheel-drive system gives up cornering prowess compared to the previous model's SH-AWD system.


The heated (front) leather seats are comfortable and soothed during the 10-hour, 700-mile trip out of Los Angeles, though we wouldn't mind if the door and center console armrest were positioned higher. Inside, the RDX proved roomy when filled with four adults on a 200-mile round trip to and from our destination to just south of the Utah-Idaho border. While the weather cooperated for most of the trip, the ground clearance and all-wheel drive performed well while other cars spun out on the 210 highway in Southern California during an unexpected downpour.


Over the course of the trip and 1700 miles, the 2013 RDX averaged 23.8 mpg including stop-and-go driving and city driving as well as highway speeds when traffic and weather allowed. The worst leg of the trip was 21.3 mpg and the best leg averaged 26.2 mpg with variations due to elevation changes. On average, the RDX traveled 242 miles between fill ups on about 3-quarters of a tank. The 2013 Acura RDX with all-wheel drive is EPA-rated at 19/27 mpg.


Overall, we liked the RDX on the road trip and grew to admire its subdued styling, though we wonder whether more expensive alternatives like the BMW X3 and Mercedes-Benz GLK350 might perform a bit better on a similar trip. The RDX competes in a crowded class, but our road trip experience and recent sales suggest Acura may have moved the entry-level premium crossover in the right direction with its 2nd generation.

TSX69 is offline  
Old 04-23-2013, 06:32 PM
  #128  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Quebec
Posts: 52
Received 9 Likes on 6 Posts
2013 RDX Vs GLK Vs X3 Vs EX37 Vs Q5.

http://www.autos.ca/car-comparisons/...rossover-suvs/

And the RDX comes in.....well you will just need to read for yourself!
yobbo is offline  
Old 04-24-2013, 06:03 AM
  #129  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Boston area
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 22 Likes on 7 Posts
Wow, the RDX came in LAST place in the comparo; that was disappointing to me.

I have 2010 TL SH-AWD Tech, and I recently test drove the 2013 RDX and really liked it. I have not driven any of the other vehicles and probably won't since I am a die-hard Honda/Acura fan, and I don't want the high long term maintenance costs of a European vehicle (Audi, Mercedes, Volvo, BME).

The RDX is $6K-$9K cheaper than the other 4 vehicles tested, so perhaps it was not a fair comparison. I wonder if the new 2014 MDX would have faired better against these same 4 CUVs?
pmartone is offline  
Old 04-24-2013, 11:32 AM
  #130  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,204
Received 1,260 Likes on 859 Posts
^^ It is disappointing but keep in mind, they did acknowledge that the RDX is still a good vehicle and just like everything else, there is always a perceived bias in everything in life. I would not worry what people say but put more importance on what matters to you. I don't take the opinion of someone to make my decision, I will make an assessment on what I want, what I need and take the vehicles I am considering for a test drive. The one that will fit best for ME will be the winner. We all drive our vehicles differently and what may feel great to me, will feel horrible to another. I treat these car reviews as "entertainment" only and certainly not as gospel. I highly suggest you do the same I have the RDX and couldn't be happier with it, but I know that to some, it would be the worst vehicle ever.
weather is offline  
Old 04-24-2013, 12:37 PM
  #131  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 101
Received 28 Likes on 15 Posts
I'm not surprised by the review. If I'm paying 5-10K more, I better be getting value somewhere. I agree with Weather though.. These reviews are entertaining to read, but it comes down more to what you value in a vehicle. I think it's funny how every time I read a review on any Acura, I can always predict they are going to come last in style and get a minus point followed by some stupid commentary on toning down the beak. Personally, I like the way the RDX looks and in like knowing it cuts through the wind like nobody's business so I'm not really don't put much weight into someone's opinion.
rsx2rdx is offline  
Old 04-24-2013, 02:35 PM
  #132  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,204
Received 1,260 Likes on 859 Posts
^^ I agree with you 100% - Well said!!
weather is offline  
Old 04-24-2013, 05:20 PM
  #133  
Registered Member
 
gbriank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, TX
Age: 43
Posts: 847
Received 10 Likes on 7 Posts
What are some of the items missing on the RDX that you think should be there??

My list?:

Fabric covered pillars (instead of plastic)
Rear air vents
Movable rear seat (fore and aft)
gbriank is offline  
Old 04-24-2013, 07:17 PM
  #134  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,204
Received 1,260 Likes on 859 Posts
^^

Passenger seat should be height adjustable would be my choice if I had one!
weather is offline  
Old 04-24-2013, 09:22 PM
  #135  
Registered Member
 
gbriank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, TX
Age: 43
Posts: 847
Received 10 Likes on 7 Posts
Originally Posted by weather View Post
^^

Passenger seat should be height adjustable would be my choice if I had one!
Fabric covered pillars (instead of plastic)
Rear air vents
Movable rear seat (fore and aft)
Height adjustable passenger seat
gbriank is offline  
Old 04-25-2013, 12:36 AM
  #136  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,021
Received 201 Likes on 144 Posts
Originally Posted by pmartone View Post
Wow, the RDX came in LAST place in the comparo; that was disappointing to me.

I have 2010 TL SH-AWD Tech, and I recently test drove the 2013 RDX and really liked it. I have not driven any of the other vehicles and probably won't since I am a die-hard Honda/Acura fan, and I don't want the high long term maintenance costs of a European vehicle (Audi, Mercedes, Volvo, BME).

The RDX is $6K-$9K cheaper than the other 4 vehicles tested, so perhaps it was not a fair comparison. I wonder if the new 2014 MDX would have faired better against these same 4 CUVs?
No, the '14 RDX would have been the same....why....'cause nothing changed except one color and the prices. That's it!

But, I love mine no matter what tests are done. It has proved itself to me....as "weather" has said. But, it is winning over many people in this "entry level luxury segment" and is selling very well.

I too would not want the added expense of driving a BMW or any of the others due to their costly prices, upkeep, and poor residual values.
Colorado Guy AF Ret. is offline  
Old 04-25-2013, 03:01 AM
  #137  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 126
Received 36 Likes on 12 Posts
These car review guys are some of the dumbest trolls around. They drool over BMW's simply because BMW gives them a nice free ride for a week or two. I use to get X3 for loaners when my X5 was in the shop which was frequently. The X3 is by far the most over rated piece of automotive crap out their. Little engine wound so tight that it sounds like it might explode any minute as it struggles up a long steep grade. Cheap finish along with some really stupid human interface issues makes that car a real bottom feader yet most of these car guys will wet their pants describing it's superior German engineering. Gimmee a break. All of this for another 10K over the RDX. People are really stupid at times.
TBC787 is offline  
Old 04-25-2013, 11:13 AM
  #138  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 173
Received 31 Likes on 24 Posts
Originally Posted by gbriank View Post
Fabric covered pillars (instead of plastic)
Rear air vents
Movable rear seat (fore and aft)
Height adjustable passenger seat
LED DRL
Optional 19" wheels
Blind spot warning
ipribadi is offline  
Old 04-25-2013, 12:15 PM
  #139  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 126
Received 36 Likes on 12 Posts
How about another four gallons of gas in the tank. That would be nice.
TBC787 is offline  
Old 10-03-2013, 07:03 AM
  #140  
Registered Member
Thread Starter
 
TSX69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC
Posts: 4,287
Received 1,179 Likes on 558 Posts
Lightbulb Car & Driver


There’s been a lot of griping—yup, including some from us—regarding the about-face Acura pulled with its 2nd-gen RDX. With a willing turbocharged 4-cylinder, a torque-vectoring rear differential, and typically sharp Acura responses, the 1st generation was the driver’s compact crossover. However, just as someone who brings up having kids on a 1st date tends not to get a 2nd date, the RDX proved a little too intense for many shoppers, many of whom, uh, realized they, you know, forgot to let the dog back in and, well, it was nice meeting you, but Rover’s probably peeing on tires at the BMW dealership again and I really should go over there. Only 15,196 drivers bought RDXs in 2011, the 1st-gen trucklet’s last full year on the market. BMW sold nearly twice that many X3s in 2011.


So, for its second act, which debuted as a 2013 model, the RDX panders less to people who like to drive and more to Compact Crossover Buyer A. The turbo 4 is replaced by a naturally aspirated V-6, the Super Handling All-Wheel Drive is downgraded to a lighter regular-handling all-wheel-drive setup (sans “Super Handling” torque vectoring), and, while the spec sheet includes adaptive dampers, the goal is clearly serenity rather than sportiness. The styling is more subdued now, but the overall package didn’t change much. There’s a smidge more leg- and shoulder room front and rear, but total interior volume only increases by 2.1 cubic feet.


Dynamics? Nah . . .

As far as Compact Crossover Buyer A is concerned, then, the RDX should be a hit. Its strut front suspension and multilink rear lack the bite and confidence of the 1st-gen car, but also lack its harsh ride, which should be worth a few thousand sales. And the electric steering, while not the precise setup of its hydraulic predecessor, is quick and nicely weighted. We doubt that any buyers will notice that skidpad grip has dropped from our best of 0.84 g in the 1st-gen vehicle to a perfectly pedestrian 0.79, and while the 70-mph-to-0 braking distance of 181 feet is on par with what we saw with the old RDX, it’s significantly longer than what we’ve recently recorded from the likes of the Audi Q5 or the Land Rover Evoque.


While we’ll miss the turbocharged 4, the RDX’s 3.5-liter V-6 tops the 4 by 33 horsepower. It is 9 lb-ft shy of the 4, but gets a 6-speed automatic instead of the outgoing car’s fiver. A cylinder-deactivation system that allows the 6 to run on 4 or 3 cylinders depending on load helps it clobber the 4 in official efficiency ratings—19 mpg city/27 highway versus 17/22—but our observed economy of 21 mpg was right in line with previous RDX tests. The new powertrain did a better job in straight-line testing, where we clocked the new car to 60 mph in 6.2 seconds and through the quarter-mile in 14.8 at 96 mph. Those are both improvements of 0.3 second, and quicker than many competitors, too.


Numbers Smaller and Larger

Acura’s big advantage over the rest of the cute-ute realm is in pricing. The RDX starts at $35,415. All-wheel drive adds $1400, and the Tech package, which bundles all of the major extras—remote power hatch, rearview camera, upgraded audio/nav with real-time traffic and voice control—is $3700. Additional options are limited to nickel and dime accessories. Our Tech-equipped all-wheel-driver topped out at $40,515. The Evoque’s base price is higher than that.


The RDX is a thoroughly competent little machine, but we’re disappointed that it feels like just another compact crossover. While not good for enthusiasts, that’s great for Acura. People buy a lot of compact crossovers, and the taming of this 1 is already paying off big time. In a segment that is enjoying rapid growth, the RDX is outpacing its competitors, nearly doubling its 2011 sales figure in 2012, when the new model went on sale, and already surpassing its 2012 total through just the 1st 8 months of ’13. So maybe that identity shift wasn’t a bad idea after all.

C/D TEST RESULTS:
0 to 60 mph: 6.2 sec
0 to 100 mph: 16.3 sec
Rolling start, 5–60 mph: 6.7 sec
Top gear, 30–50 mph: 3.7 sec
Top gear, 50–70 mph: 4.4 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.8 sec @ 96 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 135 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 181 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.79 g

FUEL ECONOMY:
EPA city/highway driving: 19/27 mpg
C/D observed: 21 mpg

TSX69 is offline  
Old 01-06-2014, 06:05 AM
  #141  
Registered Member
Thread Starter
 
TSX69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC
Posts: 4,287
Received 1,179 Likes on 558 Posts
Arrow Mt


It's hard to believe a year has come and gone with our long-term Acura RDX. In that time, I learned a lot. Without focusing on the idiosyncrasies I found annoying, this is a vehicle anyone would be happy owning. I didn't have a single problem with the car, and we never really had anything negative to say about it. In truth, we didn't really have anything at all to say about the RDX, and therein lies the issue. There is a missing component that Acura clearly needs to find.

The 2013 RDX is completely different from when it launched. Then, Acura was targeting a specific demographic with its edgy styling, turbo engine, and tech-laden SH-AWD system. Acura learned that focusing that narrowly isn't necessarily a good thing, which is why this new version was changed so thoroughly. Out went the edgy styling, the turbo engine, even the SH-AWD system -- all replaced by things that would appeal to a more mainstream audience. Compared with its competitive set (Infiniti QX50, Lexus RX, BMW X3), the RDX offers the best value, best fuel efficiency, and most standard equipment. But it still lacks one key ingredient.


During my year with the RDX, I took it on many road trips -- some solo, others with the whole family, and a few with just my son. Flying solo, the RDX was great. It's not too big, the interior is comfortable for an extended stay, there's plenty of room for anything, and the fuel mileage is more than adequate. When it was just my son and me, again, the RDX was a fairly smooth, quiet, comfortable, fun vehicle for whatever little adventure we went on. But when I loaded up the family, the RDX's limited room became evident. Both my wife and I are taller than 6 feet. I had no problem with the driver's seat legroom, but when the boy was in his car seat behind my wife, legroom for both of them was compromised. Interior ergonomics are good, but not great. If you have four adults in the vehicle, plus luggage, this smaller luxury SUV gets pretty crowded.

When you think SUV, you think, big, family-friendly vehicle, but the RDX isn't that. It's definitely more ideal for a single individual or a newly married couple with no immediate plans to start a family. It's amazing how much you learn about things you never cared about when you have a family. Do you have the cargo room necessary to hold all the things needed to keep your child happy, safe, and fed, plus whatever the grown-ups might require? (Yes, for a weekend.) How easy or difficult is the installation of a child seat? (It's a snap.)


In addition to serving as family transportation, the RDX also was a more than competent support vehicle for our photo and video teams. With 1 or 2 occupants, the Acura was able to hold anything they needed: rig gear, camera bags, booms, sliders, tripods, bounce boards, cleaning gear. And because the RDX has decent ground clearance and AWD, there weren't many places it couldn't go. The lifting rear hatch and relatively smooth ride also made the RDX a good vehicle to shoot photos from.

The RDX was serviced 3 times while with us. The service reminder made sure I didn't forget when it was due and which service I needed. For more than a year's worth of duty, some of it hard duty, $357 is reasonable as far as maintenance costs go. For that fee, we had 3 oil changes, 2 tire rotations, and 1 differential fluid change.


Whenever I asked a staffer who drove the RDX how it was, I would get a shoulder shrug and "It was fine" or "It was good," but there weren't any strong emotions. Compared with the previous-generation RDX, basically everything in this 2013 version -- styling, fuel economy, ride -- is head and shoulders better. But there is still something missing -- that deeper connection, that feeling of looking forward to driving it -- in essence, a soul. The RDX does everything well, but there is nothing that wows you, nothing that excites you, nothing that makes you eager to go for a drive.
Our Car
Service life 15 mo/28,406 mi
Base Price $36,815
Price as Tested $40,315
Options Technology Package ($3500: AcuraLink Telematics, Navigation, Acura/ELS Surround Sound System)
Average fuel economy 21.8 mpg
CO2 emissions 0.89 lb/m
EPA City/Hwy/Comb Fuel Econ 19/27/22 mpg
Problem Areas None
Maintenance cost $357 (3-oil change, inspection; 2-tire rotation; 1-differential fluid change)
Normal-wear cost $0
3-Year Residual Value* $21,367
Recalls NHTSA Campaign ID number 13V143000. Component: powertrain: automatic transmission
TSX69 is offline  
Old 01-21-2014, 08:51 PM
  #142  
New Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In my opinion I would like an Acura to allow to choose any color combination. My favorite is Kona Coffee Metallic exterior with light beige leather.
IliaNc is offline  
Old 01-23-2014, 10:50 AM
  #143  
2014 RDX Tech AWD
 
KJW73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Age: 46
Posts: 476
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
This is somewhat of a ramble, so I apologize in advance.

It is disappointing to hear so many of the "negatives" from the professional reviews about the RDX. I get tired of hearing "people" talk about how poop Acura is compared to Lexus, BMW, MB, etc. So having said that I am totally done, finished - kaput - with reading these reviews. Before reading any reviews... I would have NEVER thought of the RDX competitors to be BMW, etc. (even for an Acura, I was thinking, maybe a top of the line non-luxury CUV like a CX7, Highlander... I don't know???). The MDX seemed more fairly comparable to those (in terms of luxury and price). I mean, c'mon - you can buy a Hyundai for $30+ grand. So as someone else mentioned; maybe this little entry level guy isn't getting a fair shot based on the named competition and it's current offered amenities? Compare it to a Hyundai, and heck it might be a winner!

Do I think my RDX is as a nice as the Audi? No. Do I like the Audi's headlights and overall design better? Absolutely. Was I scared to dabble across the street with a brand that I was not at all familiar with? YES. It all comes back (for me, anyway) to familiarity and dependability. But - to each their own, for sure. I know that some folks that will purchase a $60,000 SUV solely based on its looks. And that's all good...

But while I'm at it...LOL. So, ask my BFF about her 2013 MB C300 that she has had in the shop constantly for repairs since she took it off the lot. And then ask me how often I had my TL in for service over 9 years - NONE! No repairs, just the regular scheduled maintenance; and my husband and I competently 'drove' that car like nobody's business. I'm not saying that every MB is going to be defected, because I realize that can happen with any manufacturer... I get that. But there is something to be said about overall dependability of Honda (at least the one's I've owned) - and, I don't think that some"reviewers" get "that" (...and then they drive off into the sunset in their 1998 Hyundai). Feeling my sarcasm? Am I even making sense?? LOL.

((Stepping off of my soap box and away from the reviews now.... thanks for listening!))
:-)

Last edited by KJW73; 01-23-2014 at 10:53 AM.
KJW73 is offline  
Old 07-06-2015, 07:22 AM
  #144  
Registered Member
Thread Starter
 
TSX69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC
Posts: 4,287
Received 1,179 Likes on 558 Posts
Lightbulb Consumer Reports


The Acura RDX has been one of the most popular small, upscale SUVs for good reason: it has a roomy cabin, plenty of power, is competitively priced, and its upscale without being pretentious.

But the RDX was missing some safety and luxury features expected from an prestige nameplate. Good news: A freshening for 2016 brings important safety equipment that were previously unavailable.

We’re pleased to see that the Acura Watch safety package—including autobraking to mitigate forward crashes and lane-departure warning with lane keep assist—is now available on every trim line.

More upscale features are available now, too, like blind-spot monitoring, an 8-way power passenger seat, and ventilated front seats.


The powertrain benefits from the addition of cylinder deactivation, whereby the V6 can run on just 3 cylinders under light loads, such as modest-speed cruising. Further, the engine gains 6 horsepower for the new model year. The 279-hp, 3.5-liter V6 and 6-speed automatic remains slick. Both front- and all-wheel drive are available.

EPA estimates for the AWD model are 19 mpg in the city and 28 mpg on the highway, promising a 1 mpg gain on the highway. In the real world, we expect that the 22 mpg overall figures that we got in our last RDX test won’t likely change.

Slight suspension tweaks seem to have settled the ride, but impacts from bumps are rather stiff.

Handling is quite mundane and the lifeless steering contributes to the hum-drum driving experience. Fans of the German competition from Audi and BMW just might find the RDX boring to drive, others may have no objection.


The seats offer many adjustments and are reasonably accommodating for a long drive. The backseat is also spacious and there's plenty of cargo space.

Unfortunately, the controls are an exercise in needless stupidity, a common phenomenon with recent Acuras and Hondas.

Acura replaced the old RDX’s simple controls with their latest corporate infotainment system. This multiscreen display unit is distracting and annoying, with one screen too many and an awkward mix of hard and virtual controls. Voice commands, also, are hit and miss.

Outside, you’ll now find Acura's familiar many-lensed "jewel eye" LED headlamps, as well as new taillights and wheel designs.


Where the RDX wins big points is value. An RDX AWD with the Technology package and the Acura Watch safety gear costs $42,690. Typically equipped, compared to the Germans, it’s about $6,000 cheaper.

No, it's not as fun to drive as the best from Europe, but the RDX has plenty of luxury touches.

The RDX also delivers a more premium drive compared to its natural rival, the Lexus NX. The NX favors a less refined turbocharged four-cylinder engine, and it feels more snug and stiff.

All in all, the updated RDX probably continues to offer exactly what Acura buyers want.

—Mike Quincy
TSX69 is offline  
Old 07-06-2015, 03:24 PM
  #145  
Registered Member
 
RDX10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 4,878
Received 635 Likes on 511 Posts
Originally Posted by KJW73 View Post
This is somewhat of a ramble, so I apologize in advance.

It is disappointing to hear so many of the "negatives" from the professional reviews about the RDX. I get tired of hearing "people" talk about how poop Acura is compared to Lexus, BMW, MB, etc. So having said that I am totally done, finished - kaput - with reading these reviews. Before reading any reviews... I would have NEVER thought of the RDX competitors to be BMW, etc. (even for an Acura, I was thinking, maybe a top of the line non-luxury CUV like a CX7, Highlander... I don't know???). The MDX seemed more fairly comparable to those (in terms of luxury and price). I mean, c'mon - you can buy a Hyundai for $30+ grand. So as someone else mentioned; maybe this little entry level guy isn't getting a fair shot based on the named competition and it's current offered amenities? Compare it to a Hyundai, and heck it might be a winner!

Do I think my RDX is as a nice as the Audi? No. Do I like the Audi's headlights and overall design better? Absolutely. Was I scared to dabble across the street with a brand that I was not at all familiar with? YES. It all comes back (for me, anyway) to familiarity and dependability. But - to each their own, for sure. I know that some folks that will purchase a $60,000 SUV solely based on its looks. And that's all good...

But while I'm at it...LOL. So, ask my BFF about her 2013 MB C300 that she has had in the shop constantly for repairs since she took it off the lot. And then ask me how often I had my TL in for service over 9 years - NONE! No repairs, just the regular scheduled maintenance; and my husband and I competently 'drove' that car like nobody's business. I'm not saying that every MB is going to be defected, because I realize that can happen with any manufacturer... I get that. But there is something to be said about overall dependability of Honda (at least the one's I've owned) - and, I don't think that some"reviewers" get "that" (...and then they drive off into the sunset in their 1998 Hyundai). Feeling my sarcasm? Am I even making sense?? LOL.

((Stepping off of my soap box and away from the reviews now.... thanks for listening!))
:-)
Even though this post is nearly ancient, I feel the need to reply.

I think the current generation of RDX is a "nice" vehicle and not a "great" vehicle for a variety of personal reasons. I also think it was a 4/5's baked attempt by Acura to produce a solid car. It isn't fair to compare it to vehicles costing 10k more, however in terms of its' position in the luxury or premium market, it will be cross shopped on a daily basis by the common consumer.

I disagree with your statement of the RDX needing to be compared to top model levels of high volume common brands. This is an Acura, not a Honda (though some would have a hard time knowing) and therefore Acura should have worked harder to produce a model that can sufficiently compete on equal ground with the GLK, Q5, X3, NX...etc. I honestly have to admit that although the current redesign is nice, it is only what it should have been back in 2013 not 2016. It is STILL lacking MANY luxury options, such as heated rear seats, heated steering wheel, around view camera, panoramic sunroof, more multi functional seats, wood or aluminum interior trim, fabric on the pillars...etc. When a kia sorento is better built and has more luxurious options, it is time to go back to the drawing board (not that the sorento is a bad vehicle).

On a last note, reviewers are mostly a bunch of stupid sheep, they already go into a review knowing what to say. They always kiss the bottoms of BMW, Audi, and Mercedes but mostly BMW. I never take what they have to say to heart, many times they absolutely crush an excellent vehicle and other times praise a complete piece of crap. Don't ever stay away from a vehicle because someone said it was bad. For me personally, I HATE CVT's but I would still test drive a car with one just to see. Reviewers almost always poop on a car with a cvt even if it makes perfect sense for it.
RDX10 is offline  
Old 08-04-2015, 12:11 PM
  #146  
Registered Member
Thread Starter
 
TSX69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC
Posts: 4,287
Received 1,179 Likes on 558 Posts
Cool AutoBlog


Acura is deeply confused as a brand. Is it sporty or luxurious? Conservative or avant garde? Truly premium, or just premium for Honda? At its heart, there is a simple truth: despite confused characters, Acura vehicles are usually very competent. The new TLX, for example, is a smart, comfortable, near-premium sedan. The new ILX, meanwhile, is a huge improvement over its predecessor, and finally feels like the entry-level, premium four-door stepping stone Acura needs.

Then there's the RDX. Placed in a very hot segment, the Honda CR-V-based crossover never quite caught on. For its 1st 6 years on the market, it couldn't even break 25,000 annual sales. The more mainstream redesign in 2013 made some waves, nearly doubling sales, but Acura still fell way behind the competition. In 2014, the Lexus RX outsold the RDX nearly three to one.

For 2016, the RDX gets a substantial refresh. The biggest visual update comes from Acura's polarizing, JewelEye LED headlights, which are standard. These aren't the best looking headlights on the market, but the many 'eyes' are better executed on the RDX than any other Acura. The LED daytime running lights round out a nice face during light hours, too. More subtle tweaks are given to the bumpers, with larger intakes in front and bigger reflector housings around back.


The big change in the cabin cannot, sadly, be called an improvement. It's the addition of the Honda/Acura dual-screen system, and while it gives the interior a techy vibe, the user experience is convoluted and unintuitive. The rest of the cabin's design, however, is easy to like.

Material quality is adequate for the segment. Plastics are abundant, but are soft to the touch, while fit is impressive and typically Honda throughout. The steering wheel is a parts shelf item and feels just a bit too large for a crossover of this size. The seats are broad, flat, and comfortable, and backseat passengers are treated quite well. Even with the driver's seat set for your 6-foot, 1-inch author, there's plenty of space in back, especially for long-legged folks.

Small changes are found under the RDX's hood, where the 3.5-liter i-VTEC V6 gains 6 horsepower and 1 pound-foot of torque. What hasn't changed, however, is this engine's general character. This V6, while not a member of Honda's excellent Earth Dreams family, is a smooth, refined operator. Its muted note is luxurious, but at the same time, it's very easy to access the engine's linear powerband. New front and rear engine mounts bolster this engine's already impressive noise, vibration, and harshness characteristics.


But the RDX doesn't feel powerful. The 279 horsepower and 252 pound-feet of torque are tasked with hauling nearly 4,000 pounds of Japanese crossover. Sure, the RDX is lighter than a lot of competitors, but it lacks power and especially torque. A BMW X3 xDrive35i, for example, offers up 300 lb-ft from 1,300 to 5,000 rpm. The Audi Q5 3.0 TFSI makes 295 at 2,150 rpm. This shows on the stopwatch, where both the BMW and Audi are indeed quicker.

For better or worse, the 3.5-liter V6 is the RDX's only engine – getting 6-pot power requires expensive upgrades with Audi and BMW. Thus, the Acura more directly compares with 2.0-liter, turbocharged versions of the X3 and Q5, not to mention the segment's other naturally aspirated competitors, like the Mercedes-Benz GLK350 (for now) and Cadillac SRX. We're certain the RDX could trump the Lexus RX 350 in the quickness department, too.

With the help of active cylinder management, the 2016 RDX AWD is said to return 19 miles per gallon in the city and 28 mpg in the city. Our final tally of 20.5 miles per gallon isn't a huge surprise, considering we logged mostly city miles. The front-wheel-drive RDX improves the EPA-rated economy figures to 20/29 mpg city/highway.


The 6-speed automatic favors smoothness over speed, and downshifts require some hunting. There is a manual mode with steering wheel-mounted paddle shifters, but it doesn't have a huge impact on upshift or downshift speeds. We do like the solid, satisfying sensation when slotting the shift lever into gear. It's a little thing, sure, but gives a real sense of quality.

Both front- and all-wheel drive are available. That latter feature is not Acura's excellent Super Handling All-Wheel Drive system, but is instead listed as "All-Wheel Drive with Intelligent Control." The system sends all the engine's torque to the front wheels in straight-on cruising, and if any wheel slippage is detected, power can be split evenly, aiding driver confidence in slippery situations. The AWD will also adjust itself in dry conditions, with up to 40 percent of power being sent rearward as needed, say, during hard launches.

Suspension components carry over unchanged, including amplitude reactive dampers, front MacPherson struts, a multi-link, independent rear suspension, and standard 18-inch wheels. That's just fine – this is a comfortable cruiser, able to soak up bumps and impacts with little issue. The ride quality is lovely – quiet, too. Our tester's 235/60-series Michelin Primacy MXM4 tires are more compliant than the sportier, 45-series rubber offered on the BMW X3 and Audi Q5. Even the new Lexus RX uses a more aggressive setup, with 55-series 19-inch wheels on the F-Sport.


Overall, the RDX doesn't feel quite as sharp as its German competition. Much like the CR-V on which it's based, the RDX feels very disconnected, both through the steering and the chassis. We aren't asking for low-profile rubber or anything like that, but something to better communicate road feel to the driver would be nice.

There are 4 trim levels to choose from – RDX with AcuraWatch Plus, RDX with Technology Package, a combo of those 2, and the top-of-the-line Advance, which we have here. Prices start as low as $36,190 with front-wheel drive, including $920 for destination, while our loaded AWD tester costs $44,340.

Part of acknowledging the general goodness of the RDX is divorcing it from the increasingly popular idea of the sporty crossover, like the German set. Following this mid-cycle revision, the RDX leans much more closely towards the crossover example set by the Lexus RX – that of the comfortable, relaxed, and finely appointed 5-passenger cruiser. You'd never know it based on sales numbers, but the RDX is an excellent alternative to the all too popular Lexus.


TSX69 is offline  
Old 08-04-2015, 12:31 PM
  #147  
Registered Member
 
giovane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Houston
Posts: 187
Received 49 Likes on 36 Posts
Lexus RX is not direct competitor with RDX (the new NX actually is), and stating that the car is not as peppy as the X3 3.5i or the Q5 3.0 shows how incompetent the reviewer is.
In its segment (small luxury SUV) RDX was the best seller in 2014, and looks like it's going to be the same for 2015.
giovane is offline  
Old 08-04-2015, 01:01 PM
  #148  
Registered Member
 
Kaputnik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 607
Received 68 Likes on 60 Posts
Part of acknowledging the general goodness of the RDX is divorcing it from the increasingly popular idea of the sporty crossover...
Kaputnik is offline  
Old 08-19-2015, 07:01 AM
  #149  
Registered Member
Thread Starter
 
TSX69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC
Posts: 4,287
Received 1,179 Likes on 558 Posts
Cool C&d


Acura was the 1st Japanese carmaker to challenge the luxury establishment, rolling into the big-bucks banquet in 1986 with a bold corporate mantra: “Precision Crafted Performance.” Yet it didn’t take long for Honda’s luxury division to stray from that lofty credo and embark on a meandering identity quest that’s only now beginning to show tiny glimpses of returning to its roots—on the passenger-car side of the house, at least.

But it’s another story in Acura’s SUV department. After kicking up some dust with its 1st offering in the compact-crossover segment, the slightly unruly but stimulating original RDX, Acura has retreated to the safety of posh interiors, creamy ride quality, quiet operation, lots of tech features, and not too many demands on the driver.


That evolution occurred when the RDX went from generation 1 to generation 2 for 2012, and it’s amplified by this update for model-year 2016. It brings sexier styling (if any of these 2-box haulers can be classified as sexy), more content, more safety features, a modest power increase, and a 1-mpg uptick in EPA highway fuel economy to 28 mpg with all-wheel drive. We recorded 23 mpg during our travels with this AWD model.

Smooth Operator

Raising the output of the 3.5-liter V-6 by 6 horsepower and a single pound-foot of torque, predictably, makes no difference at the test track. Acceleration results are identical with those posted by the 2014 AWD RDX we tested: zero to 60 in 6.2 seconds and through the quarter-mile in 14.8 at 96 mph.

These are certainly respectable numbers by the standards of this class and quicker than many, and the six-speed automatic is nicely attuned to the engine’s powerband, going about its business unobtrusively in full auto mode. Its languid responses to the paddle shifters add nothing to the driving experience, however. Beyond that, the RDX is a smooth operator on just about any surface, isolating occupants from the harsh realities of nasty pavement, and doing so quietly. What’s not to like?

The answer to that question depends on what you expect from your vehicle. If it’s merely luxuriously furnished comfort and insulation from the vicissitudes of daily traffic, fortified by vigorous throttle response (compared with much of the competition), the RDX is hard to fault. But if you demand a little more—eager responses, minimal body motions, tactile steering, confidence-inspiring grip, decisive braking—the RDX begins to feel a little ho-hum.

The electric power steering, for example, varies effort with speed but doesn’t feel particularly precise; the driver finds himself making little midcorner corrections. Body roll is just this side of abundant; grip, delivered by a set of Michelin Primacy MXM4 all-season tires (235/60-18), is modest at 0.77 g; transient responses are relaxed; and braking performance is so-so by class standards. Our test crew noted the complete absence of fade and consistent distances, but 184 feet from 70 mph is not a bragging point. Understeer is plentiful, of course, but that’s pretty much universal in this segment.


Chock-a-block

Leaving dynamics to 1 side for the moment, the RDX stacks up as a tempting package in terms of eye appeal, features, roominess, and value. The new fascia, with Acura’s now-familiar LED headlight array, adds a little drama to a package that was already about as shapely as it gets in this class. The list of features packed into this full-boat test vehicle—all-wheel drive, navigation, a power sunroof, leather, ELS premium audio, Pandora, Bluetooth connectivity, a power tailgate, power everything else—make the $44,340 all-in price look pretty appealing in the growing luxury-compact-crossover tournament.

And that price also includes Acura’s new batch of AcuraWatch safety features: forward collision warning, collision mitigation braking, adaptive cruise control, lane-departure warning, lane-keeping assist, and a color display screen. As for the car’s other tech, we find it difficult to appreciate the Honda/Acura preoccupation with touch-screen controls and phobic rejection of traditional knobs and buttons. And this particular screen can be a bit of a stretch to reach from the driver’s seat.

Nevertheless, for the owner who prioritizes quiet comfort and luxurious appointments over driving enjoyment, the RDX makes a pretty compelling case. Maybe Acura could retrieve its original slogan and revise it for its SUV offerings: Precision Crafted Comfort.

TSX69 is offline  
Old 08-19-2015, 11:44 AM
  #150  
Registered Member
 
giovane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Houston
Posts: 187
Received 49 Likes on 36 Posts
giovane is offline  
Old 08-19-2015, 09:37 PM
  #151  
Registered Member
 
Kaputnik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 607
Received 68 Likes on 60 Posts
Nice read. I did love the 2015 on a test drive. But I still couldn't let go of my super-fun, slightly tuned SH-AWD 2008.

But with each passing year I inch closer to being that owner the reviewer describes..."the owner who prioritizes quiet comfort and luxurious appointments over driving enjoyment, the RDX makes a pretty compelling case."

Not ready to let go of the S2000, but just maybe they will fill this niche with an Acura branded HRV...one can hope.
Kaputnik is offline  
Old 07-07-2019, 09:38 AM
  #152  
T16
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Age: 58
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
RDX buying decision

I have never owned an RDX. So need some advice if possible. I am looking at a 2013 RDX w/tech has 37k miles selling for 19k, or a 2017 RDX Base with 33k miles selling for 22k. Both are being sold at the same Acura dealer, and both have excellent maintenance records.
Any thoughts??
T16 is offline  
Old 07-07-2019, 11:05 AM
  #153  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 97
Received 20 Likes on 18 Posts
Originally Posted by T16 View Post
I have never owned an RDX. So need some advice if possible. I am looking at a 2013 RDX w/tech has 37k miles selling for 19k, or a 2017 RDX Base with 33k miles selling for 22k. Both are being sold at the same Acura dealer, and both have excellent maintenance records.
Any thoughts??
Are both AWD? FWD? Which is more important...the features which come with the TECH trim level -or- the updated front-end / headlights on the 2017? When we were looking and deciding between a TECH and BASE 2013 models...my wife wanted the back-up camera and the powered rear hatch. She does not like the usability of the navigation system on the RDX and chooses to use her Garmin unit. For me personally...I can do without the navigation, back-up camera and powered rear hatch. Were it me...I would go with the 2017 as it has the updated front end and I think it's the better deal.
jjrphs is offline  
Old 07-07-2019, 01:01 PM
  #154  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 12
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by jjrphs View Post
Are both AWD? FWD? Which is more important...the features which come with the TECH trim level -or- the updated front-end / headlights on the 2017? When we were looking and deciding between a TECH and BASE 2013 models...my wife wanted the back-up camera and the powered rear hatch. She does not like the usability of the navigation system on the RDX and chooses to use her Garmin unit. For me personally...I can do without the navigation, back-up camera and powered rear hatch. Were it me...I would go with the 2017 as it has the updated front end and I think it's the better deal.
IMO the base 2017 feels like a CRD with a fast engine, I couldn’t get over how lame the base is that it doesn’t even have navigation. It has the same interior as 2013 base. I couldn’t pull the trigger on the newer base for 22k and I am prob going to buy a 2013 tomorrow with tech and 65k miles for 16,500. (Trading in my 08)
Joe123inc is offline  
Old 07-07-2019, 01:01 PM
  #155  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 12
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by T16 View Post
I have never owned an RDX. So need some advice if possible. I am looking at a 2013 RDX w/tech has 37k miles selling for 19k, or a 2017 RDX Base with 33k miles selling for 22k. Both are being sold at the same Acura dealer, and both have excellent maintenance records.
Any thoughts??
IMO the base 2017 feels like a CRD with a fast engine, I couldn’t get over how lame the base is that it doesn’t even have navigation. It has the same interior as 2013 base. I couldn’t pull the trigger on the newer base for 22k and I am prob going to buy a 2013 tomorrow with tech and 65k miles for 16,500. (Trading in my 08)
Joe123inc is offline  
 
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
inmydream316
Second Generation RDX (2013-2018)
53
05-03-2019 07:28 AM
SidhuSaaB
3G TL Problems & Fixes
16
03-28-2019 11:12 PM
12vancover
Second Generation RDX (2013-2018)
41
10-16-2015 12:04 PM
joflewbyu2
Fifth Generation TLX (2015+)
0
09-23-2015 11:16 PM
ExcelerateRep
Excelerate Performance
0
09-22-2015 10:40 AM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: 2nd Generation RDX Reviews


Contact Us - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.