Freaking out at four days of 2016 RDX ownership
11-09-2015, 01:50 PM
#1
2016 RDX Advance Blk/Blk
Thread Starter
Freaking out at four days of 2016 RDX ownership
Now I'm four full days into RDX ownership (picking up went smoothly - thanks to those of you who posted in response to my other thread), and I'm experiencing some buyer's remorse. Don't get me wrong, it's a great car, but I feel like I'm not "taking to it" like other cars.
My last car was an Infinity EX35 (recently renamed as the QX50). It drove like a sport sedan, so acclimating to it after my car before that (an Acura TSX) was easy. The RDX drives more like an SUV. I feel like I'm levitating down the road, too.
Of course I test drove the RDX, three times (!), but there's nothing like experiencing a car on your daily commute to really get a feel for the driving experience. In my buying process, I focused on practical matters (cargo space, fuel economy). I should have rented an RDX for a few days before buying.
I think that in my search I didn't put enough emphasis on driving excitement.
I feel like there's more body roll with this car, and switching back to all-wheel drive with a front-wheel drive emphasis is more noticeable than I anticipated. (The EX35 is RWD except when AWD kicks in). (Or is this all in my head?)
There are a couple of hiccups with my car as well. Going up one of the hills on my commute resulted in the adaptive cruise control (ACC) being really, really choppy [the EX handled that same hill in ACC mode just fine].
A strange rattle behind my left ear when driving happens occasionally. That one is so intermittent, and I haven't been able to connect it to any individual event yet, that it'll be hard to get the dealership to hear it.
Finally, I'm at under 300 miles, and I understand that there's a break in period. But right now I'm getting 19.3 miles/gallon, and that's with a good half of the driving having taking place on the highway. Fuel economy was a selling point. I'm disappointed. Is that irrational at so few miles?
I loved my TSX, and I loved my EX35. I like the RDX ok, but I fear that I may not end up really enjoying driving it like I did my last two cars. I sound like a spoiled brat here - I know that - but I need someone to talk me off the ledge (not push me off of it like my significant other probably wants to do right now given the anxiety I'm feeling). Part of the issue is that this wasn't an inexpensive purchase, and I want to LOVE it for that price, and I don't.
Advice?
Thanks!
Jane
My last car was an Infinity EX35 (recently renamed as the QX50). It drove like a sport sedan, so acclimating to it after my car before that (an Acura TSX) was easy. The RDX drives more like an SUV. I feel like I'm levitating down the road, too.
Of course I test drove the RDX, three times (!), but there's nothing like experiencing a car on your daily commute to really get a feel for the driving experience. In my buying process, I focused on practical matters (cargo space, fuel economy). I should have rented an RDX for a few days before buying.
I think that in my search I didn't put enough emphasis on driving excitement.
I feel like there's more body roll with this car, and switching back to all-wheel drive with a front-wheel drive emphasis is more noticeable than I anticipated. (The EX35 is RWD except when AWD kicks in). (Or is this all in my head?)
There are a couple of hiccups with my car as well. Going up one of the hills on my commute resulted in the adaptive cruise control (ACC) being really, really choppy [the EX handled that same hill in ACC mode just fine].
A strange rattle behind my left ear when driving happens occasionally. That one is so intermittent, and I haven't been able to connect it to any individual event yet, that it'll be hard to get the dealership to hear it.
Finally, I'm at under 300 miles, and I understand that there's a break in period. But right now I'm getting 19.3 miles/gallon, and that's with a good half of the driving having taking place on the highway. Fuel economy was a selling point. I'm disappointed. Is that irrational at so few miles?
I loved my TSX, and I loved my EX35. I like the RDX ok, but I fear that I may not end up really enjoying driving it like I did my last two cars. I sound like a spoiled brat here - I know that - but I need someone to talk me off the ledge (not push me off of it like my significant other probably wants to do right now given the anxiety I'm feeling). Part of the issue is that this wasn't an inexpensive purchase, and I want to LOVE it for that price, and I don't.
Advice?
Thanks!
Jane
The following users liked this post:
musty hustla (11-10-2015)
11-09-2015, 02:06 PM
#2
Stay Out Of the Left Lane
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: SE Mass --- > Central VA --- > SE Mass
Age: 57
Posts: 8,953
Received 1,236 Likes
on
1,023 Posts
It's been 4 days............ Give yourself some more time behind the wheel. You may have felt similarly with your other vehicles but it's been a while. Mileage will improve as you roll up more miles.
The following users liked this post:
CJaneDrive (11-10-2015)
11-09-2015, 02:15 PM
#3
Once you move past the idea that a 2016 RDX should be an "enthusiasts car" with any notion of sportiness in the driving experience, you will be fine. Rather enjoy the quiet, smooth comfort - perfect for the commute. Hopefully they will bring a bit of the fun factor back with the next iteration.
The following users liked this post:
CJaneDrive (11-10-2015)
11-09-2015, 02:35 PM
#4
You should focus on the positives of the vehicle. Comparing the drive to a sedan (TSX) or a wagon (qx50, I don't consider it an SUV) to a SUV crossover, you have to expect many differences. At least your visibility is way better with 8.1 inch clearance off the ground. The 2016 RDX is safer than the qx50 and the TSX. In a collision, you're less likely to get as many injuries as with the TSX or qx50. The qx50 is a gas guzzler and looks hideous. The RDX looks beautiful and drives the smoothest out of these cars. It also has the most comfortable and spacious cabin and best headlights and sound system. It also has a way better infotainment system than the infinity.
I'm getting great mileage in mine and girls are finding me way more attractive than before so this stallion is doing its job.
I'm getting great mileage in mine and girls are finding me way more attractive than before so this stallion is doing its job.
The following users liked this post:
CJaneDrive (11-10-2015)
11-09-2015, 02:45 PM
#5
Hard as it may be to do this, think of it as a 6 cyl CRV because in essence that's what it really is. It's a good car, but nothing special. Just enjoy it. My wife picked ours out. It has some electronic features that our 2010 Toyota venza (6 cyl) didn't have, but we don't really use them. Some of the materials in the RDX are nicer than the venza, but the venza had a far smoother drive train and far smoother ride. It also used 87 octane gas and got better gas mileage than our RDX with premium unleaded. IMHO, the venza is a better car than the RDX, but in the end it's just a car. You're probably disappointed that you paid so much for what you got, but Infinity (Nissan's premium car) is built for sportiness; Lexus (Toyota's premium car) is built for luxury, and Acura (Honda's premium car) really doesn't focus on anything - i.e. it's neither sporty or luxurious. It's just an upgraded Honda. There will be enthusiasts who argue differently, but I am just expressing an honest opinion.
Last edited by snorf; 11-09-2015 at 02:54 PM.
The following users liked this post:
CJaneDrive (11-10-2015)
11-09-2015, 03:05 PM
#6
2016 RDX Advance Blk/Blk
Thread Starter
Good point! It has bee five years since I last bought a car. Maybe this is just my way of adapting. I'm 47 and am still learning how to be patient I guess! Thanks for the reminder!
11-09-2015, 03:08 PM
#7
2016 RDX Advance Blk/Blk
Thread Starter
Once you move past the idea that a 2016 RDX should be an "enthusiasts car" with any notion of sportiness in the driving experience, you will be fine. Rather enjoy the quiet, smooth comfort - perfect for the commute. Hopefully they will bring a bit of the fun factor back with the next iteration.
Trending Topics
11-09-2015, 03:14 PM
#8
2016 RDX Advance Blk/Blk
Thread Starter
You should focus on the positives of the vehicle. Comparing the drive to a sedan (TSX) or a wagon (qx50, I don't consider it an SUV) to a SUV crossover, you have to expect many differences. At least your visibility is way better with 8.1 inch clearance off the ground. The 2016 RDX is safer than the qx50 and the TSX. In a collision, you're less likely to get as many injuries as with the TSX or qx50. The qx50 is a gas guzzler and looks hideous. The RDX looks beautiful and drives the smoothest out of these cars. It also has the most comfortable and spacious cabin and best headlights and sound system. It also has a way better infotainment system than the infinity.
I'm getting great mileage in mine and girls are finding me way more attractive than before so this stallion is doing its job.
I'm getting great mileage in mine and girls are finding me way more attractive than before so this stallion is doing its job.
I'm glad that the RDX is working for you! Hopefully I'll feel more and more positive about it as time goes by. It's interesting that I'm usually optimistic to a fault, and am happy the vast majority of the time. This car, though, my brain got stuck in the groove of what's missing instead of what's great about it! Now it's time for a major course correction!
11-09-2015, 03:22 PM
#9
2016 RDX Advance Blk/Blk
Thread Starter
Hard as it may be to do this, think of it as a 6 cyl CRV because in essence that's what it really is. It's a good car, but nothing special. Just enjoy it. My wife picked ours out. It has some electronic features that our 2010 Toyota venza (6 cyl) didn't have, but we don't really use them. Some of the materials in the RDX are nicer than the venza, but the venza had a far smoother drive train and far smoother ride. It also used 87 octane gas and got better gas mileage than our RDX with premium unleaded. IMHO, the venza is a better car than the RDX, but in the end it's just a car. You're probably disappointed that you paid so much for what you got, but Infinity (Nissan's premium car) is built for sportiness; Lexus (Toyota's premium car) is built for luxury, and Acura (Honda's premium car) really doesn't focus on anything - i.e. it's neither sporty or luxurious. It's just an upgraded Honda. There will be enthusiasts who argue differently, but I am just expressing an honest opinion.
It's...nice. Not jazzy in any way, but all around ok. I had all of the information that I needed to know this before making the purchase. I'm not sure how I failed to note that maybe I should have kept looking. From some of the other cars that you mentioned, it seems that I didn't cast a broad enough net. Regardless, I think that I can come to appreciate the comfortable commute, the extra space, and all of the tech! There's lots of that!
11-09-2015, 03:28 PM
#10
mrgold35
It might take some time to get use to the new Acura direction with an emphasis on mpgs and safety tech. It is almost like Acura and Lexus switched in the last few years. My 08 RDX is all sport and very little safety/luxury compared to the 16 RDX. Have you test drove the Lexus NX for the fun of it to see the pros/cons of the new turbo 4? I think they are within the same ball park if you put the same tech/features on them both (Lexus more expensive).
It might make you fall in love with the RDX if you compare it to other competitors.
It might make you fall in love with the RDX if you compare it to other competitors.
The following users liked this post:
CJaneDrive (11-10-2015)
11-09-2015, 05:06 PM
#11
The Venza is NOT smoother than the 2016 RDX. Anyone who has driven the RDX would know this.
The Venza is a fine car with great horsepower. But the RDX goes over bumps wayyy smoother, cabin doesn't vibrate like in the venza, acceleration is incredibly faster, brakes respond wayyy better. Build quality of the RDX is also in another league.
How do I know this? I have both cars in my driveway. Stop giving Jane wrong info, son!
The Venza is a fine car with great horsepower. But the RDX goes over bumps wayyy smoother, cabin doesn't vibrate like in the venza, acceleration is incredibly faster, brakes respond wayyy better. Build quality of the RDX is also in another league.
How do I know this? I have both cars in my driveway. Stop giving Jane wrong info, son!
Hard as it may be to do this, think of it as a 6 cyl CRV because in essence that's what it really is. It's a good car, but nothing special. Just enjoy it. My wife picked ours out. It has some electronic features that our 2010 Toyota venza (6 cyl) didn't have, but we don't really use them. Some of the materials in the RDX are nicer than the venza, but the venza had a far smoother drive train and far smoother ride. It also used 87 octane gas and got better gas mileage than our RDX with premium unleaded. IMHO, the venza is a better car than the RDX, but in the end it's just a car. You're probably disappointed that you paid so much for what you got, but Infinity (Nissan's premium car) is built for sportiness; Lexus (Toyota's premium car) is built for luxury, and Acura (Honda's premium car) really doesn't focus on anything - i.e. it's neither sporty or luxurious. It's just an upgraded Honda. There will be enthusiasts who argue differently, but I am just expressing an honest opinion.
11-09-2015, 05:09 PM
#12
Team Owner
So is it your dad that drives the venza? Or your mom? I thought she was driving the 2016 RDX Elite.
The following users liked this post:
Kaputnik (11-09-2015)
11-09-2015, 05:12 PM
#13
Jane, don't listen to the haters. The RDX is not a 6 cylinder CRV or similar to the Venza.
It's in another league. Way better in build and drive quality, acceleration, braking, safety, tech, everything.
The 2016 RDX competes with Mercedes, BMW, Infinity, Porshe, Audi, etc. I have friends who drive many different luxury vehicles including all these that I mentionned. I can vouch from first hand experience that the RDX is just as good or better than these other luxury crossovers but at a wayyy cheaper price. Also think of this: in Canada, the Nissan Murano Platinum costs $50,000. It's more expensive than the 2016 RDX Elite af $46,500. And the RDX is the better vehicle!! Trust me, I could have gotten the Lexus NX or RX, Porsche Macan, BMW X4, Merceds GLA AMG, etc. but I chose the 2016 RDX Elite after considering a plethora of factors and concluded the 2016 RDX Elite is the best purchase.
There are lots of haters on here who I suspect have not even driven the 2016 RDX based on their irrationally illogical commentary.
Hope that helps!
It's in another league. Way better in build and drive quality, acceleration, braking, safety, tech, everything.
The 2016 RDX competes with Mercedes, BMW, Infinity, Porshe, Audi, etc. I have friends who drive many different luxury vehicles including all these that I mentionned. I can vouch from first hand experience that the RDX is just as good or better than these other luxury crossovers but at a wayyy cheaper price. Also think of this: in Canada, the Nissan Murano Platinum costs $50,000. It's more expensive than the 2016 RDX Elite af $46,500. And the RDX is the better vehicle!! Trust me, I could have gotten the Lexus NX or RX, Porsche Macan, BMW X4, Merceds GLA AMG, etc. but I chose the 2016 RDX Elite after considering a plethora of factors and concluded the 2016 RDX Elite is the best purchase.
There are lots of haters on here who I suspect have not even driven the 2016 RDX based on their irrationally illogical commentary.
Hope that helps!
This perspective really resonates with me! The RDX felt like the practical choice for me. I didn't pick it for it having excelled in one area. Instead, I picked it because it generally met most of my criteria. Now I suppose that it's no wonder that it isn't knocking my socks off in any area.
It's...nice. Not jazzy in any way, but all around ok. I had all of the information that I needed to know this before making the purchase. I'm not sure how I failed to note that maybe I should have kept looking. From some of the other cars that you mentioned, it seems that I didn't cast a broad enough net. Regardless, I think that I can come to appreciate the comfortable commute, the extra space, and all of the tech! There's lots of that!
It's...nice. Not jazzy in any way, but all around ok. I had all of the information that I needed to know this before making the purchase. I'm not sure how I failed to note that maybe I should have kept looking. From some of the other cars that you mentioned, it seems that I didn't cast a broad enough net. Regardless, I think that I can come to appreciate the comfortable commute, the extra space, and all of the tech! There's lots of that!
11-09-2015, 05:14 PM
#14
Team Owner
Dont ignore the question, Rocky!!
11-09-2015, 05:23 PM
#16
Team Owner
Jane, don't listen to the haters. The RDX is not a 6 cylinder CRV or similar to the Venza.
It's in another league. Way better in build and drive quality, acceleration, braking, safety, tech, everything.
The 2016 RDX competes with Mercedes, BMW, Infinity, Porshe, Audi, etc. I have friends who drive many different luxury vehicles including all these that I mentionned. I can vouch from first hand experience that the RDX is just as good or better than these other luxury crossovers but at a wayyy cheaper price. Also think of this: in Canada, the Nissan Murano Platinum costs $50,000. It's more expensive than the 2016 RDX Elite af $46,500. And the RDX is the better vehicle!! Trust me, I could have gotten the Lexus NX or RX, Porsche Macan, BMW X4, Merceds GLA AMG, etc. but I chose the 2016 RDX Elite after considering a plethora of factors and concluded the 2016 RDX Elite is the best purchase.
There are lots of haters on here who I suspect have not even driven the 2016 RDX based on their irrationally illogical commentary.
Hope that helps!
It's in another league. Way better in build and drive quality, acceleration, braking, safety, tech, everything.
The 2016 RDX competes with Mercedes, BMW, Infinity, Porshe, Audi, etc. I have friends who drive many different luxury vehicles including all these that I mentionned. I can vouch from first hand experience that the RDX is just as good or better than these other luxury crossovers but at a wayyy cheaper price. Also think of this: in Canada, the Nissan Murano Platinum costs $50,000. It's more expensive than the 2016 RDX Elite af $46,500. And the RDX is the better vehicle!! Trust me, I could have gotten the Lexus NX or RX, Porsche Macan, BMW X4, Merceds GLA AMG, etc. but I chose the 2016 RDX Elite after considering a plethora of factors and concluded the 2016 RDX Elite is the best purchase.
There are lots of haters on here who I suspect have not even driven the 2016 RDX based on their irrationally illogical commentary.
Hope that helps!
11-09-2015, 06:13 PM
#17
Drifting
I am wondering how old you are and if you are not ready for a quiet refined ride. I have driven a TSX and it is a fine and fun vehicle. To me the EX35 is ugly but maybe it rides more like a sports car. My wife has an 11 RDX with the turbo. Definitely more sporty than my 14 RDX.
That said I love my 14 and it is perfect for me. Perhaps you made a mistake for you. Great car though. I expect I may get another.
That said I love my 14 and it is perfect for me. Perhaps you made a mistake for you. Great car though. I expect I may get another.
The following users liked this post:
CJaneDrive (11-10-2015)
11-09-2015, 07:40 PM
#18
Instructor
I am wondering how old you are and if you are not ready for a quiet refined ride. I have driven a TSX and it is a fine and fun vehicle. To me the EX35 is ugly but maybe it rides more like a sports car. My wife has an 11 RDX with the turbo. Definitely more sporty than my 14 RDX.
That said I love my 14 and it is perfect for me. Perhaps you made a mistake for you. Great car though. I expect I may get another.
That said I love my 14 and it is perfect for me. Perhaps you made a mistake for you. Great car though. I expect I may get another.
I ended up with an NX F-Sport because it has a younger more exciting look and you just made me realize that it resembles the first gen RDX to me.
The following 2 users liked this post by skabei:
CJaneDrive (11-10-2015),
TacoBello (11-09-2015)
11-09-2015, 08:15 PM
#19
I have that feeling with every new car I've ever had. I can find a zillion things that were better on the old car. As I've bought more cars it has gotten worse.
I loved my first car (a Dodge Dart) but I liked my next car (Ford Granada) better. Then I got an LTD that was previously owned by a moonshiner. It was the cat's meow. There followed a series of Benz products and each was a classic so those didn't count but then I bought a Rover 3500 and that's when things started going downhill.
A new Jag XJ V-12HE followed and the questions started. Did I spend too much? Is it really that much better? Is the roadholding really better than the LTD I remembered? Why did I buy this?
Gave it to my dad and bought a XJS- V12. Why did I buy a two door? What's that noise? The radio sounds lousy. etc. etc.
For the first few months you tend to focus on the downsides. When you get used to the car you start focusing on the positives.
I drove the Infiniti for a week or so and mostly liked it but it wasn't as refined as the RDX.
The gas mileage will improve with time and once you quit focusing on it.
I've been in your shoes tons of times. Just give it a bit - you'll love it.
I loved my first car (a Dodge Dart) but I liked my next car (Ford Granada) better. Then I got an LTD that was previously owned by a moonshiner. It was the cat's meow. There followed a series of Benz products and each was a classic so those didn't count but then I bought a Rover 3500 and that's when things started going downhill.
A new Jag XJ V-12HE followed and the questions started. Did I spend too much? Is it really that much better? Is the roadholding really better than the LTD I remembered? Why did I buy this?
Gave it to my dad and bought a XJS- V12. Why did I buy a two door? What's that noise? The radio sounds lousy. etc. etc.
For the first few months you tend to focus on the downsides. When you get used to the car you start focusing on the positives.
I drove the Infiniti for a week or so and mostly liked it but it wasn't as refined as the RDX.
The gas mileage will improve with time and once you quit focusing on it.
I've been in your shoes tons of times. Just give it a bit - you'll love it.
The following users liked this post:
CJaneDrive (11-10-2015)
11-09-2015, 09:00 PM
#20
When I was looking at SUVs I was actually wanting to buy a used 1st gen RDX because I like the size (I wanted a small SUV or a hatch) and it looks younger and sportier than the current gen RDX. I've never test driven a first gen but maybe one day I will just to try it.
I ended up with an NX F-Sport because it has a younger more exciting look and you just made me realize that it resembles the first gen RDX to me.
I ended up with an NX F-Sport because it has a younger more exciting look and you just made me realize that it resembles the first gen RDX to me.
Congrats CJaneDrive, i'm sure you'll love it once the shock wears off!!
The following users liked this post:
CJaneDrive (11-10-2015)
11-09-2015, 09:02 PM
#21
My 2 cents.... I've recently driven a 12 (turbo), a 15 AWD, and now I am in a new 16 AWD.
The 12 felt typical Acura. It was tight & very responsive in steering, braking, ride, and acceleration. Ride was a bit too harsh IMO.
The 15 was much softer and the only time I felt that (old school) Acura "DNA" was when I drove it *overly* aggressive. It does well when pushed, but pushing it that hard on public streets is not how I want to drive.
This 16 I have, I've only put about 80 miles on so far so I can't give it a fair review except to say that it feels a little softer than the 15 I drove. These newer Acura's are nothing like the old ones. Having said that.... it seems to be more popular than the previous generations. The MDX & RDX are selling very well. So it stands to reason they are making what more people want.
Jane I know my post is kind of random.. but I think it can be a reality check for what the 2nd gen RDX is all about.
I also think that the feeling of driving it vs the cars you mention is a feeling of a higher center of gravity combined w/a softer suspension. So the perception is that its not as sporty. And... that's the intent.
The 12 felt typical Acura. It was tight & very responsive in steering, braking, ride, and acceleration. Ride was a bit too harsh IMO.
The 15 was much softer and the only time I felt that (old school) Acura "DNA" was when I drove it *overly* aggressive. It does well when pushed, but pushing it that hard on public streets is not how I want to drive.
This 16 I have, I've only put about 80 miles on so far so I can't give it a fair review except to say that it feels a little softer than the 15 I drove. These newer Acura's are nothing like the old ones. Having said that.... it seems to be more popular than the previous generations. The MDX & RDX are selling very well. So it stands to reason they are making what more people want.
Jane I know my post is kind of random.. but I think it can be a reality check for what the 2nd gen RDX is all about.
I also think that the feeling of driving it vs the cars you mention is a feeling of a higher center of gravity combined w/a softer suspension. So the perception is that its not as sporty. And... that's the intent.
The following users liked this post:
CJaneDrive (11-10-2015)
11-09-2015, 10:51 PM
#22
How does the 1st gen RDX look sportier and younger than the current one? The 2016 RDX looks the most sporty and young of all the crossovers out there. Look at the cool 3D grill with Jewel Eye LED headlights, the redesigned Acura symbol that looks like the batman symbol. The LED tail lights and just thr awesome shape of this vehicle. In the sunlight, the Jewel Eyes shine like diamonds. That's young and sporty!
The NX is 4 cylinder and not as refined overall as the 2016 RDX Elite 6 cylinder.
The NX is 4 cylinder and not as refined overall as the 2016 RDX Elite 6 cylinder.
When I was looking at SUVs I was actually wanting to buy a used 1st gen RDX because I like the size (I wanted a small SUV or a hatch) and it looks younger and sportier than the current gen RDX. I've never test driven a first gen but maybe one day I will just to try it.
I ended up with an NX F-Sport because it has a younger more exciting look and you just made me realize that it resembles the first gen RDX to me.
I ended up with an NX F-Sport because it has a younger more exciting look and you just made me realize that it resembles the first gen RDX to me.
11-09-2015, 11:06 PM
#23
@CJaneDrive - I don't know if hauling things is an issue for you or not, but out of sheer curiosity I just looked up the interior dimensions for the RDX and the CR-V. (The RDX is based on the CR-V platform.) The interior passenger room is about the same size (the CR-V slightly larger) while the RDX gives you more cargo room.
Acura RDX
Interior Passenger Volume 103.5 cu ft
Cargo Volume 76.9 cu ft with 2nd row down
CR-V
Passenger Volume 104.1 cu ft (LX)
Cargo Volume 70.9 cu ft with 2nd row down
Acura RDX
Interior Passenger Volume 103.5 cu ft
Cargo Volume 76.9 cu ft with 2nd row down
CR-V
Passenger Volume 104.1 cu ft (LX)
Cargo Volume 70.9 cu ft with 2nd row down
The following users liked this post:
CJaneDrive (11-10-2015)
11-09-2015, 11:12 PM
#24
One of the reasons I think Acura is not a priority for Honda, but just a sideline has to do with their new line of sedans.
NOTE: The EPA categorizes any car with a total interior volume under 109.9 cu ft as a "Compact Car"
Acura TL:
EPA Passenger Volume = 98.2 cu ft
EPA Cargo Volume = 13.1 cu ft
EPA Total Interior Volume = 111.3 cu ft
2014 TSX:
EPA Passenger Volume = 94.5 cu ft
EPA Cargo Volume = 14 cu ft
EPA Total Interior Volume = 108.5 cu ft
Acura TLX:
EPA Passenger Volume = 93.3 cu ft
EPA Cargo Volume = 13.2 cu ft for base and Tech (14.3 cu ft for Advance) EPA Total Interior Volume = 106.5/107.6 cu ft
Acura combined two cars and produced one with a smaller interior than both the cars it replaced (or smaller than the two being replaced). The TLX has a smaller passenger volume and a smaller interior volume than the TSX or TL. (As a comparison, the 2014 Accord has an interior volume of 119 cu ft and the 2014 Civic has an interior volume of 107.4 cu ft. The interior volume of the Civic is actually larger than the TLX at 94.9 cu ft) They took a (barely) midsized TL, combined it with a compact (TSX) and produced a smaller compact - the TLX.
NOTE: The EPA categorizes any car with a total interior volume under 109.9 cu ft as a "Compact Car"
Acura TL:
EPA Passenger Volume = 98.2 cu ft
EPA Cargo Volume = 13.1 cu ft
EPA Total Interior Volume = 111.3 cu ft
2014 TSX:
EPA Passenger Volume = 94.5 cu ft
EPA Cargo Volume = 14 cu ft
EPA Total Interior Volume = 108.5 cu ft
Acura TLX:
EPA Passenger Volume = 93.3 cu ft
EPA Cargo Volume = 13.2 cu ft for base and Tech (14.3 cu ft for Advance) EPA Total Interior Volume = 106.5/107.6 cu ft
Acura combined two cars and produced one with a smaller interior than both the cars it replaced (or smaller than the two being replaced). The TLX has a smaller passenger volume and a smaller interior volume than the TSX or TL. (As a comparison, the 2014 Accord has an interior volume of 119 cu ft and the 2014 Civic has an interior volume of 107.4 cu ft. The interior volume of the Civic is actually larger than the TLX at 94.9 cu ft) They took a (barely) midsized TL, combined it with a compact (TSX) and produced a smaller compact - the TLX.
Last edited by snorf; 11-09-2015 at 11:14 PM.
The following users liked this post:
CJaneDrive (11-10-2015)
11-09-2015, 11:18 PM
#26
Team Owner
The following users liked this post:
CJaneDrive (11-10-2015)
11-09-2015, 11:48 PM
#27
Instructor
How does the 1st gen RDX look sportier and younger than the current one? The 2016 RDX looks the most sporty and young of all the crossovers out there. Look at the cool 3D grill with Jewel Eye LED headlights, the redesigned Acura symbol that looks like the batman symbol. The LED tail lights and just thr awesome shape of this vehicle. In the sunlight, the Jewel Eyes shine like diamonds. That's young and sporty!
The NX is 4 cylinder and not as refined overall as the 2016 RDX Elite 6 cylinder.
The NX is 4 cylinder and not as refined overall as the 2016 RDX Elite 6 cylinder.
The first gen though had a sporty hatch-back-esque shape to it and it looks like it was made to be modded which many people have done. Yeah it's a bit ricey but I like it. It looks like it would be a fun car to drive. Try finding mods for the second gen RDX because you won't find much. The modding community for it is nil.
Jane - you made a good choice. It is a good ride and it has more power than a lot of other competing compacts. It won't drive like the EX35, but this is a real suv. The EX35 is more of a hatch version of the G37 with a very hungry engine, its not really as practical and I'm assuming that you were looking for more practicality when you switched from the EX35 to the RDX. You haven't lost that much power.
I on the other hand went for mostly looks and the interior when I picked the NX over the RDX. I wish I had the RDX's acceleration and power, but I'm very happy with it. My point is that you've incrementally graduated into a real suv and you'll realize that soon. Afterwards you'll definitely enjoy it.
Last edited by skabei; 11-09-2015 at 11:57 PM.
The following users liked this post:
CJaneDrive (11-10-2015)
11-10-2015, 05:16 AM
#28
2016 RDX Advance Blk/Blk
Thread Starter
I am wondering how old you are and if you are not ready for a quiet refined ride. I have driven a TSX and it is a fine and fun vehicle. To me the EX35 is ugly but maybe it rides more like a sports car. My wife has an 11 RDX with the turbo. Definitely more sporty than my 14 RDX.
That said I love my 14 and it is perfect for me. Perhaps you made a mistake for you. Great car though. I expect I may get another.
That said I love my 14 and it is perfect for me. Perhaps you made a mistake for you. Great car though. I expect I may get another.
Making the decision of which car to buy required balancing several factors. Looking back on the process, I probably should have paused for longer before committing to the RDX.
I drove the Lexus NX 300h because I wanted better fuel economy than the EX35 (it was definitely a thirsty car!), but the cabin felt pretty cramped, and the cargo space was limited. The ride was nice. Ultimately, even if I had sprung for that, I might not have enjoyed the driving as much as I did the EX35. Maybe I would've liked the turbo version.
I didn't buy another EX35 because my last one, although fun to drive, had some fit, finish and quality issues that weren't great to deal with.
I drove the Audi Q5 (diesel, still wanting good fuel economy), and it was ok, not great. It was very plain in the cabin, not much to look at. Sort of dull.
Maybe I should have been searching for a sport wagon instead of a small SUV.
Anyway, I'm going to try to be Zen with my new RDX for a few months, and if I hate it after that, I'll sell it, but I'd really have to hate it to do that since I'd be throwing away quite a bit of cash on depreciation, not to mention that I'd feel even sillier than I already do.
11-10-2015, 05:24 AM
#29
2016 RDX Advance Blk/Blk
Thread Starter
I think that you explained what I've done well, skabei, I've graduated to a real SUV. And the difference between that and what was a hatchback sedan, essentially, are more noticeable than I expected.
I liked the NX for looks and the interior did feel more like a luxury vehicle than the RDX. Do you have the turbo?
Yup, I went for practicality. Now I have to try to appreciate that and not miss the surge of quick power upon acceleration. The RDX is zippy in its own right. It's just not as sporty as I guess I deluded myself into thinking that it was during the buying process.
I liked the NX for looks and the interior did feel more like a luxury vehicle than the RDX. Do you have the turbo?
Yup, I went for practicality. Now I have to try to appreciate that and not miss the surge of quick power upon acceleration. The RDX is zippy in its own right. It's just not as sporty as I guess I deluded myself into thinking that it was during the buying process.
I don't think the 2nd gen RDX is sportier than the first gen at all and it seems clear that Acura has purposefully positioned it that way. The grill and headlights make it look sharp and edgy but I wouldn't say it's all that sporty. When I first looked at a 2016, I liked the look, but it drove just like what I imagined it to - a solid suv with good pickup and very good value, but not enough sport enthusiasm about it.
The first gen though had a sporty hatch-back-esque shape to it and it looks like it was made to be modded which many people have done. Yeah it's a bit ricey but I like it. It looks like it would be a fun car to drive. Try finding mods for the second gen RDX because you won't find much. The modding community for it is nil.
Jane - you made a good choice. It is a good ride and it has more power than a lot of other competing compacts. It won't drive like the EX35, but this is a real suv. The EX35 is more of a hatch version of the G37 with a very hungry engine, its not really as practical and I'm assuming that you were looking for more practicality when you switched from the EX35 to the RDX. You haven't lost that much power.
I on the other hand went for mostly looks and the interior when I picked the NX over the RDX. I wish I had the RDX's acceleration and power, but I'm very happy with it. My point is that you've incrementally graduated into a real suv and you'll realize that soon. Afterwards you'll definitely enjoy it.
The first gen though had a sporty hatch-back-esque shape to it and it looks like it was made to be modded which many people have done. Yeah it's a bit ricey but I like it. It looks like it would be a fun car to drive. Try finding mods for the second gen RDX because you won't find much. The modding community for it is nil.
Jane - you made a good choice. It is a good ride and it has more power than a lot of other competing compacts. It won't drive like the EX35, but this is a real suv. The EX35 is more of a hatch version of the G37 with a very hungry engine, its not really as practical and I'm assuming that you were looking for more practicality when you switched from the EX35 to the RDX. You haven't lost that much power.
I on the other hand went for mostly looks and the interior when I picked the NX over the RDX. I wish I had the RDX's acceleration and power, but I'm very happy with it. My point is that you've incrementally graduated into a real suv and you'll realize that soon. Afterwards you'll definitely enjoy it.
11-10-2015, 05:26 AM
#30
2016 RDX Advance Blk/Blk
Thread Starter
11-10-2015, 05:29 AM
#31
2016 RDX Advance Blk/Blk
Thread Starter
Thanks for this perspective. I have to pause for a moment to say that I really, really loved my 2005 TSX when I had it. It had a manual transmission and was so fun to drive.
One of the reasons I think Acura is not a priority for Honda, but just a sideline has to do with their new line of sedans.
NOTE: The EPA categorizes any car with a total interior volume under 109.9 cu ft as a "Compact Car"
Acura TL:
EPA Passenger Volume = 98.2 cu ft
EPA Cargo Volume = 13.1 cu ft
EPA Total Interior Volume = 111.3 cu ft
2014 TSX:
EPA Passenger Volume = 94.5 cu ft
EPA Cargo Volume = 14 cu ft
EPA Total Interior Volume = 108.5 cu ft
Acura TLX:
EPA Passenger Volume = 93.3 cu ft
EPA Cargo Volume = 13.2 cu ft for base and Tech (14.3 cu ft for Advance) EPA Total Interior Volume = 106.5/107.6 cu ft
Acura combined two cars and produced one with a smaller interior than both the cars it replaced (or smaller than the two being replaced). The TLX has a smaller passenger volume and a smaller interior volume than the TSX or TL. (As a comparison, the 2014 Accord has an interior volume of 119 cu ft and the 2014 Civic has an interior volume of 107.4 cu ft. The interior volume of the Civic is actually larger than the TLX at 94.9 cu ft) They took a (barely) midsized TL, combined it with a compact (TSX) and produced a smaller compact - the TLX.
NOTE: The EPA categorizes any car with a total interior volume under 109.9 cu ft as a "Compact Car"
Acura TL:
EPA Passenger Volume = 98.2 cu ft
EPA Cargo Volume = 13.1 cu ft
EPA Total Interior Volume = 111.3 cu ft
2014 TSX:
EPA Passenger Volume = 94.5 cu ft
EPA Cargo Volume = 14 cu ft
EPA Total Interior Volume = 108.5 cu ft
Acura TLX:
EPA Passenger Volume = 93.3 cu ft
EPA Cargo Volume = 13.2 cu ft for base and Tech (14.3 cu ft for Advance) EPA Total Interior Volume = 106.5/107.6 cu ft
Acura combined two cars and produced one with a smaller interior than both the cars it replaced (or smaller than the two being replaced). The TLX has a smaller passenger volume and a smaller interior volume than the TSX or TL. (As a comparison, the 2014 Accord has an interior volume of 119 cu ft and the 2014 Civic has an interior volume of 107.4 cu ft. The interior volume of the Civic is actually larger than the TLX at 94.9 cu ft) They took a (barely) midsized TL, combined it with a compact (TSX) and produced a smaller compact - the TLX.
11-10-2015, 05:34 AM
#32
2016 RDX Advance Blk/Blk
Thread Starter
Mr_MDX, yes I think that's it exactly - higher center at gravity and softer suspensionbmake for a different driving experience. It's a good vehicle, though. I'm not arguing that. I think that I made a decent, practical choice. So the thrill isn't there, and I just need to see if I can live without the thrill and be happy with the comfort, better fuel economy, more cargo space. All good things!
My 2 cents.... I've recently driven a 12 (turbo), a 15 AWD, and now I am in a new 16 AWD.
The 12 felt typical Acura. It was tight & very responsive in steering, braking, ride, and acceleration. Ride was a bit too harsh IMO.
The 15 was much softer and the only time I felt that (old school) Acura "DNA" was when I drove it *overly* aggressive. It does well when pushed, but pushing it that hard on public streets is not how I want to drive.
This 16 I have, I've only put about 80 miles on so far so I can't give it a fair review except to say that it feels a little softer than the 15 I drove. These newer Acura's are nothing like the old ones. Having said that.... it seems to be more popular than the previous generations. The MDX & RDX are selling very well. So it stands to reason they are making what more people want.
Jane I know my post is kind of random.. but I think it can be a reality check for what the 2nd gen RDX is all about.
I also think that the feeling of driving it vs the cars you mention is a feeling of a higher center of gravity combined w/a softer suspension. So the perception is that its not as sporty. And... that's the intent.
The 12 felt typical Acura. It was tight & very responsive in steering, braking, ride, and acceleration. Ride was a bit too harsh IMO.
The 15 was much softer and the only time I felt that (old school) Acura "DNA" was when I drove it *overly* aggressive. It does well when pushed, but pushing it that hard on public streets is not how I want to drive.
This 16 I have, I've only put about 80 miles on so far so I can't give it a fair review except to say that it feels a little softer than the 15 I drove. These newer Acura's are nothing like the old ones. Having said that.... it seems to be more popular than the previous generations. The MDX & RDX are selling very well. So it stands to reason they are making what more people want.
Jane I know my post is kind of random.. but I think it can be a reality check for what the 2nd gen RDX is all about.
I also think that the feeling of driving it vs the cars you mention is a feeling of a higher center of gravity combined w/a softer suspension. So the perception is that its not as sporty. And... that's the intent.
11-10-2015, 05:37 AM
#33
2016 RDX Advance Blk/Blk
Thread Starter
Mr. Gold, I liked the NX ok, but it was skimpy on cargo space...and yes, a bit more pricey than the RDX. Still, I came close to choosing the NX. Maybe I'd have been happier because at least it excelled on luxury. It may have a lower center of gravity, too...???
It might take some time to get use to the new Acura direction with an emphasis on mpgs and safety tech. It is almost like Acura and Lexus switched in the last few years. My 08 RDX is all sport and very little safety/luxury compared to the 16 RDX. Have you test drove the Lexus NX for the fun of it to see the pros/cons of the new turbo 4? I think they are within the same ball park if you put the same tech/features on them both (Lexus more expensive).
It might make you fall in love with the RDX if you compare it to other competitors.
It might make you fall in love with the RDX if you compare it to other competitors.
11-10-2015, 05:40 AM
#34
2016 RDX Advance Blk/Blk
Thread Starter
I have definitely noticed that there isn't as much talk of mods here than back when I had my TSX. I'm still wondering if I'd have liked the 1st gen RDX. I might've.
I don't think the 2nd gen RDX is sportier than the first gen at all and it seems clear that Acura has purposefully positioned it that way. The grill and headlights make it look sharp and edgy but I wouldn't say it's all that sporty. When I first looked at a 2016, I liked the look, but it drove just like what I imagined it to - a solid suv with good pickup and very good value, but not enough sport enthusiasm about it.
The first gen though had a sporty hatch-back-esque shape to it and it looks like it was made to be modded which many people have done. Yeah it's a bit ricey but I like it. It looks like it would be a fun car to drive. Try finding mods for the second gen RDX because you won't find much. The modding community for it is nil.
Jane - you made a good choice. It is a good ride and it has more power than a lot of other competing compacts. It won't drive like the EX35, but this is a real suv. The EX35 is more of a hatch version of the G37 with a very hungry engine, its not really as practical and I'm assuming that you were looking for more practicality when you switched from the EX35 to the RDX. You haven't lost that much power.
I on the other hand went for mostly looks and the interior when I picked the NX over the RDX. I wish I had the RDX's acceleration and power, but I'm very happy with it. My point is that you've incrementally graduated into a real suv and you'll realize that soon. Afterwards you'll definitely enjoy it.
The first gen though had a sporty hatch-back-esque shape to it and it looks like it was made to be modded which many people have done. Yeah it's a bit ricey but I like it. It looks like it would be a fun car to drive. Try finding mods for the second gen RDX because you won't find much. The modding community for it is nil.
Jane - you made a good choice. It is a good ride and it has more power than a lot of other competing compacts. It won't drive like the EX35, but this is a real suv. The EX35 is more of a hatch version of the G37 with a very hungry engine, its not really as practical and I'm assuming that you were looking for more practicality when you switched from the EX35 to the RDX. You haven't lost that much power.
I on the other hand went for mostly looks and the interior when I picked the NX over the RDX. I wish I had the RDX's acceleration and power, but I'm very happy with it. My point is that you've incrementally graduated into a real suv and you'll realize that soon. Afterwards you'll definitely enjoy it.
11-10-2015, 08:35 AM
#35
Burning Brakes
I think it's hilarious with your comment about what you like to drive and what your (older) husband likes to drive. In my family, I'm the SUV guy, having driven/owned several through the years. I'm in my late 50's and and really enjoying the RDX. My wife is 2 years OLDER than me (she's 60), and she drives a SH-AWD TL and doesn't like driving my RDX much at all - feels too disconnected from the road, steering too loose, not crisp on corners, etc. Must be a woman thing or something. 
andy
andy
The following users liked this post:
CJaneDrive (11-10-2015)
11-10-2015, 08:48 AM
#36
mrgold35
I think the performance and handling numbers are about the same for the 1st and 2nd gen RDX. Maybe the difference could be the all season mpg bias tires, touch softer suspension, and the electric power steering isolating you more from road feel from the 16 RDX? Maybe upgrading/upsizing tires down the road and trying different IDS modes might help.
Last edited by mrgold35; 11-10-2015 at 08:53 AM.
11-10-2015, 09:20 AM
#37
2016 RDX Advance Blk/Blk
Thread Starter
Thank you, Ceb. Reading this really helped me. I don't remember having this feeling before, but maybe I did...or maybe like you, I am developing this way of thinking as I get older. Maybe it's because this is the sixth car that I have owned in my lifetime, and I'm not as easily impressed any more. The self-doubt that you described...that's exactly it, to a T...really just like what I am experiencing! At least I know that I'm not alone, and that (based on your experience) this likely will pass. I am still hopeful that I'll grow to really like the RDX. Thanks for helping to keep my hope alive!
I have that feeling with every new car I've ever had. I can find a zillion things that were better on the old car. As I've bought more cars it has gotten worse.
I loved my first car (a Dodge Dart) but I liked my next car (Ford Granada) better. Then I got an LTD that was previously owned by a moonshiner. It was the cat's meow. There followed a series of Benz products and each was a classic so those didn't count but then I bought a Rover 3500 and that's when things started going downhill.
A new Jag XJ V-12HE followed and the questions started. Did I spend too much? Is it really that much better? Is the roadholding really better than the LTD I remembered? Why did I buy this?
Gave it to my dad and bought a XJS- V12. Why did I buy a two door? What's that noise? The radio sounds lousy. etc. etc.
For the first few months you tend to focus on the downsides. When you get used to the car you start focusing on the positives.
I drove the Infiniti for a week or so and mostly liked it but it wasn't as refined as the RDX.
The gas mileage will improve with time and once you quit focusing on it.
I've been in your shoes tons of times. Just give it a bit - you'll love it.
I loved my first car (a Dodge Dart) but I liked my next car (Ford Granada) better. Then I got an LTD that was previously owned by a moonshiner. It was the cat's meow. There followed a series of Benz products and each was a classic so those didn't count but then I bought a Rover 3500 and that's when things started going downhill.
A new Jag XJ V-12HE followed and the questions started. Did I spend too much? Is it really that much better? Is the roadholding really better than the LTD I remembered? Why did I buy this?
Gave it to my dad and bought a XJS- V12. Why did I buy a two door? What's that noise? The radio sounds lousy. etc. etc.
For the first few months you tend to focus on the downsides. When you get used to the car you start focusing on the positives.
I drove the Infiniti for a week or so and mostly liked it but it wasn't as refined as the RDX.
The gas mileage will improve with time and once you quit focusing on it.
I've been in your shoes tons of times. Just give it a bit - you'll love it.
11-10-2015, 09:23 AM
#38
2016 RDX Advance Blk/Blk
Thread Starter
Haha, Kaputnik, I do have a form of shock! As in, "What have I done?" But, thanks for the congrats. I'm going to focus on the positive and see how that goes. :-)
The 1st and 2nd gen RDX basically just share the name RDX in common. Ya, the 1st gen are a blast to drive - a whole different beast. Sounds like the OP would prefer the driving experience of the 1st gen, but of course they have their issues and are woefully outdated compared to a new 2016.
Congrats CJaneDrive, i'm sure you'll love it once the shock wears off!!
Congrats CJaneDrive, i'm sure you'll love it once the shock wears off!!
11-10-2015, 09:28 AM
#39
2016 RDX Advance Blk/Blk
Thread Starter
Snorf, I carry some stuff. The EX35 had a lot less cargo space, but it served me just fine most of the time. Even so, in selecting the RDX, I was thinking that picking a vehicle that would serve me (in terms of carrying stuff) all of the time would be better. The RDX has quite a bit more cargo space than the EX35 did. That's a win!
11-10-2015, 09:33 AM
#40
Team Owner
10 years later, here comes Acura, going down a route that others have turned away from