thejavagod

I priced the RDX out on carsdirect.com and with the tech package it comes to around $38.3k, the MDX with tech package comes to $42.5k. How come the price difference is only $4k?

For $4k extra you get a better interior, SH-AWD, a larger vehicle with more space and what else?

I know the cons are the worse fuel economy but then I believe the MDX has better acceleration than the RDX correct?

geocord

The reason is obvious. The RDX is a brand new version that is selling very well hence lower discounts. The current MDX is being replaced with a completely new version in a month and the discounts are huge. The difference is because of the discounts and certainly not the MSRP. If someone didn't care about the size and the poor MPG, the current MDX is a screaming buy right now and dealers seem to have a lot of them.

AndyI

The new generation 2014 MDX will start selling in mid-May. Talking to a dealer, they are no longer recieving 2013 MDXs and are getting rid of their inventory. There is a special incentive from Acura to dealers which enables them to offer the remaining vehicles at several thousands below regular invoice price. If you go through carsdirect pages to the very end, you will see that MDX Tech has invoice price $44,650 but with the incentive is offered at $42,250. It is a good opportunity to get 2nd generation MDX at a good price.

As an owner of both a 2nd generation MDX and 2013 RDX, I am not certain if it is worth getting a 2nd generation MDX even when the price difference is around 3k to 4k. The new generation RDX feels and drives pretty much as MDX, but it is a little more agile and quite a bit more fuel efficient. The main difference is in the size of the trunk, really.

thejavagod

The new RDX does not have a touchscreen? LAME!!! and beyond ridiculous. What is Acura thinking?

thejavagod

Believe it or not my girlfriend just bought a brand new 2013 Nissan Sentra SL, fully loaded with leather, moonroof, dual zone climate control, keyless access, touchscreen navigation AND rear view camera with all premium features - google connect, bluetooh, ipod, sd, illuminated kickplates, protection package with various extras (rubber mats, cargo nets, body moldings in various places), auto LED headlights, heated seats, 8 speaker BOSE audio that sounds surprisingly good etc. etc. and a beautiful interior for just $21,500!! Granted the engine is only a 130hp 4-banger but it's a beautiful car and gives 30/39 mpg and ridiculously luxurious for what it costs.

It's an odd comparison since the RDX is a different class of vehicle (although I tend to think of it more as a car in the shape of an SUV) but I feel for $18,000 more the RDX should've offered much more in terms of comfort and luxury. Particularly things like the lack of a touchscreen navigation, rain sensing wipers, elimination of SH-AWD are hard to accept at this price level.

I think manufacturers are adding more amenities to vehicle in the non-luxury segment ($20,000-30,000 range) while the luxury vehicles are just asking for more money each year without adding anything of significance and sometimes even cost-cutting (SACRILEGE!).

weather

^^ You know, I find it hard to disagree with you! Entry level cars are now loading these things and makes the justification to get a premium vehicle, well, less enticing, especially when they don't even offer the same things as a Santra (as an example)

thejavagod

well why did Acura omit the touchscreen? to save a few bucks on a $40,000 vehicle??

mikejmack

I think these options appearing in lower priced cars is just the natural progression of technology. I remember when power windows were reserved for high end vehicles.

CoachRick

Heck, my Grandmother spoke of the days before electricity...said folks had to watch TV by candle-light.

Young next-door neighbor saw his first set of manual windows on an early Mustang a while back. Said he finally understood why his parents speak of 'rolling up the windows'.

It'll be interesting how the vehicles fare when these 'throw-away' electronic devices start to fail down the road; darned near impossible to repair these gizmos...like so many things, they're designed to toss and replace.

geocord

So true. I chuckle when people go on and on about some these inexpensive cars that have all these wonderful electronic gizmos to play with and then complain that the RDX doesn't have some of them. Most of these items can be installed dirt cheap but how much of it will work 5 years later. Ever hear of two dollar calculators? They work and look pretty much like the $50 dollar ones for awhile and then they break. if that is what one wants in a car go for it but I'll take a great driving, well engineered dependable car over one cheaply engineered that has lots of baubles and beads.

thejavagod

sorry geocord, I disagree. How are you so sure the GPS in the Sentra will fail and the GPS in your RDX will not? How are you sure that the quality is better in the RDX than in the Sentra? They are all made by an external vendor and QC'd by Nissan, the manufacturer is the same for the $20k Sentra or the $100k GT-R.

I have a 5 year old Garmin GPS that I paid $200 for and it still works fine... GPS is dirt cheap now, if you paid thousands for your GPS then i'm sorry but you got horrendously ripped off, the truth is hard to accept so you justify it by saying the others are low quality.

BTW, I have a friend with a $60,000 BMW and his power windows failed in the first year, BRAND NEW car and the poor guy was scrambling to put plastic covers on the window so rain water would not enter, SHAME!. I have a $15000 Nissan that I bought in 2004 and I haven't had a SINGLE problem. Just because something is lower price doesn't mean it's necessarily lower quality.

masterrdx

It is pathetic that 2013 RDX can not compare with 2013 accord touring in terms of feature. I just can not believe it that they could not put features like - compass in rearview mirror, side mirrors auto dimming, touchscreen navi, rear LED lights, rear HVAC, passgr seat height adjustment, keyless access in rear door, blind spot tech, led lights in footwell etc...
How much have they saved - probably $500 which could have been built in tech. It is a shame
Barring these annoyances, it is spacious SUV with excellent gas mileage - I guess i bought it for these reasons and all those annoyances remain a wish list now !!!

geocord

That is my opinion. You have every right to disagree. Since neither of us has any real data then it is just opinion. You have no idea if an electronic part in the Sentra is the same as the GTR. I really wasn't talking specifically about GPS as those are pretty run of the mill. I was really talking more about heated steering wheels, side mirror lane warning systems, collision avoidance systems, radar type gadgets that guide you to park, etc etc. All those things that you really don't need to operate a car safely but seem to amaze some people to the point where they feel they just have to have them.

Ok, you had good luck with a car. So what? I have had good luck with a lot of cars too but it doesn't make them generally great. A survey of one is worthless and nobody buys a BMW if they want a competely trouble free car, they buy it for the driving experience. I doubt if your Sentra drives like a BMW. I'm not even saying that Acura is better made then Nissan. I loved my Infiniti that I just traded after 10 years. I used to have a Maxima before that and I will tell you the Infiniti had better switches, better leather, better lighting, better suspension then the Maxima did. If you want to believe your Sentra is as well engineered and made with the same quality materials that an Acura or an Infiniti is made with then more power to you. Most rational people would not agree that a $40k car is no better made or has no better material than a $20k car. Just because it has a GPS and leather doens't make it the same. I'm not trying to come off as snobbish but there is a reason that people pay more for a vehicle.....because it's better not just from a problem standpoint but from a enjoyable drive standpoint. You sound so offended, please keep in mind that we are just talking about cars here.

thejavagod

I did not say the RDX is not better made or has more luxury than a Sentra...of course it does, that is pretty obvious. I am saying that it is not $18,000 more luxurious. It is infact, not even worth half the additional premium because I have sat in the interior of both - the RDX is definitely more luxurious but not all that much more. To pay $18k more I need to go "WOW!" when I transition from a Sentra to an RDX.

The mid-level cars and now even the econoboxes have been closing the gap in terms of build quality/features and the 100% premium that is being charged for luxury vehicles is not justified - the luxury makers need to put in significant differences between the mid-level and upscale vehicles to charge so much more.

That is my point.

AndyI

thejavagod, it is really strange how you arrived to the idea of comparing prices of two vehicles in completely different class. If you want to compare Nissan Sentra with Acura, then at least compare it to a car of a similar size, e.g., ILX or TSX. The price difference will then be a lot lower - and even then the drivability and performance will not be even close. People buy Acuras because it is SUV, because it has all wheel drive, because Acura is one of the most reliable brands on the market, because it is comfortable, because it is powerful, because it has an awesome surround sound system, because you get 4 years warranty, because service people treat you really well, because they give you loaner vehicles when you need them,... etc. Which of these applies to Sentra??

thejavagod

to which I reply:

At one point of time Japanese cars, even the luxury brands, were good value! When I bought my TL Type S I paid $32k for it with a 260hp engine and touchscreen Navi which was innovative those days and it was way more luxurious than the mid level segment. Now these cars have just become the extremely bad value that the German brands have always been. But given people's psychology I guess they will still blow money on them for their bragging rights

rsx2rdx

True the gap between entry level cars and pricier ones has shrunk, but relatively speaking the RDX still offers excellent value relative to the peers it gets compared against and that's what's important for buyers. Most people here probably drove it back to back vs. a RX, X3, Q5 and other peers in the "luxury compact CUV" class and came to there own conclusion. You may feel perfectly happy in a Sentra, but someone looking for a "luxury compact CUV" won't.

Also, don't knock the acceleration on the RDX.

KeithL

I think his point is basically if Nissan can cramp all that tech into a $20K car then Acura should find a way to at least offer it in an Advance option. I have mentioned that the RDX may age fast as all the competition will have theses features and Acura typically does not make major changes even at MMC until the next gen, which is about 4 years away.

musty hustla

The average buyer probably wouldn't pay $21k for a car that starts at $13-15K. I know I wouldn't.

The other thing to consider is the quality of the tech. A few weeks ago I drove a Jaguar XK and XF at a test drive event. The cars had all the fancies. One of the things that surprised me was how slow the touch screen was and how it took 3-5 seconds before the rear-view cam activated when placing the car in reverse. Acura is behind in tech, but it works very well (at least in the cars I own).

KeithL

Ditto, I have never had issues with Acura Tech, very responsive. Talk to CUE and Ford My Touch owners and they will tell you how laggy the system is. Must be based on MS Windows

geocord

For as often as I use it the NAV is fine for me and the ELS is great. Comparing apples to apples the AWD Nissan Murano SL (first version with leather and comparable to the base RDX) is $40,245. That is without NAV as well but does have a power rear hatch. That doesn't impress me as being a great value. Plus you have to like a CVT transmission. A Sentra comparably equipped to the base ILX is about $6k cheaper.

fleuger99

Not sure why one is comparing a Sentra to an RDX. Two totally different vehicles in different segments at different price points.

I purchased the RDX because compared to the other vehicles I shopped it against (Volvo XC60 and Audi Allroad) it offered the best bang for the buck in terms of both features like Nav, HID's and Stereo System but it also had the most powerful and efficient engine. It will also, probably have less issues than the above vehicles, simply based on past reliability data.

I cannot look at sedans or coupes because I have two large dogs so I need a wagon or small SUV and the RDX fits the bill perfectly.

thejavagod

Yes, it's an odd comparison and I mentioned it at the outset. The purpose was to make a broader point that the gap between the lower end cars and the higher end cars is diminishing and some of the luxury makers are nickel and diming people to death for every little option that should be STANDARD when the car already commands such a substantial premium.

About the quality of the tech - what really surprised me about the Sentra was how well executed the tech was in such a cheap car. The Nav system is actually very fast and responsive believe it or not and the backup camera works just as well. The Sentra is highlighted here because it just reflects the trend of manufacturers upping the ante in the lower segments while the luxury models are just getting the same old and as I said sometimes cutbacks!!! geez!

I don't mean to criticize the RDX since I actually love Acuras and I know that it's one of the better values compared to it's peers but I am addressing the entry level luxury segment in general.

I know the Subaru Forester is not a luxury brand per se but Subaru wanted $36,000 for their fully loaded forester and it doesn't even come with a power passenger seat - I looked at the salesman like he was crazy! No passenger power seat in a car that is going to cost me $40k out the door? LOL! Add to this is a TINY 4.3" LCD screen navi that is way worse than the 5.8" screen on the econobox Sentra. I told the salesman that the Subaru designers must have been drinking some strong Tequila to think that someone would pay $40,000 for this crap!

What I am saying is that when I buy a $40,000 car it should blow the socks off a $20k car in every respect, comfort, power, luxury etc. etc....no if's and's or but's.

blSwagger

The salesman was crazy. Truecar.com shows a fully loaded Forester 2.0XT Touring (including popular package #2) should sell for ~$32.5k.

geocord

And I think many people are getting the base RDX for about $33.5k plus ttl.

blSwagger

No doubt, the RDX is a great value. I'm sure that some may cross shop the Forester with the RDX, but probably an RDX with AWD, which results in a larger price delta. Plus, the Forester gets you an additional 5+ cu. ft. of cargo capacity, 4+ cu. ft. of passenger volume, and almost an inch more overall legroom. The Forester has the better AWD system, especially with X drive and more ground clearance. Finally, the Forester gets better gas mileage, albiet, with a CVT. We all know where the RDX trumps the Forester.

geocord

I've really wanted to like the Outback or the Forester over the years but have never warmed to their interiors which seem on the cheap side and they always seem to be behind in the tech dept. No doubt they are well built, solid vehicles but just not luxurious enough for me.

thejavagod

Trucar sometimes gives unrealistically low figures - for instance a 2013 Infiniti EX37 has a Trucar price almost $2000 below invoice which I find extremely hard to believe, I find carsdirect.com to be closer to what a dealer would settle for - Forester 2.0XT with Keyless package + popular package #1 is $35,118

AndyI

THe Javagod, I can comment on your comments as follows:

because it has all wheel drive, - ok so that commands a small premium, perhaps $2k? --> It depends on AWD system, I assume SH-AWD is worth more, but it is no longer offered on RDX, so let's say 2k is in the right ballpark. I think it actually can be more.

because Acura is one of the most reliable brands on the market, - Nissans as just as reliable --> According to Consumer Reports car reliability survey results published in October 2012 (this is the only independent survey which we can rely on), Acura is on the list of 10 most reliable brands and Nissan is not. So your statement is incorrect. You can easily google this report or pick up the April Consumer reports issue with car reliability survey results.

because it is comfortable, - some of the cheap luxury offerings (Sentra, Altima etc.) are close enough, the extra luxury in the RDX commands a small premium, perhaps $1K? ---> In this segment of market, there will be a difference between cost and price. You may consider these little gadgets and features worth $1k, but the market may be willing to pay more. How much leather seats are worth? If you compare them to cost of a leather coach, 1k might be considered the cost of just leather seats, for example.

because it is powerful, - it is 2 seconds faster to 60 than a Sentra - one of the slowest cars around, this is not some kind of speed demon to call it powerful LOL! Powerful would be over 300hp and a 0-60 under 6 seconds. I will say this commands a small premium, perhaps $2k for a better engine. Note - the Sentra is built for fuel economy and serves it's purpose well, the RDX is made as a powerful SUV but doesn't deliver the promised power part of the equation as it's acceleration I believe is 7 seconds which is slow for a bulky V6 with lackluster fuel economy. When I drove the RDX it felt slow. ---> This is an absolutely inappropriate comparison. There is no way how one can compare performance of a small sedan and an SUV. A heavy SUV is not meant to be a racing car and it cannot be super fuel efficent due to weight and air drug. Why don't you take it to the limit and compare it with a moving truck in terms of acceleration and fuel efficiency? RDX makes it to 60 in 6.2 seconds according to Edmunds. How much is it different from "under 6 seconds? It has a respectable fuel efficiency in the SUV class of its size.

because it has an awesome surround sound system, - the Sentra has a 8-speaker BOSE but the ELS is better for sure, say a $500 premium --->When I shopped for a home sound system and was comparing different 5.1 audio systems using the same DVD-A as I use in my cars, I could get close to the sound of ELS in surround mode only at a price point of $5k. I had to pay over 10k to beat ELS 5.1 by a hearable margin (note that ELS in stereo mode does not sound nearly as great as in surround). Based on this, 5k is about how much ELS is worth.I think ELS deserves a premium of at least 3-4k over Bose (I have a Bose in my older MDX and it is crap compared to ELS - although it sounds great compared to "premium" systems in Hondas and Fords).


because you get 4 years warranty - you get 3 yrs with a Sentra, so perhaps this deserves a $1k premium --> Perhaps.

because service people treat you really well, - they do not sorry, I am a previous Acura owner and it is definitely not on par with Lexus and other upscale brands. The treatment at Acura dealerships is 2nd rate, definitely on par with Hondas, Toyotas or Nissans, sometimes even worse if you are unlucky. --> I am sorry to hear that you had to deal with a bad dealership. I serviced my cars at Acura dealers since 2001, I had prior experience with Honda and Ford, and it is day and night type of difference. Acura guys so far were great going above and beoynd to make a customer happy. I think you just got into hands of a poorly kept dealership (which may happen).

because they give you loaner vehicles when you need them,... - what is this worth? $50 for a loaner car here and there, c'mon now. ---> It is not about monetary value. When you get a new model of Acura for a day as a loaner, it is a new interesting experience and a fun test drive. $$$ added value is almost zero, indeed.

so, I see a justifiable premium of $6-7k perhaps, ok I will be EXTREMELY GENEROUS and give you a justifiable premium of $10,000!!! But they want almost double that!!

---> If you compare apples to apples, i.e., Sentra with ILX, the difference will be between 2k and 7k depending on the package you choose. And you will be comletely right with your figures. However, it makes no point comparing vehicles in different categories. They may not cost much more to build (even though a lot more metal goes into them), but it is a different market, different purpose, and different capabilities. To take your example to the limit, you can compare Geo Metro with Cadillac Escalade - sure enough, the luxury features in Cadillac would not warrant a $50k difference.

If you are trying to convince yourself that Sentra is a better buy, then you succeeded - it is indeed a better value for money as a means of transportation from home to work. And so is Ford, Toyota, Honda, Scion, and any other brand in the $20k price range.

de-pro

I am going to compare apples to apples. First off, Nissan's reliability and long term value does not even come close to an Acura. As a matter of fact, not even an Infiniti does.
I had leased for 4 years my 05 Nissan Maxima. I tell you it was a fun car to drive with the 6 speed stick, however during the 4 years, I had quite a few issues with it as well as several recalls. I used to hate taking the car to the dealership due to the lousy customer service they were providing. Remind you, they were treating their Infiniti customers much better. They even had a separate service desk for those Infiniti customers which was always my biggest pet peeve.
I chose to replace that leased car with my 09 TL. Initially I was going to go with an 09 G35 however the lease payments ended up much higher for the vehicle that was identical in price to my TL. Do you want to know why? The TL had much higher buy back value after the 4 years lease term than the G35, which helped drop my lease price.
Nissan's and Infiniti's do not hold their values like Honda and Acura's do.
During the 4 years I had my TL, I never had any issues with the car and only took it to the dealer for the regular maintenance visits. As of today, the TL was one of the most reliable cars I ever owned. That's one of the main reasons I decided to stay with Acura when I needed an SUV and spending a few dollars more for it, is worth minimizing the long term aggravation factor.

thejavagod

de-pro, I had a 2001 Acura TL Type S, it was recalled for an transmission defect. I had to take it in for a complete disassembly of the engine to put this part in which I call a MAJOR quality issue. At 20,000 or so miles my brand new TL's sportshift auto started "slipping gears". It turns out a critical bearing was not machined correctly.

I had given the car with a sparkling engine bay and when the Acura dealer gave the car back to me the engine bay was filthy. Even after expressing dissatisfaction at this the dealer simply told me that there is nothing they can do about such things...totally unprofessional. I complained to Acura and never even heard back!

I've owned a Nissan Frontier since 2004, so that's for 10 years. I have not had a single issue with it. There was 1 recall a long time ago that related to the steering column but that was an extremely minor issue and took 30 mins to fix at the dealership. So I am speaking on the reliability issue from personal experience.

geocord

And if you read the horror stories of others that have owned Nissans you would never have even bought that Frontier. Quality rankings aren't based on your experience only. How could you possibly think that a bad experience with one car and one dealer is what everyone else experience and vice versa with your Nissan. That is just ridiculous and naive.

I've owned about 40 different vehicles and even if I had great luck with a particular brand that is simply my expereince. There may be thousands of people of that same brand that had bad experiences. That's why surveys are conducted of hundreds or thousands of owners....to eliminate the haters and the fanboys and get to the real averages.

de-pro

Although irrelevant to this thread, my dissatisfaction with Nissan customer service was based on dealing with at-least 3 different dealerships.
I haven't had to change the dealership while I owned my TL since those guys are awesome.

Wanax

JavaGod, I somewhat agree with you that things are a bit overpriced, but I think this is a matter of your market expectations, especially when it comes to SUVs/CUVs. They are just priced higher and are an entirely different market then the small econo cars. You may think the RDX does not fully warrant the price, but just look at your own comparison.

A fully loaded Subaru Forester is $36k. And from my experience, a fully loaded CX5 is $31k and a Santa Fe Sport is $33k. That's all not very far off from what the RDX is. And based on my own comparisons, the materials in the RDX are overall better. Yes, there are some shortcomings, but every car has something wrong with it. If you think the RDX's NAV is horrible, you should see how crappy the CX5 is, and it does not not even have a power liftgate or power passenger seats.

For its price and dependability as a luxury brand, the RDX is positioned very competitively. For you to go up another step in luxury to get that WOW!!! factor means another $10k (X3, Q5, GLK).

hand-filer

I own a 2012 Mustang GT with touch screen NAV and recently traded in a 2012 Focus Titanium with MFT. I can navigate through the menu and access most functions much faster on the RDX. I have zero finger smears on the screen and none of the glitches that MFT is plagued with. Touch screen systems are over rated IMHO.

Wanax

I agree. I think its a bit easier to navigate the controls with RDX. Touchscreen typically has small buttons and are poorly designed. I also prefer that the NAV on the RDX is under the dash hood to prevent sun glare. Having that be a touch screen makes absolutely no sense since it would require you have super long arms.

thejavagod

The problem is typing...the typing is something that was extremely slow on the RDX and I could see how it could be frustrating if you have to type/erase.

So you are saying you are faster turning a knob just exactly so it falls on a letter and then pushing the button than it is to just take your finger and put it directly on the letter? I am not buying that. I tried the system and I was much much slower inputting text.

TBC787

If touch screens were so good you would see them in cockpits like the space shuttle, Boeing, and Airbus. Guess what, not now, not ever. The human factors folks will not stand for the game boy approach. Actually the Nav function on the RDX is damn close to the 787 FMC.

hand-filer

As previously mentioned, I can navigate through the menu and access most functions much faster on the RDX. Inputing addresses into the NAV is the exception. If I were using my RDX as a taxi or delivery vehicle it might be an inconvenience. Who really uses NAV that frequently?

geocord

I programmed an address into my RDX today while driving to another state for a funeral using voice commands for the first time. With absolutely no clue how to do it I muddled through and found that it was fairly easy to do. Wasn't real fast but, hey, I was driving 200 miles on an expressway so I had plenty of time.