2018 Acura RDX
06-07-2017, 04:21 PM
#81
Pro
Acura is doing better because their vehicles are improving (latest MDX, RDX, TLX and NSX). The discounts are pretty common across the auto companies eg when they need to move last year's inventory etc. Some companies give equal or greater discounts such as Lexus, Infiniti, etc.
06-08-2017, 12:09 AM
#82
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
Acura has done an impresive job with each of the refreshes MDX, RDX and TLX. And the new pentagon grill looks better than people thought it would and they have some of the best car commercials now. I think if Acura keeps this up, and adds improvements and more customizability to the vehicles they sell in the next gen models, whilst keeping V6 options available and continuing to offer more for less vs competitors, they can really raise their profile. They have the momentum on their side now and they're trying to go back to their roots.
06-08-2017, 07:12 AM
#83
Pro
Lots of if's and suppositions there Rockyboy. Time will tell, but as of now Acura is pretty stagnant in my view. I suspect we will be seeing less V6 models over time as well.
06-09-2017, 09:43 AM
#84
Advanced
"Luxury compact SUV sales are on the rise, but you wouldn’t know by looking at the RDX’s sales numbers. In fact, Acura dealers have sold 18.3 percent fewer RDX models in 2017 than they did over the same period last year. Last month was even worse, with a 36 percent decline in sales relative to the same month last year." This was from a June, "US News" article.
I expect that one reason for a decline in sales of the RDX model is that some potential buyers have been holding off for the new and revised 2018 model being that the current model is at the end of its 5 year cycle. Traditionally, the 2018 RDX would be released late Spring but it is now looking like a revised RDX may now not happen until the 2019 model in Spring of 2018. Acura may see a further decline in sales of RDX models because those potential buyers who were waiting for a "new" RDX may not be willing to wait another year for it, so may purchase the new Audi Q5 or other competitive models. The luxury compact SUV market has been really heating up and manufacturers have been upping their game in order to get a larger % of the market - all but Acura. Even though Acura has offered a $3500 rebate on their 2016 & 2017 Canadian RDXs sales volumes have continued to drop yet it has not seemed to register with Acura that something is amiss. Although Acura has good products, it is going to take much more than a "refresh" for it to increase their share of the market.
I expect that one reason for a decline in sales of the RDX model is that some potential buyers have been holding off for the new and revised 2018 model being that the current model is at the end of its 5 year cycle. Traditionally, the 2018 RDX would be released late Spring but it is now looking like a revised RDX may now not happen until the 2019 model in Spring of 2018. Acura may see a further decline in sales of RDX models because those potential buyers who were waiting for a "new" RDX may not be willing to wait another year for it, so may purchase the new Audi Q5 or other competitive models. The luxury compact SUV market has been really heating up and manufacturers have been upping their game in order to get a larger % of the market - all but Acura. Even though Acura has offered a $3500 rebate on their 2016 & 2017 Canadian RDXs sales volumes have continued to drop yet it has not seemed to register with Acura that something is amiss. Although Acura has good products, it is going to take much more than a "refresh" for it to increase their share of the market.
06-09-2017, 01:36 PM
#86
06-09-2017, 07:27 PM
#87
Pro
"Luxury compact SUV sales are on the rise, but you wouldn’t know by looking at the RDX’s sales numbers. In fact, Acura dealers have sold 18.3 percent fewer RDX models in 2017 than they did over the same period last year. Last month was even worse, with a 36 percent decline in sales relative to the same month last year." This was from a June, "US News" article.
I expect that one reason for a decline in sales of the RDX model is that some potential buyers have been holding off for the new and revised 2018 model being that the current model is at the end of its 5 year cycle. Traditionally, the 2018 RDX would be released late Spring but it is now looking like a revised RDX may now not happen until the 2019 model in Spring of 2018. Acura may see a further decline in sales of RDX models because those potential buyers who were waiting for a "new" RDX may not be willing to wait another year for it, so may purchase the new Audi Q5 or other competitive models. The luxury compact SUV market has been really heating up and manufacturers have been upping their game in order to get a larger % of the market - all but Acura. Even though Acura has offered a $3500 rebate on their 2016 & 2017 Canadian RDXs sales volumes have continued to drop yet it has not seemed to register with Acura that something is amiss. Although Acura has good products, it is going to take much more than a "refresh" for it to increase their share of the market.
I expect that one reason for a decline in sales of the RDX model is that some potential buyers have been holding off for the new and revised 2018 model being that the current model is at the end of its 5 year cycle. Traditionally, the 2018 RDX would be released late Spring but it is now looking like a revised RDX may now not happen until the 2019 model in Spring of 2018. Acura may see a further decline in sales of RDX models because those potential buyers who were waiting for a "new" RDX may not be willing to wait another year for it, so may purchase the new Audi Q5 or other competitive models. The luxury compact SUV market has been really heating up and manufacturers have been upping their game in order to get a larger % of the market - all but Acura. Even though Acura has offered a $3500 rebate on their 2016 & 2017 Canadian RDXs sales volumes have continued to drop yet it has not seemed to register with Acura that something is amiss. Although Acura has good products, it is going to take much more than a "refresh" for it to increase their share of the market.
That is exactly the case. The 2018 is already out. Same exact model as the 16/17.
Spring of 18 will be the 3rd gen all new RDX..
06-10-2017, 06:05 PM
#88
I've been an audi fan for 10 yrs now. Owning 5 Audis in that time. I test drove the 2018 Q5 before buying my RDX. I can tell you the new Mexican built Q5 with the fake Quattro setup and fake exhaust holes out the rear was a huge disappointment.
The SQ5 is even worse looking with the quad fakes out the rear. The build quality was ok, but not on par with the German built versions of yester-year.
Wife and I were pleasantly surprised by the RDX on the test drive. Especially at a 10k less pricepoint, lower insurance and less depreciation. Acura dealer was also very aggressive with pricing wanting to get rid of the 2017s.
-cW
The SQ5 is even worse looking with the quad fakes out the rear. The build quality was ok, but not on par with the German built versions of yester-year.
Wife and I were pleasantly surprised by the RDX on the test drive. Especially at a 10k less pricepoint, lower insurance and less depreciation. Acura dealer was also very aggressive with pricing wanting to get rid of the 2017s.
-cW
06-10-2017, 06:20 PM
#89
I've been an audi fan for 10 yrs now. Owning 5 Audis in that time. I test drove the 2018 Q5 before buying my RDX. I can tell you the new Mexican built Q5 with the fake Quattro setup and fake exhaust holes out the rear was a huge disappointment.
The SQ5 is even worse looking with the quad fakes out the rear. The build quality was ok, but not on par with the German built versions of yester-year.
Wife and I were pleasantly surprised by the RDX on the test drive. Especially at a 10k less pricepoint, lower insurance and less depreciation. Acura dealer was also very aggressive with pricing wanting to get rid of the 2017s.
-cW
The SQ5 is even worse looking with the quad fakes out the rear. The build quality was ok, but not on par with the German built versions of yester-year.
Wife and I were pleasantly surprised by the RDX on the test drive. Especially at a 10k less pricepoint, lower insurance and less depreciation. Acura dealer was also very aggressive with pricing wanting to get rid of the 2017s.
-cW
06-25-2017, 05:20 PM
#90
My dealership guy also told me that overall 2018 RDX production would be lower so I suspect an early introduction of the 2019.
06-25-2017, 06:00 PM
#91
Advanced
I can understand if the production numbers of the 2018 RDX is lower. Based on what I have read about the sales of the 2017 RDX being down there are probably going to be left-over 2017 models when the 2018's arrive on the lot, and in about 10 months time the newly 'redesigned' 2019 will be available. I can't tell you what year it was that I last saw a TV advertisement for the Acura RDX but there certainly are ads for them this summer stressing the $3500 rebate (which puts them close to the price of a Honda CR-V Touring
06-25-2017, 06:31 PM
#92
06-26-2017, 07:11 AM
#93
Racer
My wife described it as Kenmore White. ("I'm not having a car the same color as our washer/dryer.") Hence black vehicles since our '07 RX350. There are really no good intermediate colors, except for that awesome Black Copper Pearl on our TLX, so the default color is black for us, as in, her. The Basque Red Pearl on my old '10 TSX worked very well but doesn't seem to fit other Acuras. Now, Mazda's Soul Red would work just fine.
We looked at all manner of crossovers including Audi and Mercedes but kept coming back to the RDX. Aside from all the other valid reasons to choose Acura, the big thing was familiarity for my wife - so close to the '13 we sold to our son.
We looked at all manner of crossovers including Audi and Mercedes but kept coming back to the RDX. Aside from all the other valid reasons to choose Acura, the big thing was familiarity for my wife - so close to the '13 we sold to our son.
06-26-2017, 08:51 AM
#94
The "changes", in Canada though I don't think it's the same in the US, is a starting price that is $600 higher plus another $500 if you want it in white. That I really don't understand...white is the cheapest color on the X3.
My dealership guy also told me that overall 2018 RDX production would be lower so I suspect an early introduction of the 2019.
My dealership guy also told me that overall 2018 RDX production would be lower so I suspect an early introduction of the 2019.
Other auto manufacturers charge a premium for 3 stage paints.
06-26-2017, 10:15 AM
#95
mrgold35
I would be happy if you could get any exterior color with any interior color for the +18 RDX. I would be willing to wait a few month for Fathom Blue Pearl if I could get it in Ebony, Black with Graystone, Basque Red Pearl II in Ebony or Graystone.
06-26-2017, 12:10 PM
#96
My wife described it as Kenmore White. ("I'm not having a car the same color as our washer/dryer.") Hence black vehicles since our '07 RX350. There are really no good intermediate colors, except for that awesome Black Copper Pearl on our TLX, so the default color is black for us, as in, her. The Basque Red Pearl on my old '10 TSX worked very well but doesn't seem to fit other Acuras. Now, Mazda's Soul Red would work just fine.
We looked at all manner of crossovers including Audi and Mercedes but kept coming back to the RDX. Aside from all the other valid reasons to choose Acura, the big thing was familiarity for my wife - so close to the '13 we sold to our son.
We looked at all manner of crossovers including Audi and Mercedes but kept coming back to the RDX. Aside from all the other valid reasons to choose Acura, the big thing was familiarity for my wife - so close to the '13 we sold to our son.
06-26-2017, 07:11 PM
#97
8th Gear
I really think Acura will have to add a 3rd or 4th SUV/CUV and/or TLX/ILX wagon/fast back 4-door pretty soon.
Acura: RDX and MDX (maybe HR-V based CDX in +2020)
Lexus: NX, RX, GX and LX
Infiniti: QX30, QX50, QX60, QX70, and QX80
Audi: A4 Allroad, Q3, Q5, and Q7
BMW: X1, X3, X4, X5, X6, along with sport wagons and Gran Turismo
MB: GLA, GLC, GLE, GLS, G-Class and wagons
Again, Acura is late to the party and playing catch up after the rest of market has a foothold established.
i own
I remember Temple of VTEC has some drawings of an ILX and TLX fastbacks. Add the sh-awd and sh-sh-awd powertrains to the 3.5L or turbo engines and it would give us Acura diehards a reason to stay with the brand. I would love to have CUV room and capability in a sporty sedan body. I really think the 2019 3rd Gen RDX will just look like less capable baby version the current 2017 MDX.
Acura: RDX and MDX (maybe HR-V based CDX in +2020)
Lexus: NX, RX, GX and LX
Infiniti: QX30, QX50, QX60, QX70, and QX80
Audi: A4 Allroad, Q3, Q5, and Q7
BMW: X1, X3, X4, X5, X6, along with sport wagons and Gran Turismo
MB: GLA, GLC, GLE, GLS, G-Class and wagons
Again, Acura is late to the party and playing catch up after the rest of market has a foothold established.
i own
I remember Temple of VTEC has some drawings of an ILX and TLX fastbacks. Add the sh-awd and sh-sh-awd powertrains to the 3.5L or turbo engines and it would give us Acura diehards a reason to stay with the brand. I would love to have CUV room and capability in a sporty sedan body. I really think the 2019 3rd Gen RDX will just look like less capable baby version the current 2017 MDX.
went to Montreal and rent a car
they gave me a BMW X5 2017 for 6 bucks extra
i mean I couldn't pass it up
with my Acura every other day I am having Bluetooth issue where it hang up and turn off and turn on
the navigation on the X5 is even better than google nav
it make the RDX look like child play in term of technology
now i don't want my RDX ANYMORE but am stuck with it till 2019
06-27-2017, 05:36 PM
#98
Advanced
I was checking out the 2018 Acura RDX on Acura.com to see if I could discover any changes. Based on their website, the black and the beige interiors are gone. It appears that you can have any other color you like as long as it is "Greystone". "Greystone" will look fine with white, black, silver, grey exteriors but what do you think of Kona (brown) exterior with grey interior? There are a lot of RDX buyers/ current owners who like the black exterior with black interior. Apparently that option will not be offered in 2018. Rather than limit color options to prospective buyers, why wouldn't Acura offer additional options in an attempt to increase sales - especially in light of the fact that 2018 will be the final production year of this 2nd generation of RDX?
You say you want a black/ black Acura RDX? Well you had best buy a 2017 - quickly!
You say you want a black/ black Acura RDX? Well you had best buy a 2017 - quickly!
06-27-2017, 05:48 PM
#99
Advanced
2018 rdx
I can understand if the production numbers of the 2018 RDX is lower. Based on what I have read about the sales of the 2017 RDX being down there are probably going to be left-over 2017 models when the 2018's arrive on the lot, and in about 10 months time the newly 'redesigned' 2019 will be available. I can't tell you what year it was that I last saw a TV advertisement for the Acura RDX but there certainly are ads for them this summer stressing the $3500 rebate (which puts them close to the price of a Honda CR-V Touring
Apologies if I cause any confusion.
07-10-2017, 03:20 PM
#100
2019 rdx
More spy photos, although they don't really anything other than what appears to be a well concealed CR-V test mule. Possibly more critical to me is yet more speculation that the 2019 RDX will indeed be powered by the new 2.0L turbo instead of a V6. That's a serious disappointment. Still, if they offer it with a 3-motor Sport Hybrid setup, it will definitely be worth a test drive.
Spied: New 2019 Acura RDX To Ditch V6 For 2.0L Turbo-Four
Spied: New 2019 Acura RDX To Ditch V6 For 2.0L Turbo-Four
07-10-2017, 03:37 PM
#101
Advanced
I was away on a 1100 km (670 mile) weekend trip with my 2016 RDX Tech. I lucked into nice sunny weather and was in no hurry so I set cruise at 104 km/hr (65 mph) and as a result I achieved mileage of 7.5 l/100km (37.56 miles imperial gallon). I took a picture of my dash showing the 7.5l/100km for those non-believers! When you take into consideration that it is a V6 engine with 279 hp this is truly great gas mileage and I can't foresee a replacement 2.0l turbo engine giving better mileage than this. In light of the fact that Volvo has just announced that within the next 2 years Volvo will not be offering gasoline-only engines, instead their engines will be electric or gas/ electric hybrid, one might think that Honda would at least start in the same trend, but my guess is that will only happen after Toyota, Kia, Hyundai and Mazda have already taken the lead.
07-10-2017, 04:22 PM
#102
When you take into consideration that it is a V6 engine with 279 hp this is truly great gas mileage and I can't foresee a replacement 2.0l turbo engine giving better mileage than this. In light of the fact that Volvo has just announced that within the next 2 years Volvo will not be offering gasoline-only engines, instead their engines will be electric or gas/ electric hybrid, one might think that Honda would at least start in the same trend, but my guess is that will only happen after Toyota, Kia, Hyundai and Mazda have already taken the lead.
You're right ... it's very possible that you couldn't achieve that in the real-world with a 4-cylinder turbo. But real-world isn't as important to manufacturers as the EPA test cycle. Even if the current V6 could achieve similar fuel economy to the 2.0T on the EPA's test cycle, which is very possible thanks to cylinder deactivation, it still has critical disadvantages. The V6 costs more to build, it weighs more, it doesn't offer the low-end torque of a DI turbo engine, it doesn't perform as well at altitude, and it comes with a significant packaging disadvantage. I fully understand the trend toward smaller displacement turbos, but I still don't like it.
On the subject of Volvo's full "hybrid" lineup, don't be fooled ... most of them will be 48-volt mild hybrids, and will not have the ability to run on electric power only. Personally, I think it's a dangerous PR move. In the age of cheap gas, hybrids aren't real popular. If Joe/Jane Consumer believes every model is a true hybrid, it could potentially keep him/her out of Volvo showrooms. Why take that risk? Simply offering a hybrid option for every model should be sufficient.
07-11-2017, 06:10 AM
#103
mrgold35
Hopefully Acura will offer more than one engine option or different power levels from the 2.0L turbo. Looks like the 3rd Gen RDX could utilize the sh-sh-awd powertrain down the road.
07-11-2017, 07:02 AM
#104
Pro
More spy photos, although they don't really anything other than what appears to be a well concealed CR-V test mule. Possibly more critical to me is yet more speculation that the 2019 RDX will indeed be powered by the new 2.0L turbo instead of a V6. That's a serious disappointment. Still, if they offer it with a 3-motor Sport Hybrid setup, it will definitely be worth a test drive.
Spied: New 2019 Acura RDX To Ditch V6 For 2.0L Turbo-Four
Spied: New 2019 Acura RDX To Ditch V6 For 2.0L Turbo-Four
07-11-2017, 09:17 AM
#105
Advanced
Impressive numbers. Did you calculate the actual numbers, too? In my experience, computers fib -- usually on the side of being quite optimistic.
You're right ... it's very possible that you couldn't achieve that in the real-world with a 4-cylinder turbo. But real-world isn't as important to manufacturers as the EPA test cycle. Even if the current V6 could achieve similar fuel economy to the 2.0T on the gas used.EPA's test cycle, which is very possible thanks to cylinder deactivation, it still has critical disadvantages. The V6 costs more to build, it weighs more, it doesn't offer the low-end torque of a DI turbo engine, it doesn't perform as well at altitude, and it comes with a significant packaging disadvantage. I fully understand the trend toward smaller displacement turbos, but I still don't like it.
On the subject of Volvo's full "hybrid" lineup, don't be fooled ... most of them will be 48-volt mild hybrids, and will not have the ability to run on electric power only. Personally, I think it's a dangerous PR move. In the age of cheap gas, hybrids aren't real popular. If Joe/Jane Consumer believes every model is a true hybrid, it could potentially keep him/her out of Volvo showrooms. Why take that risk? Simply offering a hybrid option for every model should be sufficient.
You're right ... it's very possible that you couldn't achieve that in the real-world with a 4-cylinder turbo. But real-world isn't as important to manufacturers as the EPA test cycle. Even if the current V6 could achieve similar fuel economy to the 2.0T on the gas used.EPA's test cycle, which is very possible thanks to cylinder deactivation, it still has critical disadvantages. The V6 costs more to build, it weighs more, it doesn't offer the low-end torque of a DI turbo engine, it doesn't perform as well at altitude, and it comes with a significant packaging disadvantage. I fully understand the trend toward smaller displacement turbos, but I still don't like it.
On the subject of Volvo's full "hybrid" lineup, don't be fooled ... most of them will be 48-volt mild hybrids, and will not have the ability to run on electric power only. Personally, I think it's a dangerous PR move. In the age of cheap gas, hybrids aren't real popular. If Joe/Jane Consumer believes every model is a true hybrid, it could potentially keep him/her out of Volvo showrooms. Why take that risk? Simply offering a hybrid option for every model should be sufficient.
07-13-2017, 11:14 PM
#106
Touring
07-14-2017, 01:02 AM
#107
With all due respect, that's EXACTLY what Acura did when they transitioned from the 1G to 2G RDX. The decision to remove SH-AWD and replace the turbo 4 with a V6 when EVERYONE else is moving to turbo 4's and some form of trick AWD system was a stupid, short sighted, and poor decision from a performance perspective. Arguably, sales improved WAY more in the 2G vs 1G RDX. But I credit that to the more interior space, toned down interior and exterior, and softer ride than to the changes the did under the hood and the awd system.
07-14-2017, 08:01 AM
#108
mrgold35
I think folks are equating 0-60 performance with balance/handling performance on the same level. The 07-12 RDX with sh-awd is the best bang for the buck off the shelf handling performance CUV at the time without have a "M", "AMG", "GTS", or "S-line" on the back bumper. The +13 RDX has superior 0-60 performance; but, the 07-12 RDX had better handling performance. I would prefer both in the same platform or the option to upgrade with Acura or aftermarket parts. There is no debate the versatile 2nd Gen RDX is a sales winner over the one trick pony 1st Gen RDX. There is also no debate aftermarket support is next to nil compared to the 1st gen because the industry saw the 2nd Gen RDX as another plain Jane vanilla CUV on the market. I haven't seen a lot of car magazines include any of the current Acura models when they are doing comparisons test. It is almost like Acura only exist on this forum and the rest of world don't share our views.
I'm looking forward to the 2.0L turbo IF aftermarket support comes back (brakes, suspension, reflash, I/H/E, etc...) and sh-awd with or without hybrid option. This is the reason I have my TSX (A-spec suspension+Progress RSB), RDX (Hondata+ETS intercooler+Progress RSB+Eibach springs), and my MDX Adv (20" rim/tires+Racing brake slotted rotors+Carbontech brake pads) is because of aftermarket support and superior handling compared to the competition at the same price points.
Just want the same options down the road and I look forward to seeing the 2.0L RDX Turbo if it brings back all aspects of performance to Acura.
I'm looking forward to the 2.0L turbo IF aftermarket support comes back (brakes, suspension, reflash, I/H/E, etc...) and sh-awd with or without hybrid option. This is the reason I have my TSX (A-spec suspension+Progress RSB), RDX (Hondata+ETS intercooler+Progress RSB+Eibach springs), and my MDX Adv (20" rim/tires+Racing brake slotted rotors+Carbontech brake pads) is because of aftermarket support and superior handling compared to the competition at the same price points.
Just want the same options down the road and I look forward to seeing the 2.0L RDX Turbo if it brings back all aspects of performance to Acura.
Last edited by mrgold35; 07-14-2017 at 08:07 AM.
The following users liked this post:
RDX10 (07-14-2017)
07-14-2017, 11:09 AM
#109
I think folks are equating 0-60 performance with balance/handling performance on the same level. The 07-12 RDX with sh-awd is the best bang for the buck off the shelf handling performance CUV at the time without have a "M", "AMG", "GTS", or "S-line" on the back bumper. The +13 RDX has superior 0-60 performance; but, the 07-12 RDX had better handling performance. I would prefer both in the same platform or the option to upgrade with Acura or aftermarket parts. There is no debate the versatile 2nd Gen RDX is a sales winner over the one trick pony 1st Gen RDX. There is also no debate aftermarket support is next to nil compared to the 1st gen because the industry saw the 2nd Gen RDX as another plain Jane vanilla CUV on the market. I haven't seen a lot of car magazines include any of the current Acura models when they are doing comparisons test. It is almost like Acura only exist on this forum and the rest of world don't share our views.
I'm looking forward to the 2.0L turbo IF aftermarket support comes back (brakes, suspension, reflash, I/H/E, etc...) and sh-awd with or without hybrid option. This is the reason I have my TSX (A-spec suspension+Progress RSB), RDX (Hondata+ETS intercooler+Progress RSB+Eibach springs), and my MDX Adv (20" rim/tires+Racing brake slotted rotors+Carbontech brake pads) is because of aftermarket support and superior handling compared to the competition at the same price points.
Just want the same options down the road and I look forward to seeing the 2.0L RDX Turbo if it brings back all aspects of performance to Acura.
I'm looking forward to the 2.0L turbo IF aftermarket support comes back (brakes, suspension, reflash, I/H/E, etc...) and sh-awd with or without hybrid option. This is the reason I have my TSX (A-spec suspension+Progress RSB), RDX (Hondata+ETS intercooler+Progress RSB+Eibach springs), and my MDX Adv (20" rim/tires+Racing brake slotted rotors+Carbontech brake pads) is because of aftermarket support and superior handling compared to the competition at the same price points.
Just want the same options down the road and I look forward to seeing the 2.0L RDX Turbo if it brings back all aspects of performance to Acura.
you're going to roll over if you take a turn going faster than 30kms and hour. I had a 2016 RDX loaner a year ago and tried driving it like I did my 1G RDX and the passengers in my car were afriad because they felt like we were going to roll over.
Furthermore I don't credit that improved 0-60 to the V6, rather to the upgrade from a wider ratio 5 speed to a 6 speed. The 1G RDX with a 6 or 7 speed auto would have EASILY hit 60 in under 6 seconds IMHO.
07-14-2017, 04:15 PM
#110
my neighbor just bought one with advance package and got a few dollars short of $6k discount. Truecar shows $5.2k discount in my area. As 2018 is no change, it a no brianer to get 2017.
07-16-2017, 10:50 AM
#111
Pro
Rated at 252 horsepower and 273 lb-ft of torque, it gives up 26 horsepower to the V-6 it replaces but offers up 21 lb-ft more torque. Extracting maximum power from the new 2.0-liter requires 6500 rpm (versus 6200 for the V-6), but peak torque is available between 1500 and 4000 rpm. (The V-6 didn’t deliver max torque until 4900 rpm.) Honda says it will be able to run on regular-octane gasoline, although likely with reduced performance.
Last edited by chickdr; 07-16-2017 at 10:52 AM.
07-21-2017, 03:40 PM
#112
I haven't seen anything firm on the new RDX, but I do know that it is usually a few years behind in technology when compared to the main honda line (features in the civic, accord, CR-V, etc not available in the RDX). I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see acura keeping a 6 cyl in the RDX, but instead of using the old accord 6 cyl that is currently being used, I could see them using the 6 cyl earth dreams engine that has been in the accord since about 2013. Honda invested a lot of money in that engine and I could see them keeping the engine going in the acura line.
07-22-2017, 11:46 AM
#113
Pro
I haven't seen anything firm on the new RDX, but I do know that it is usually a few years behind in technology when compared to the main honda line (features in the civic, accord, CR-V, etc not available in the RDX). I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see acura keeping a 6 cyl in the RDX, but instead of using the old accord 6 cyl that is currently being used, I could see them using the 6 cyl earth dreams engine that has been in the accord since about 2013. Honda invested a lot of money in that engine and I could see them keeping the engine going in the acura line.
07-24-2017, 01:26 PM
#114
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
I think they will keep a 6 cylinder engine for the next generation RDX. Looks like they are keeping most of the Honda line at up to 4 cylinders and if you want a 6 cylinder you have to aspire to Acura. Similar to what Mercedes and Audi does with their AMG and S lines. If I were shopping for an Accord, the 4 cylinder would most likely rule it out as I have a bias towards the more smooth and powerful and expensive 6 cylinder engines.
07-25-2017, 07:30 AM
#115
Pro
I think they will keep a 6 cylinder engine for the next generation RDX. Looks like they are keeping most of the Honda line at up to 4 cylinders and if you want a 6 cylinder you have to aspire to Acura. Similar to what Mercedes and Audi does with their AMG and S lines. If I were shopping for an Accord, the 4 cylinder would most likely rule it out as I have a bias towards the more smooth and powerful and expensive 6 cylinder engines.
Last edited by chickdr; 07-25-2017 at 07:32 AM.
07-25-2017, 09:48 AM
#116
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
I'd rather have a naturally aspirated 6 cylinder than a 4 cylinder turbo any day. If Acura switches to a 4 cylinder in the next gen RDX, I would probably avoid it unless it's 300+ horsepower and smooth. The new Jaguar E Pace is 4 cylinder, I was excited for its release until they listed up to 4 cylinder only...
07-25-2017, 11:30 AM
#117
mrgold35
I think large displacement NA V-8 and V-6 are one step in the grave along with 5 and 6 speed manual transmissions. 
I've learned to drive on my Dad's old Oldsmobile with a 455 ci engine. Good luck finding anything smaller than a semi truck with NA 7.5 liters under the hood. Everyone is going small displacement+force induction with multi geared 7/8/9/10 transmissions. I've read they are working on electric superchargers/turbochagers to spool almost instantly to eliminate force induction lag. Transmissions are starting to become larger than engines now days.
We be lucky to find any V-6 in 5-10 years from now without having some-type of hybrid and/or force induction tech attached. The good thing is the 2nd Gen RDX will still be on the road still with its V-6.
I've learned to drive on my Dad's old Oldsmobile with a 455 ci engine. Good luck finding anything smaller than a semi truck with NA 7.5 liters under the hood. Everyone is going small displacement+force induction with multi geared 7/8/9/10 transmissions. I've read they are working on electric superchargers/turbochagers to spool almost instantly to eliminate force induction lag. Transmissions are starting to become larger than engines now days.
We be lucky to find any V-6 in 5-10 years from now without having some-type of hybrid and/or force induction tech attached. The good thing is the 2nd Gen RDX will still be on the road still with its V-6.
07-25-2017, 11:55 AM
#118
Pro
I'd rather have a naturally aspirated 6 cylinder than a 4 cylinder turbo any day. If Acura switches to a 4 cylinder in the next gen RDX, I would probably avoid it unless it's 300+ horsepower and smooth. The new Jaguar E Pace is 4 cylinder, I was excited for its release until they listed up to 4 cylinder only...
07-26-2017, 06:14 PM
#119
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
I suspect the real reason behind the trend towards 4 cylinders is the bottom line for these companies. A four cylinder engine is always cheaper to produce than the 6 cylinder counterparts. It's sad because 6 cylinders give you a good a balance between powerful performance, smoothness and fuel efficiency. The only advantage of the 4 cylinders is the greater fuel efficiency because its a weaker engine. Some companies force you to go to an AMG or S Line to get a 6 cylinder...