James Wilson

It appears there could be several options for consumers to choose from with the new RDX. There is FWD vs AWD, some A-Spec packages, some Type-S offerings, and some websites have said there will eventually be a hybrid offering. We also have heard about the Turbo V6 option which I am wondering if this is the same as the hybrid or Type S offering, or something completely different. Does anyone else have insight into these offerings?

CheeseyPoofs McNut

No insight but here's a guess on how it initially rolls out - assuming there's only one drive-train option:

Base FWD
Tech FWD
Base SH-AWD
Tech SH-AWD
Advanced SH-AWD
A-Spec FWD (Tech package with exterior sporty design elements)
A-Spec SH-AWD (Tech package with exterior sporty design elements)

I'm not sure you get a Type-S (or turbo V6) for the RDX/MDX. I suspect they're referring to the sedan lineup in that regard but I may be wrong.

KeithL

Let’s hope A$Spec has an Advanced option unlike TLX which does not offer an A-Spec equipped with Advance options.

James Wilson

I think the Type S could end up being the sports hybrid offering. I have talked to a couple dealers and asked how the MDX sports hybrid was doing, and he said most customers turn away when they hear the word hybrid, despite the fact that the sports hybrid delivers greater performance and city MPG than the regular MDX. If you asked the same person would you want the engine offering in the NSX supercar with great fuel economy they would likely say yes. Perhaps I am wrong, but I could see the V6 Turbo being a sports hybrid that is called the Type S.

CheeseyPoofs McNut

Maybe - I guess I don't see the demand for an Acura Type S CUV - which would most certainly be more than 50k. You're competing with some heavy weight badges in that price range.

James Wilson

I don't think the price would go that high. The MDX Sports Hybrid is only $1500 over the non-hybrid offering. The current RDX Tech is just under $42,000. Let's assume the new model goes up by $1000 (I don't think it will be that much), that would put it at $43,000, and a Type S sports hybrid offering with a $1500 premium would still put it under $45K. I think there is a lot of wiggle room in there before a high performance offering goes over $50K.

romer

I understood the Acura RDX presentation in Detroit to say the 6 cylinder turbo in future years.

GhostTL09

iTrader: (1)

Acura has said A-spec is tuned suspension and an appearance package. So most likely won't see Advance options on that trim level

mrgold35

I would have to see the option list breakdown between the RDX Adv -vs- RDX tech A-Spec to see what features and advantages between the two. I like how my 2006 TSX could be turned into the A-Spec TSX just by adding suspension and appearance parts. Not sure why we can't do the same with the RDX Adv if you want to turn it into a A-Spec model (mostly suspension parts is what I'm after).

Acurafiend

The 2018 TLX A-Spec vs Advance is interesting. A-Spec is about $1,000 less than the Advanced Package, but you get a lot of the Advanced options in the A-Spec package including Ventilated seats, Accent Lighting (Red instead of White), Wireless Phone Charging, LED Fog Lights (Round instead of rectangular), parking sensors and Keyless Access at all 4 doors. This leaves just heated rear seats, puddle lights, power folding and auto-dimming exterior mirrors, heated windshield wiper element, and remote engine start to the Advance Package. You can add the Factory Remote Engine Start at the dealership for under $1,000 making the A-Spec with the upgraded suspension, beefier exhaust and clearly more aggressive styling pretty compelling in my opinion.

chickdr

Kind of silly to limit it to non Advance models if that is what they choose. Why not offer the best they can offer if it is possible?

ZipSpeed

Here in Canada, the TLX SH-AWD Elite (Advance) A-Spec is available. And it would have been the vehicle I would have chosen if it had been available back in 2016. That said, it does seem peculiar that the smaller Canadian market would get more choices in trims. I did read something about it back in the day, and it boils down to the competitive nature of price in the American market. There are a lot more people and cars in the US than Canada, so the market is inherently more competitive due to larger volume. Larger volume means people are able to shop around to get better prices. And when people want the best price, manufacturers tend to strip the vehicles of features to get it down to a target price point.

In Canada, our cars cost a lot more money. The TLX SH-AWD Elite A-Spec is just over $53,000 CDN. And that is before freight, fees, and taxes. Manufacturers don't face the same pricing pressures as the US market, so to make the higher price justifiable, more trims and features are available. Anyway, that was the gist of it. Whether that is true or not, who knows. Maybe Honda thinks Canadians love more features, and we're all gullible for paying more for it!

cheffip

Wonder if the show car is closer to the Advance/Elite or A-Spec?

russianDude

If the only way to get adaptive dampers & SH-AWD in highest package trim, it would really suck because its now in $45K area. I personally could care less about technology/advance packages.
For me SH-AWD is a must, and to get most firm ride you need adaptive dampers.... which looks like will require you to buy all other tech and ASPEC stuff.

md222

I agree. Personally I don't need any of those features except the remote engine start.

Kaputnik

I like this too. None of those extra features are needed in a warm climate like here in California. I never use the front seat butt warmers as it is.

seaman116

I've had a turbocharged 4 cylinder RDX and a 6 cylinder RDX and I much prefer the 6 cylinder.It's very peppy and the mileage is pretty good. The plan to do away with the 6 cylinder is not a good one and I'll probably have to purchase a 2018 RDX instead of a 2019. I'm really disappointed that the 6 cylinder will no longer be available!

mrgold35

The best of both worlds would be a 3.0T or 2.0T+hybrid power for that off the line pep with decent mpgs. Acura might surprise us with a 2.0T sh-sh-awd by the 3rd Gen RDX MMC; but, I think that is slim to none chance of that. We have to jump up to the current Gen or next Gen MDX sh-sh-awd for that power jump.

russianDude

ZipSpeed

Yeah, that lighter front end will definitely give the vehicle better driving dynamics. Here's hoping that Acura can get as close to 50:50 as possible.

nightflow

Curious as to why they don't move the battery to the back of the vehicle like the germans to improve weight balance if we can't have a longitudinal engine layout. Downside is wires to go to the back for the battery but I don't think it would be a serious detriment to reliability or durability. Thoughts?

TacoBello

Isn't it typical to have a 60/40 weight distribution for a FWD based vehicle? I'd be surprised if they could balance it that well. Almost seems out of question.

I think you hit the nail on the head- cost- those wiring harnesses are expensive bits. Car companies (or rather, the bean counters) do their best at keeping costs down. If there isn't a solid reason to extend the harnesses, it might be a very tough sell for the engineers to get passed.

Engineers be like "but it'll improve the handling!"
Bean counters be like "but will it work just fine without extending harnesses?"
Engineers be like "Well.. yeah... it just won't be as good."
Bean counters be like "welp, that's good enough for us! Save where we can!"

I guess the other issue is room and packaging... but.. i'm sure the engineers could figure that out if push came to shove.

nightflow

Thanks. 1st gen RDX was 57/43. I would imagine the 3rd gen with pano roof and beefier SH-AWD would be similar if not better weight balance. Maybe 56/44 or better w/ the 2.0t. I guess you can put sandbags or weight in the back. That has always been the rebuttal, but would rather a more elegant approach. Pano roof would increase center of gravity and put more weight in the back.

TacoBello

True... But the turbo, intercooler, piping, etc. Add weight up front. I feel like the weight distribution won't change all that much, if at all.

nightflow

The 1st gen RDX had a 2.3l turbo, intercooler, piping, cooling as well which is why I think given the pano roof and beefier SHAWD, speculating we may get better weight balance than 57/43.