2019 Acura RDX will be the first Acura to have a full REDESIGN!!! Proto pics page 12
12-28-2017, 06:23 AM
#401
Suzuka Master
Btw, replacing transmission is 2-3 times more expensive than replacing Turbo component. 10sp reliability scares me more than turbo. Honda is known for screwing up transmissions when they come up with something new.
12-28-2017, 08:06 AM
#402
mrgold35
Is the 10AT 100% Honda/Acura development or are they doing co-development with another car company or trans only manufacturer?
I really like my 6AT in my 11 MDX. It seems to be a good match for the 4500lbs SUV for acceleration, gear ratio, towing, and performance. I can even get good use out of the paddles for performance driving, engine braking, or using use the ACC cruise control for faster acceleration. I pretty much drive the same way in my 5AT RDX and the extra turbo TQ and being 500 lbs lighter makes up for one less gear compared to the MDX.
I've had a few +16 MDX loaners with the 9AT and I couldn't use the paddles the same way:
- it took 3-4 9AT paddle taps to get into the max acceleration
- 1-2 paddle kick downs would make the MDX accelerate/surge instead of engine braking
- too long of delay from 9th to 6th or 5th in regular mode if you needed speed in a hurry
I gave up and just drove the MDX in regular mode and didn't touch the paddles after a while. I would have to really adjust the way I drive to get the same level of performance from the 9AT compared to the 6AT/5AT. I almost found the paddles useless in performance driving because of the 9AT. I will have to really change my driving style to get most out of the 10AT RDX Turbo. That is why I'm hoping for sporty RDX with sh-sh-awd+7DCT down the road.
I really like my 6AT in my 11 MDX. It seems to be a good match for the 4500lbs SUV for acceleration, gear ratio, towing, and performance. I can even get good use out of the paddles for performance driving, engine braking, or using use the ACC cruise control for faster acceleration. I pretty much drive the same way in my 5AT RDX and the extra turbo TQ and being 500 lbs lighter makes up for one less gear compared to the MDX.
I've had a few +16 MDX loaners with the 9AT and I couldn't use the paddles the same way:
- it took 3-4 9AT paddle taps to get into the max acceleration
- 1-2 paddle kick downs would make the MDX accelerate/surge instead of engine braking
- too long of delay from 9th to 6th or 5th in regular mode if you needed speed in a hurry
I gave up and just drove the MDX in regular mode and didn't touch the paddles after a while. I would have to really adjust the way I drive to get the same level of performance from the 9AT compared to the 6AT/5AT. I almost found the paddles useless in performance driving because of the 9AT. I will have to really change my driving style to get most out of the 10AT RDX Turbo. That is why I'm hoping for sporty RDX with sh-sh-awd+7DCT down the road.
The following users liked this post:
mrgold35 (12-28-2017)
12-28-2017, 08:37 AM
#404
mrgold35
The design and manufacturing is all Honda. Details here if you're interested in learning more.
12-28-2017, 09:50 AM
#405
It worries me a little bit with the statement at the bottom of the article: "While initial applications will be front-drive only, it’s safe to assume that a power takeoff can be added for all-wheel drive in the future." Will Acura offer 10AT fwd and 6AT or 9AT AWD with or without sh-awd to the 3rd Gen RDX?
12-28-2017, 10:29 AM
#406
mrgold35
I hope that was poor wording on C/D's part. I can't imagine Acura doesn't plan to roll out the 10-speed across the lineup. The 6-speed is outdated and not terribly refined, and the ZF 9-speed has been problematic in all applications, plus it can't be cheap for Acura to purchase. The Aisin 8-speed would have been a better choice for Acura, but Toyota's 30% ownership of Aisin was always going to prevent that from happening. My concern for the 10-speed is the torque limitation (initially 275 lb-ft). The article indicates the torque capability will be increasing, but how much? I guess there's always the DCT for any higher output applications, but DCT's have their shortcomings, too.
12-28-2017, 04:12 PM
#407
It looks like the 2018 RLX only comes in fwd 10T or 7DCT sh-sh-awd? It seems Acura isn't offering regular good old fashion sh-awd as an option other than the MDX or TLX for its current line-up? It also seems the mpg advantage of 6AT vs 9AT vs 10AT over the old 5AT seems to drop a bit as they add more gears? Acura needs to hit it out of the park with the styling if they keep the same formula with out dated entertainment tech, +10 year old navi tech, sometimes quirky AcuraWatch, limited to no powertrain options, no performance/handling upgrades (factory or aftermarket), and always taking a back seat and getting leftovers down the road to similar Honda products.
The RDX will have the Precision Cockpit tech - wholly different from Honda’s most recent infotainment design and will be the first product on the planet to get it. We still don’t really know what “Acura-exclusive” platform means but it’s supposedly a new one.
12-28-2017, 04:14 PM
#408
Hondata did a dyno of the Accord with the 2.0t pushing over 300 lb-ft on regular fuel. Jeff at TOV also tested the Accord 2.0t at 5.3 seconds to 60. A 2.0t RDX will be plenty fast.
Last edited by iutodd; 12-28-2017 at 04:21 PM. Reason: autocorrect issues
12-28-2017, 06:15 PM
#409
Burning Brakes
Yes, I am original owner. All you have to do is search 1st gen RDX forum or internet, and you will find very limited (if any) number of turbo issues in 1st gen RDX. The early RDXs are now 10yr+ with a lot of miles, any turbo reliability issues would be all over internet by now.
I'd have a turbo in a diesel or a 911. In fact, the 911 Turbo or Turbo S are the other options over the GT3 I am considering. They are toys and not daily drivers, so I am not too worried about replacing parts sooner than later.
I have to wonder why turbos with a square wave torque curve need soooo many gears though.
12-28-2017, 09:16 PM
#410
Instructor
Personally I don't understand the fascination with a Pano roof. Adds costs, adds weight, and here in Houston will make the interior unbearable in the summer. I never use the sun roof in the TLX. It stays closed with the sun shade pulled. It is worthless. We ordered my wife's Mini without a sun roof. It added almost 2 inches of headroom and we don't miss it a bit. This feature is kind of like the fireplace in my house. Here is it on 23 Dec and I have the A/C on! A fireplace is worthless, but it is an expected feature in the house. Everyone thinks they want one, but when the get it, it is worthless. Just decoration.
“Too each his own” I guess. I’m in H-Town and always have the sunroof shade down, even during the summer (and I have the ebony leather interior). I do like to cruise the town with all 4 windows and sunroof down when I can (usually spring, winter, or fall). Even though I enjoy my sunroof, a panoramic SR isn’t a must have feature for me. I’m perfectly fine with just a sunroof. But count me as one of those who also prefers a naturally aspirated V6 over a Turbo 4. The other fear I have for the new RDX is in the wording of the press release & the teaser image: “Low & Wide” like the Precision Concept. The Pentagon grille on the RDX teaser appears really wide, a la the TLX grille. Not a fan of this look. For all the hate the beak got, atleast it was a workable canvas to easily modify and better the overall look (i.e. beak delete). In summary, glad I bought a second gen 2017 RDX.
12-30-2017, 02:13 AM
#411
Summer is Coming
“Too each his own” I guess. I’m in H-Town and always have the sunroof shade down, even during the summer (and I have the ebony leather interior). I do like to cruise the town with all 4 windows and sunroof down when I can (usually spring, winter, or fall). Even though I enjoy my sunroof, a panoramic SR isn’t a must have feature for me. I’m perfectly fine with just a sunroof. But count me as one of those who also prefers a naturally aspirated V6 over a Turbo 4. The other fear I have for the new RDX is in the wording of the press release & the teaser image: “Low & Wide” like the Precision Concept. The Pentagon grille on the RDX teaser appears really wide, a la the TLX grille. Not a fan of this look. For all the hate the beak got, atleast it was a workable canvas to easily modify and better the overall look (i.e. beak delete). In summary, glad I bought a second gen 2017 RDX.
I just don't see the benefit of the pano roof over a regular sunroof. Just no return on that investment for me. But I'm sure some will enjoy it.
The following users liked this post:
pilozm (01-27-2018)
12-31-2017, 08:16 AM
#412
Three Wheelin'
I'm sure you get enjoyment out of your sunroof. But I seldom see people in Houston driving with their windows down, it does happen and there are convertibles I spot with the roof down, but the season for windows down driving is pretty short. I have pretty high end tinting on all the glass in my car except for the sunroof. I guess I'm so used to the sunroof being closed I don't even realize it is there. We'll have to see how Acura implements the pano roof in the RDX. But to me it is just another chance for issues with the car that have no real benefit, at least to me. I recall there were several ZDX's that had rear windows shatter and that was out of a fairly small population of cars. I recently had the large tempered glass in our bathroom removed for some remodeling. This glass was floor to ceiling and 4 guys were trying to get it out. They must have stressed it the wrong way because it shattered like a small bomb. Glass went everywhere, even into the adjoining bedroom and closet. Two of the guys had cuts on their arms and hands. I'm not saying this is going to happen on RDX roofs, but tempered glass is strong right up to the point that it fails and it fails dramatically. It is probably also not the best materiel to have in the roof in an accident. I had a laminated glass storm door in our old house. That was some tough stuff. You could hit it with a baseball bat. If Acura were smart they'd put laminated glass in the pano roof and avoid the chances of roof failures giving them more issues to blame on customers.
I just don't see the benefit of the pano roof over a regular sunroof. Just no return on that investment for me. But I'm sure some will enjoy it.
I just don't see the benefit of the pano roof over a regular sunroof. Just no return on that investment for me. But I'm sure some will enjoy it.
12-31-2017, 12:53 PM
#414
Team Owner
I doubt it.
I'm willing to bet most people treat a pano sunroof as a nice extra, not something that is a deal breaker. Once you own one, once, you realize they're nothing special. Is it cool to have? Sure. Would it cause people to choose one model over another? On its own- doubtful.
I'm willing to bet most people treat a pano sunroof as a nice extra, not something that is a deal breaker. Once you own one, once, you realize they're nothing special. Is it cool to have? Sure. Would it cause people to choose one model over another? On its own- doubtful.
The following users liked this post:
pilozm (01-27-2018)
12-31-2017, 12:59 PM
#415
Team Owner
You're totally right. The pano roof is simply for the rear seat occupants. Not only is it rare as fuck for the majority of us to have someone constantly sitting in the back seat, but when they do, they're generally not even looking up. Plus when it's hot out, it gets extra hot. When it's cold out, it gets extra cold. So the interior pano roof shade is generally closed anyway. It seriously serves no additional purpose over a regular sunroof.
I bought a car with one, about 6 years ago. I use it less than my regular TL sunroof. The shade is generally drawn closed. Even when open, I've never had a rear seat occupant even comment on it. No one cares. I was totally sold on the "this looks awesome!! I want it!!!" Only to realize it's just for looks and nothing else.
I bought a car with one, about 6 years ago. I use it less than my regular TL sunroof. The shade is generally drawn closed. Even when open, I've never had a rear seat occupant even comment on it. No one cares. I was totally sold on the "this looks awesome!! I want it!!!" Only to realize it's just for looks and nothing else.
12-31-2017, 01:31 PM
#416
I've had three pano roofs, and my wife has had one. They are nice to have at times, but I certainly don't need one. Given the choice, I'll gladly do without. My wife never used the roof in her Q5, so we custom ordered her GLC largely so we could forego the option. That said, I'm certainly not going to claim they're stupid or useless. In the right climate, I think I'd quite enjoy having one. Even here in Michigan I know people who won't buy a car without one - including my neighbor who claims the airier feel in the back seat prevents his daughter from getting car sick. He never opens the glass, just keeps the shade open most of the time.
In an ideal world, the panoramic roof would be a standalone option -- not standard equipment, and not tied to an option package. Making it a standalone option adds a lot of complexity to the manufacturing process, so I can understand why they're often grouped with other equipment. If the RDX is the right car for me, it will find its way to my garage with or without a pano roof.
In an ideal world, the panoramic roof would be a standalone option -- not standard equipment, and not tied to an option package. Making it a standalone option adds a lot of complexity to the manufacturing process, so I can understand why they're often grouped with other equipment. If the RDX is the right car for me, it will find its way to my garage with or without a pano roof.
12-31-2017, 06:50 PM
#417
This also grabbed my attention immediately. Keep in mind Acura was calling the 1G RDX platform unique to the crv as well because it had some minor chassis revisions so don’t get too excited.
My thoughts exactly. I still cannot believe SH-AWD was ever removed (then again the new quattro ultra is funny).
The 1G RDX turbo was ROCK solid, rarely ever see or read problems with it even dating back to first year production models. I have zero worry about that personally.
I really realy wanted a panormaic sunroof until I finally had one in my Sorento. Now granted mine was lame because the sunroof cover was manual and therefore I could not open the rear one while driving and it wasn’t a true pano roof because it was split into 2 infividual roofs. However, I realized that I really don’t care about it after having it. I do have to have a sunroof though, I open it a lot during the morning and evening while driving during the spring, summer, and fall months. But seeing as how I get literally zero benefit as the driver it really doesn’t affect me. Like someone mentioned above, because everyone else has one it becomes a status thing to say you have one too. Given the choice between a pano and normal sunroof I would take a pano just because I like it but not having the option won’t make me not buy a car.
From what I've seen being on these forums the last 4+ years, complaints related to shaking VCM issues / drive shafts, noisy suspensions and vibrating transmissions in the 2013+ models far outweigh reports of turbo failures in the old RDX. These seem to be very rare. There are members passing 200k miles in their old RDXs with just the typical number of things gone wrong, which speaks well of Acura in general. Until data supports that the turbo failure is some kind of issue in a Honda product, I don't buy it. The old model "feels" faster because of the turbo kick in the usable ranges and it's German-style handling. I'm excited that a turbo could offer a more fun to drive package in 2019. The current gen is one nice SUV with great value, but offers comfort and utility over a fun driving experience. We are a Honda family and I like to stay that way.
I doubt it.
I'm willing to bet most people treat a pano sunroof as a nice extra, not something that is a deal breaker. Once you own one, once, you realize they're nothing special. Is it cool to have? Sure. Would it cause people to choose one model over another? On its own- doubtful.
I'm willing to bet most people treat a pano sunroof as a nice extra, not something that is a deal breaker. Once you own one, once, you realize they're nothing special. Is it cool to have? Sure. Would it cause people to choose one model over another? On its own- doubtful.
12-31-2017, 08:57 PM
#418
It’s a 6-Cylinder. At least that’s what I heard from the boss wrench at my dealer a few weeks back.
01-01-2018, 11:34 AM
#420
Pro
I doubt it.
I'm willing to bet most people treat a pano sunroof as a nice extra, not something that is a deal breaker. Once you own one, once, you realize they're nothing special. Is it cool to have? Sure. Would it cause people to choose one model over another? On its own- doubtful.
I'm willing to bet most people treat a pano sunroof as a nice extra, not something that is a deal breaker. Once you own one, once, you realize they're nothing special. Is it cool to have? Sure. Would it cause people to choose one model over another? On its own- doubtful.
Highly, highly doubtful. I will shocked if it's a 6. I do hope you are right though....
01-01-2018, 01:43 PM
#421
Team Owner
01-01-2018, 10:37 PM
#422
It would literally make zero sense to offer the V6 unless it was in the base model, the turbo 4 will make much better power than that dinosaur of a V6 currently in the RDX. In terms of fuel economy, I really don’t know. On paper turbo 4’s seem really good but in real life applications they tend to be worse. But paired with the 10 speed and possibly lighter chassis we should see better handling, acceleration, and fuel economy.
01-02-2018, 07:37 AM
#423
Pro
It would literally make zero sense to offer the V6 unless it was in the base model, the turbo 4 will make much better power than that dinosaur of a V6 currently in the RDX. In terms of fuel economy, I really don’t know. On paper turbo 4’s seem really good but in real life applications they tend to be worse. But paired with the 10 speed and possibly lighter chassis we should see better handling, acceleration, and fuel economy.
01-02-2018, 07:43 AM
#424
Lola
Acura China have confirmed that the next Chinese RDX will be assembled locally, so from a cost standpoint(and avoiding displacement tax there), they will make the 2.0T standard across all markets. The V6 only makes sense if they decide to do a Type-S model in the future.
01-02-2018, 09:46 AM
#425
Moderator
01-02-2018, 12:45 PM
#426
Safety Car
Is there an update on the release date? Need to pull the trigger on a suv in late Feb/early March.
I am getting quotes for $340/mo inc tax, on a 2018 limited outback with eyesight, nav, led, full tech nannies, etc, 0 down plus fees, 10k/yr. which, given the build quality and fit and finish of the 2018s, seems fairly unbeatable for any other car that would be $400/mo or less.
Unfortunately, the 2nd gen RDX navigation system is kind of a non-starter. I presume the 2019 base RDX will come standard with apple car play (nav), LED headlights, etc, less the tech nannies, which would probably be under $400/mo....
I am getting quotes for $340/mo inc tax, on a 2018 limited outback with eyesight, nav, led, full tech nannies, etc, 0 down plus fees, 10k/yr. which, given the build quality and fit and finish of the 2018s, seems fairly unbeatable for any other car that would be $400/mo or less.
Unfortunately, the 2nd gen RDX navigation system is kind of a non-starter. I presume the 2019 base RDX will come standard with apple car play (nav), LED headlights, etc, less the tech nannies, which would probably be under $400/mo....
Last edited by ThermonMermon; 01-02-2018 at 12:51 PM.
01-02-2018, 12:56 PM
#427
01-02-2018, 11:49 PM
#428
In any SUV period, torque is king! Even "super suvs' rely on monster torque!
01-03-2018, 06:43 AM
#429
mrgold35
2.4L ILX: 201hp/180tq
2.4L TLX: 206hp/182tq
TLX V-6: 290hp/267tq
RLX V-6: 310hp/272tq
RDX V-6: 279hp/252tq
MDX V-6: 290hp/267tq
MDX sh-sh-awd: 321hp/289tq (3.0L V-6)
RLX sh-sh-awd: 377hp/341tq (3.5L V-6)
My understanding (so far) is the 10AT is limited to 275tq max and may or may not be able to be modified for (sh)awd. The 2018 RLX has the new 10AT and the 3.5L only makes 272tq. It seems the 252hp/273tq of the Accord 2.0T+10AT are going to be the minimal power numbers for the 3rd Gen RDX. I can see Acura bumping up the HP numbers; but, keeping the TQ under 275tq for the 10AT.
I don't know if the 2.0T engine does have a variable valve for the turbo intake like the 1st Gen RDX to help spool up faster or the 10AT keeping the tq in the power band is a substitution for that? My guess is a smaller turbo to spool faster like the Accord and the psi drops down a lot when you get above 5000 rpms.
01-03-2018, 09:59 AM
#430
Pro
I guess we will know in a couple of weeks. I am betting on the Accord 2.0T specs(+/- a couple of HP) for the RDX. Or, maybe we will both be wrong and they will shove the DI 3.5 motor in the bay.....
01-03-2018, 11:59 AM
#431
Acura/Honda seems to stick with a hp/tq hierarchy with every model. The same Acura engine will make more hp than Honda. Lower models will make less HP than upper models:
2.4L ILX: 201hp/180tq
2.4L TLX: 206hp/182tq
TLX V-6: 290hp/267tq
RLX V-6: 310hp/272tq
RDX V-6: 279hp/252tq
MDX V-6: 290hp/267tq
MDX sh-sh-awd: 321hp/289tq (3.0L V-6)
RLX sh-sh-awd: 377hp/341tq (3.5L V-6)
My understanding (so far) is the 10AT is limited to 275tq max and may or may not be able to be modified for (sh)awd. The 2018 RLX has the new 10AT and the 3.5L only makes 272tq. It seems the 252hp/273tq of the Accord 2.0T+10AT are going to be the minimal power numbers for the 3rd Gen RDX. I can see Acura bumping up the HP numbers; but, keeping the TQ under 275tq for the 10AT.
I don't know if the 2.0T engine does have a variable valve for the turbo intake like the 1st Gen RDX to help spool up faster or the 10AT keeping the tq in the power band is a substitution for that? My guess is a smaller turbo to spool faster like the Accord and the psi drops down a lot when you get above 5000 rpms.
2.4L ILX: 201hp/180tq
2.4L TLX: 206hp/182tq
TLX V-6: 290hp/267tq
RLX V-6: 310hp/272tq
RDX V-6: 279hp/252tq
MDX V-6: 290hp/267tq
MDX sh-sh-awd: 321hp/289tq (3.0L V-6)
RLX sh-sh-awd: 377hp/341tq (3.5L V-6)
My understanding (so far) is the 10AT is limited to 275tq max and may or may not be able to be modified for (sh)awd. The 2018 RLX has the new 10AT and the 3.5L only makes 272tq. It seems the 252hp/273tq of the Accord 2.0T+10AT are going to be the minimal power numbers for the 3rd Gen RDX. I can see Acura bumping up the HP numbers; but, keeping the TQ under 275tq for the 10AT.
I don't know if the 2.0T engine does have a variable valve for the turbo intake like the 1st Gen RDX to help spool up faster or the 10AT keeping the tq in the power band is a substitution for that? My guess is a smaller turbo to spool faster like the Accord and the psi drops down a lot when you get above 5000 rpms.
I did think about the power hierarchy when I made that earlier comment and I agree. I doubt Acura would give the RDX more power than the MDX but then again remember there is a hybrid MDX with more power now so Acura may be willing to push power in the RDX a bit more. I find it odd as it is that we have a civic Type R that makes better power numbers than the TLX.I don’t think Acura is using that variable flow turbo anymore and most likely a smaller twin scroll turbo. But when I think about it, that variable flow turbo was really advanced for its’ time back in 2006. Yup, and actually, I am even thinking they will not be using the 2.0T/10AT. The reason is we don’t even know if it can support AWD, let alone SH-AWD.
01-03-2018, 01:05 PM
#432
Moderator
Do we get powertrain specs when they roll out the prototype???? I thought this was strictly a prototype tease with no concrete information????
01-03-2018, 01:08 PM
#433
Team Owner
they might have some high level specs, like when they released the NSX. "over 500hp".. but they didn't give you a concrete number. I could see them saying what engine is going in, without giving any power numbers.
01-03-2018, 01:11 PM
#434
Team Owner
Honda didn't spend a ton of time and money to not start cramming their new turbo engines into everything. I think it is safe to assume that after 25 some odd years, Honda is finally moving away from the NA V6.
Honda has always been a company of few engines, placed into countless cars. While they do need a v6, I have a feeling it will come in as a V6T, for whatever they decide to place it into.
I'll be surprised if the RDX doesn't have the 2.0T in it, in two weeks. I know a lot of people were very happy with the RDX and the V6 in it, but let's also remember that Honda doesn't care what we are happy with, and instead insists on what we should be happy with.
Honda has always been a company of few engines, placed into countless cars. While they do need a v6, I have a feeling it will come in as a V6T, for whatever they decide to place it into.
I'll be surprised if the RDX doesn't have the 2.0T in it, in two weeks. I know a lot of people were very happy with the RDX and the V6 in it, but let's also remember that Honda doesn't care what we are happy with, and instead insists on what we should be happy with.
01-03-2018, 01:21 PM
#435
V6 is gone fellas. V6T is a realistic in future performance vehicles.
The following 4 users liked this post by Nexx:
CheeseyPoofs McNut (01-04-2018),
HotRodW (01-04-2018),
TacoBello (01-03-2018),
ZipSpeed (01-04-2018)
01-03-2018, 04:49 PM
#436
Team Owner
I'm 99% certain in one of the latest RDX releases, they mentioned the 2.0T in it.
01-03-2018, 05:17 PM
#437
Null and proud of it
It would literally make zero sense to offer the V6 unless it was in the base model, the turbo 4 will make much better power than that dinosaur of a V6 currently in the RDX. In terms of fuel economy, I really don’t know. On paper turbo 4’s seem really good but in real life applications they tend to be worse. But paired with the 10 speed and possibly lighter chassis we should see better handling, acceleration, and fuel economy.
Glad to see you around RDX10!!!I have to agree... I can't stand the lack of lower midrange torque in my 2008 TL... My 07 RDX would eat it alive.... This is exactly why I'm no longer sad to see Honda slowly drop the V6 from their lineup... It's a nice engine, sounds great, smooth, like all Honda engines, but to be blunt, almost anything with more than 2.0 liters would beat it off the line, including a 2.4 Accord IMO... I don't know... But I like it more when Honda does turbos... On a side note... RDX10, been looking at Sorento's, really getting to like them, a lot like my old Sportage in solid steering feel...
01-04-2018, 09:33 AM
#439
Pro
Last edited by chickdr; 01-04-2018 at 09:38 AM.
01-04-2018, 10:07 AM
#440
mrgold35
There is this: https://tiremeetsroad.com/2017/12/14...-new-v6-turbo/ but there is zero chance it will used in the RDX. As you said maybe for the MDX as a 3.0T instead of a 3.5? Audi did this years ago for the Q7.
I've heard rumors of a mini NSX and the 3.0T was being developed for this. I can see a de-tuned version of the 3.0T for the RLX and MDX down the road. Acura might even up the 3.0T hp/tq for an A-spec, Type S, and/or Type R TLX.
Acura has more than enough tech and a very full parts bin to have two variations of the 3rd Gen RDX in a Luxury and sporty forms: This is pretty much the difference between the Lexus NX (sport) and RX (luxury) and I would imagine Lexus yearly sells of these two models combined are very close to Acura RDX/MDX with the addition of having the Luxus GX and LX to snag additional sells Acura can't even touch. How many figgen versions do they have for the accord and civic with just minor tweeks and Acura folks just get a choice of I-4 or V-6 and fwd or (sh)awd for the exact same platforms.
