New RDX Versus New Passport?
 

Ummm... Passport is based on Pilot and competes with MDX... RDX competes with CR-V...


Passport looks nice but I don't like the whole Pilot/Ridgeline/Passport sharing the front... It's too Suburban/Tahoe/Silverado/Avalanche for me...

Looks good I really like the V6. Passport likely closer to MDX in size.
I will be taking a look.

9-speed ZF transmission is "the good stuff"? Having barely tolerated and gratefully retired a 2016 Honda Pilot Touring AWD with that POS transmission, I beg to differ.

Otherwise, apples vs oranges from what I can see. Might as well compare RDX to a Subaru. But if it suits your needs, so be it.

I saw the Passport and was thankful I didn't wait (was also considering new RAV4), and I think its kinda ugly, the Passport, and I don't know that the V6 is better than the Turbo 4. These are two different vehicles, Passport is more outdoorsy vs. RDX is more sporty and luxury.

Agree. Honda is obviously going after the outdoorsy demographic with Passport, having strayed away from that with 3rd-gen Pilot ( although Pilot has amazing capacity for its size... hence it was our family road-trip vehicle to national parks and such... think Griswolds :tongue: ). And my 2nd and 3rd-gen Pilots did stray down unimproved Forest Service roads on occasion. 2nd-gen was a bit more rugged than 3rd-gen.

I would be interested to see how much storage capacity has opened up from omitting the 3rd-row seat. I was known to pull that seat out of my Pilots for epic road trips. ( Like the Canadian Rockies, for instance ).

But just from photos, I wonder about ground clearance of this Passport. It doesn't look much different than current RDX or CRV, which is roughly the same as 2nd-gen Pilot or 1st-gen MDX ( I still have one of the latter as a beater ).

I was thinking the same thing, what "good stuff"? That ZF9 is a POS and IMO the J35 V6 is archaic at best and I'll take a new modern turbo 4 over a 20 year old V6 any day of the week. I definitely want to talk about changing a timing belt on my engine in 2018....:rolleyes:

Personally not a fan of the design. To me it looks like the just resized the Pilot front end and altered some materials. And the rear looks like a chevy or GMC. If i was in the market for a vehicle like that I'd go with the tried and true 4Runner..they are freaking rock solid

Yeah, as soon as I saw 9spd ZF I was out. I would prefer the V6 but the turbo 4 seems to be where everyone is headed. The size seems about perfect for my needs. I wonder when the contract with ZF is up....can't be soon enough!

I really thought they would have phased out use of the ZF9 since the RLX and new Odyssey use the 10AT. But I have a suspicion that the reason they did that was because the 10AT cannot handle the 5k tow capacity. That's the only thing that makes sense to me. The RDX can't tow nothing compared to some other options. 3500 for X3 and 4500 or 5k for Q5 iirc.

You thinking there...

Used to do quite a bit of that with my '95 Grand Cherokee (when it wasn't in the shop), and 1st and 2nd Gen Toyota Highlanders. The Highlanders were surprisingly capable even though that wasn't their design goal.

I sat in a Passport that was on display at the Los Angeles Auto Show, and the driver's seat was terrible compared to the RDX's seat. It was almost completely flat, with very little bolstering on the bottom cushion. I really like the RDX seat, by comparison.

I wonder how it's going to shake up price wise. I'd bet it's going to land at 45k CDN fully loaded. So right between a CRV at 40k and 52k for a pilot. Not a bad place to be. I'd still take an edge for 45k over it in a heartbeat though. Or even a base Q5.

It looks pretty good. However it is likely to appeal to those who do a lot of outdoor or off roading stuff or who live in austere or rugged environs. It will compete with Rangler, fj cruiser, etc. The RDX is just a premium class suburban or city hauler with some added traction in the AWD variant.

The J35 is a nice engine for a Honda. It still offers great performance and fuel economy. A V6 also sounds better to me. The ZF9AT has been bad but my understanding is that there's been multiple revisions and fixes that it's "tolerable" now. But I love the 2.0T in the RDX and that 10AT is just milees better than the revised ZF 9AT.

I don't know if there's gonna be much cross shopping between the Passport and RDX. They might be similarly sized but they look quite different. Honda and Acura are also marketing both vehicles to very different groups of people. I really doubt people that want a RDX would want a Passport, and vice versa. The Passport is way more "Outdoor" looking than the RDX. The interior is leagues below the RDX in terms of luxury feeling.

As as others have mentioned, the guts of both cars are very different too. Passport is based on the Ridgeline/Pilot/MDX platform. RDX rides on a unique, Acura-only platform.

The more appropriate question to me: Is the MDX going to grow a bit larger so a 2-row Passport-based crossover can be squeezed into Acura's lineup between the RDX and MDX? I doubt they'd resurrect the ZDX nameplate, but I'm sure they could come up with something that would work. I wouldn't want it with anything using the ZF9, but the MDX's hybrid powertrain would be stellar in a tidier 2-row package.

I will be considering one of these two cars.

I still have my first year (2003) Pilot. It's treated me great. Probably one of the reasons I kept it so long (maybe too long). And maybe why I'm not that reluctant to take a leap on a first-year RDX.

Most Gen 1 Pilot owners liked that Honda kept the truck-like character with the Gen 2. It appealed to the same market with the same tastes. But over time, that started to change. Pilot owners started bemoaning the lack of more modern styling. Hence, the Gen 3. When I first started car shopping I was pretty much convinced I would buy a 2019 Pilot. But I keep an open mind and I've just about zeroed in on the RDX Advance. I did like the Pilot I test drove, almost as much as the RX350, and at about $10K less, I would still take the Pilot over the RX. But I have no need at all for a 3rd row. In 15 years, I think I only used it maybe twice for very short jaunts. The 3rd row in all these vehicles is a joke anyway. I haven't even tested a Highlander and I my not even bother.

It looks to me the Passport fills the niche left by the previous generation Pilots - something with more of a truck-like character. Smart move. The market is all about SUVs / CUVs right now. Maybe Honda's smarts will make up for the Element which never seemed to appeal to anyone. I haven't seen a Passport at any of the Honda dealers I've been to and I don't know when they'll start to show up.

They started showing up a few days ago. I was all set on buying one but have decided against it. Unless something changes very soon I'll be getting an RDX Advance.

If the MDX grows, they absolutely need something to slot under it and is 190" long. As it stands the MDX is between mid sized and full sized and the RDX is between compact and mid sized. They are trying to hit the most classes with the least cars.

I'm finding that to be the case more and more often. I downsized when I got the RDX (my decision) and it seems that more and more frequently I find myself having to 'tweak' how I do things because of the smaller size. Be nice if I was willing to financially support another larger vehicle in addition to the current fleet but that would create some serious issues with domestic relationships. :eek:

Agree. The reduced height of the rear cargo area is the biggest problem with loading up 3rd-gen RDX, especially because the roof slopes down toward the hatch. It also tapers in a bit at the rear. This is a problem for bulky cargo, such as dog crates. One of our 1st-gen MDXs has been called out of semi-retirement to transport dogs and messy and/or big loads. Acura really did it right with balancing sportiness and utility for that vehicle. Too bad "minivan styling" is such a turn-off for many "SUV" buyers these days.

But the issue I had with the several Pilots I have owned is minivan handling. They are just more softly sprung to appeal to a less performance oriented demographic. That, along with the higher center-of-gravity, results in lots of body roll and pitching motions. I don't miss "still moving with the sea" after getting out of the cruise ship on long road trips. But sometimes I really do miss the cargo capacity.

Saw a Passport on the road today. Not a fan of the exterior styling. Pretty bland IMO.

Same here. Not terrible, but could be better.

Lol what were you guys expecting? It's Honda, they take the most inoffensive and therefore bland route possible.

Unrelated but what is your guy's opinion on the new Blazer? I actually really really like it. Especially in RS trim where it has a slightly shittier version of SH-AWD and a really nice 306hp V6. I do predict it will be a failure though seeing as how it is so damn cheap inside and they want 50k US for it (HA!).

I like the exterior very much.

Thats about all I like on the blazer (exterior) The inside is still boring and cheap.

The Blazer is ludicrously overpriced. You can get an Edge ST for the price of the Blazer RS. That's not a fair fight.

I don't love the Passport's styling, but I don't find it offensive, either. With the NA V6 paired with SH-AWD, it's a compelling mechanical package. But I keep going back to Honda's decision to use the ZF9 gearbox. Had Honda put the Ridgeline's 6-speed and traditional shifter in the Passport, it might be on my radar, but that 9-speed is a deal-breaker for me.

I am glad to see the mainstream 2-row mid-size segment growing. All indications are Mazda will be re-introducing an all new CX7 in a couple years, and I expect Toyota to get back into the segment, too. (Highlander Sport?) Will Ford have the balls to make the Edge and/or Nautilus RWD for the next generation? Probably not, but now that they have a proper platform, it's fun to dream about.

Lol I too am not a fan of the current accord and I actually think the last generation model was the most attractive accord ever. And yup incredibly plasticky, yuck.

Agreed I only really like the exterior and engine.

I'm also in Canada and I did expect it to be about 55k. What an absolute fricken joke! Buy a blazer for 55k or a RDX for 7k less? Hmmm or buy a pretty loaded Q5? What to do what to do LOL. I'm not quite sure what they are smoking up in Chevy HQ. Especially after GM burned a bunch of American and Canadian workers.

Yup it's almost criminally overpriced. I'm really not sure what the hell they were thinking and lmao Edge ST eats the Blazer for breakfast.

I agree that ZF9 for me is an absolute deal killer, I would never ever buy a Passport for that reason alone. I thought they finally phased out the ZF9 but nope we get it again. I'm certain it was done because the 10AT cannot tow and they think the average consumer gives enough of a crap about having 6 or 7 or 8 gears. Should have just stuck with the 6AT.

I was actually thinking about that the other day. This has historically been a very small class with really only the GC, Murano, Edge, and Santa fe (sport) but now we can add the (albeit shitty) Blazer and the Passport to the mix. I have also heard that Mazda was bringing in the CX7 again and VW is working in a Touareg replacement that would be mainstream and built on the Atlas platform.

I appreciate these 2 row mid sized suvs because they tend to have a lot more second row leg room and trunk space without fussing over some stupid and useless third row seat. I am very happy to see the growth of this segment and I always like seeing more options because it forces competition which ultimately benefits us the consumer.

I'll take the new RDX over the Passport anyday. I wouldn't necessarily say the Passport's V6 is better than the RDX's turbo 4. The RDX looks better, too.

Yes, yes, and yes! Btw how have you been? Long time no see on here!

A few reasons the ZF 9HP is still used by Honda.

1. Honda said the 10AT won't fit in the Passport (and presumably the Pilot and Ridgeline since they're the same from the front seats forward).

2. Honda may not have the capacity to produce enough 10AT's for all applications even if it did fit.

3. Contractual obligations with ZF to use a certain number of 9HP's.

It is my understanding that development of a V6/10AT/AWD combination has recently been completed. Perhaps it will debut in the 4th generation Pilot in a couple of years.

The ZF 9HP isn't necessarily unreliable, but its shift quality and consistency is a sore spot. It's better than it was, but it's still not where it should be.

The 10AT is great on paper, but in my experience the 1-2-3 shift quality is just as annoying, if not more so, than the shifts in the 9HP.

I believe the 6AT was the best automatic transmission Honda ever made. The market is responsible for the "shift" to the 9HP and 10AT because performance and fuel economy are little, if any, better while shift quality has suffered.

The ZF 8HP, on the other hand, is a fine transmission, but it's only for longitudinal applications.

I wonder if V6/10AT/AWD combination will appear first in 4th-gen MDX. It will be interesting to see if the new turbo V6 is part of that package. And/or 48V "soft hybrid" tech.

The 10AT definitely has a personality, as it has been tuned in 2019 RDX. But it doesn't have the LOOOOOOONG pause for dog-clutch shifts ( eg. 4-5 or 5-4 ) that plagues the ZF 9AT. That drove me absolutely nuts. It seems to have been mitigated with software in recent Acura product; I'm not sure if there has been any meaningful hardware change.

The high-gear-count transmissions apparently have an advantage in the EPA suite of tests, whether or not those advantages translate to the real world. I don't think we're going back. Electrification is going forward.

If you want to whine about a transmission, try a CVT! Yeah they're efficient, but ouch!

I have to agree with that. The added lower gears will certainly help getting all that mass moving during the 'city' test but it doesn't do diddly-squat for the driving experience unless you're pedal-to-the-metal which last time I tried it doesn't work out too well in traffic. :scared:

Just read an article this morning that GM is replacing the 6 speed in the '20 Acadia (and probably other vehicles as well) with a new 9-speed. Had that 6 speed in my '14 SRX and it was an absolute pleasure to drive considering the vehicle it was in.

Especially bad with smaller engines that tend to be noisier. The constant change in engine noise in the cabin can be maddening on the highway using cruise control. Had an '11 Subaru Outback (POS) that fortunately could 'fake' a fixed gear trans by locking in a specific ratio at the expense of a hit on gas mileage - not the best solution but at least it preserved my sanity on road trips.

I agree the RDX looks better, but it's considerably smaller. For some that's a disadvantage. And I have to disagree on the V6. Turbo fours have their place, and they're oftentimes a good substitute for a V6, but Honda's V6 is both stout and relatively efficient. Not only do I expect the heavier Passport to be quicker than the RDX, it might not give up anything in real world fuel economy.

It really is too bad Honda won't work with Aisin (30% owned by Toyota). The Aisin 8-speed can be a bit slow to downshift, but it's smooth and reliable. Or they could have just continued using their own 6-speed, as they do in the Ridgeline.