Acura ZDX:
An Opportunity Lost – Here’s How to Make it Righteous

Dear Acura,

Despite the way you think and behave, you’re actually competing against the likes of BMW, Audi, Mercedes-Benz, Lexus and Cadillac. You reaffirmed this axiom when you dropped your excellent product names (Legend, Integra) in favor of meaningless alphabet soup nonsense (RL and RSX), so don’t deny it. Look, even Vigor is better than TL, TSX, MDX, and RDX. Combined. Why else would you drop your admittedly limited heritage in favor of Germanic-style nonsense? Because you, dear Acura, would like to swim in that pond. Only thing is, you don’t compete very well.

Now it’s true, Motor Trend loves your new TSX Sport Wagon. Though we do get the impression that you didn’t really want to build it. Not really. I mean, the TSX 4-door can come with a big engine and a manual transmission or a 6-speed Auto. The Sport Wagon? An old 5-speed slusher and a barely acceptable 201-horsepower 2.4-liter inline-4. [Mea Culpa -- I mistakenly said that the TSX comes with AWD -- that's the TL, not the TSX. Thank you for pointing out my mistake, hyper angry commenter guy.] Put another way, Audi’s not sweating your new 5 door. At all.

Nor is BMW, Lexus, Cadillac nor Mercedes-Benz. Why not? More alpha-silliness: S, M, F-Sport, V and AMG. Even Infiniti, long confined to your tier of also-ran luxury car status, finally figured out that you need some sort of performance layer up top, even if it’s the poorly named and hardly-baked IPL. Which brings me in a round about way to your nearly-great ZDX, and what’s wrong with it.

At 1st glance, not too much. Yes of course, in Peoria the design will come off as shocking, overly bold and subversive. That’s good! You’re selling a design statement; it’s supposed to clash with the neighbor’s King Ranch F250. And yes, the ZDX is very difficult to get in and out of. This is also good, as it shows you ignored focus groups and common sense. You refused to compromise the design and we can tell. Especially when we’re talking about clambering out of the rear seat through those ridiculous half-size doors, a feat no woman can accomplish without her dress riding up above her navel. So says my wife. Besides, you tried scrambling in and out of a McLaren F1 recently? Awkward! Anyhow, the ZDX’s design is fantastic.

But driving it, well… how do the kids put it these days? Not so much. See, it’s got 300 horsepower and that’s pretty cool… if it were still 1996. Here’s why. The Toyota Camry makes 268 hp. The Honda Accord has 271 ponies. The Chrysler Town & Country makes 283 hp. Oh, then there’s the new Hyundai Sonata Turbo with its 2.0-liter humdinger that pumps out 274 (probably underrated) horsepower and can hit 155 mph before fuel cutoff with 2,000 rpm still in reserve. To reiterate, in 2011, 300 ponies ain’t shizzle. Nor is the ZDX’s slow-shifting, dim-witted 6-speed automatic. Even with the tiny little paddles behind the steering wheel. As Ed Loh said in our recent long term ZDX report, “The only thing missing is breathtaking forward velocity.”

Well, not quite the only thing. I do applaud you for refusing to sell out the ZDX’s design, but why is the interior only half-way there? For instance, you have that nifty trick where the radio buttons turn black when the stereo’s off, but illuminate when it’s on. I can’t get enough of that. However, those same space age controls are sitting on top of the same crude plastic controls for the nav system found in the Honda Odyssey, among others. Why would you do that? Why, on a car that looks this good, would you let anything seem out of the date? Why isn’t every little piece of the ZDX a massive, face-slap of a statement?

Here then, is how to make the ZDX righteous — and I won’t even charge you a lofty consulting fee. Turbos, two of ‘em. If Ford can extract 365 horsepower fromf their EcoBoosted 3.5-liter V-6, you should have no trouble squeezing at least 400 hp out of the ZDX’s 3.7-liter engine. Of course, a little birdie of an engineer at Ford told me they can actually get 600 horsepower out of the SHO’s mill witout too much hassle, but for the sake of longevity they don’t bother. Anyhow, Acura, you should shoot for 500 hp. Why the hell not? And remember, that last question is the same thing BMW’s M Division asks themselves every time they even smell an X6 M.

Let’s talk transmissions. The one you got in the ZDX is maybe OK-enough in the MDX, but for ZDX duty it sucks. Even in Sport mode. You could be brave and go with a manual. A sweet, slick-snicking, Honda-quality 6-speed, 3 pedal solution would be ideal. Actually, your manuals would be ideal in basically every situation. But I digress. You have to think of your potential customers. Therefore, in order to increase ZDX sales (anything is up, right?) I’m recommending you go with a super-fast shifting dual-clutch. Maybe give the car a reverse rake while you’re at it.

To summarize: You made a brave decision when the ZDX went up for sale. A massively impractical crossover does not typically a great halo vehicle make, but at least the styling is polarizing. It drives wonderfully, too. I love the Super-Handling All-Wheel-Drive, I love feel of the steering and heft of the wheel, and I also love the seating position. You’re high up but somehow still low down. But there’s a definite lack. Yes, you can get in front of that oncoming Touareg as long as its driver doesn’t put his foot in it. Is that… luxury?

So, the ZDX feels good but goes slow. Is slow bad? No, not on it’s own. But when you combine slow with a high price (about $50,000) and those arrogant looks, slow becomes bad. Bad becomes your potential customer shopping elsewhere. Sluggish performance makes the ZDX feel silly and cartoonish. All that fearless design is just wasted. The ZDX can’t transcend what it actually is: a rebodied MDX. Which is a shame, and a missed opportunity. How many more of these can a brand sustain, Acura?

Jonny Lieberman on February 28 2011 5:00 AM

 

Wow, talk about tough. Probably one of the most negative reviews I've ever read in an auto magazine. Was the author recently fired from Acura??

 

Acura can very easily add a supercharger with the 6AT or S/C + 6MT option. Extra power when you need it and same gas mileage when you don't.

Acura is very good at giving you what you need instead of what you want.

 

All of these reviewers talk about the ZDX needing a bigger, beefier engine, but they're not the ones filling the thing up at the pump every week. I'm perfectly content with the 300 hp 3.7 V6 engine. I think it's a fair trade-off between power and fuel efficiency. I'm not taking the damn thing to the track. I'm driving it to work, lol.

 

But that's the point they're trying to make. Acura wanted to make a statement, a no compromise, compromised design just for the sake of being in your face.

What is the point of using so much leather around the dash when they could save $ by using more plastic? To make a statement.
What was the point of making a vehicle as big, heavy, and expensive as the MDX, but not being nearly as practical or roomy? To make a statement.

Their point was, Why not ALSO put a ridiculously large engine in it or make it unnecessarily fast to finish the job and make another statement?

Then they could say "we have the fastest most luxurious 4 door coupe crossover thingamajiggy in it's class!" Instead now they need to explain what specific market this is for, and you have countless people asking WHY this thing exists and why anyone would take it over a MDX.

 

Lol.... Good write up very fun to read on a long day at work... Thanks

 

We're not talking about a completely radical vehicle, here. Maybe some nice, different sheetmetal, but almost identical to the MDX chassis- and powertrain-wise.

Why did they add leather to the dash? They make up for it in the MSRP (over the MDX).

To make a statement? Maybe from a glance outside, but it's no big statement under the skin. It's a "we want to look like we're making a statement without really doing so".

We're not talking about a GT-R here. That's a unique chassis, powertrain, and vehicle. Acura's not in that realm as of now. Maybe if the reborn NSX arrives, some parts can be shared to make more high-performance vehicles with platform sharing? Until then, one can only assume that Acura would lose $ by putting "a ridiculously large engine in it". Do you want to pay X6 $ for a ZDX, or would you rather pay 25%+ less for an engaging drive and unique looking vehicle, inside and out?

It's easy to question the powertrain of the ZDX without looking, or even thinking, about the financials involved. Are we not just coming out of the "Great Recession", or what? Acura is not BMW...they were just trying to make a cheaper X6, so why complain?

 

Acura and Acura buyers are inherently conservative; the effort on the ZDX, along with its new design philosophy which is best seen in the ZDX (not, however, in the current TL) was an attempt to move Acura's ability to garner attention from a certain segment of the auto buying public that might not have considered an Acura before. If one doesn't try, one can neither succeed nor fail.

The automotive press, meanwhile, sits on their collective butts from the back seat and says "should have" or "would have". They never complain about the inability to get into the back of a Porsche or comment that the back seat of a 3 series BMW is cramped for a 6 foot person, but knock Acura for its back seat entry and exit. Smart people learn from their mistakes; the rest repeat hitting their heads.

Meanwhile, the entire magazine publishing industry, including the auto magazines, are about to become extinct thanks to Nooks and Kindles etc. I don't see them looking over their shoulder to notice that their hind legs are already stuck in the La Brea Tar Pits of history while they roar their dissatisfaction with what is instead of what might have been. Sic transit gloria.

 

^^
+1

 

My friend is 6'2" and while he has a little trouble getting in, he has learned on how to get in without hitting his head. On numerous occasions he confirmed that he is plenty comfortable in the back seat. The only problem is if I hit a bump big enough then his head is at a risk of bumping the headliner


I also noticed with people in general, we are almost never satisfied. People complained before about acura's bland styling, when they redesigned the grille to stand out more- now it's too extreme.

 

I was trying to explain the point of the article. You guys are either missing the point or are ignoring it. Though I guess saying it's acuras version of the X6 is the best way to put it.

Personally, I think the ZDX should not have been built. A waste of resources that completely goes against honda and acuras philosophy.

As for the design, I think its obvious that they went from "somewhat bland" to "IN YOUR FACE OUR CAR LOOKS LIKE A METAL ARROW" in one generation with no real transition. You can't force change down everyones throat. As a result, either directly or indirectly, sales may have suffered. There's a reason they're "refining" it, aka toning it down.

 

As for the back seat, i'm 5'9" with more leg than torso.. and if I sit straight in the back seat, my head hits the roof. I need to slouch in order not to hit the roof. Not sure how your 6'2" friend sits comfortably.

 

Bear in mind that the Cadillac SRX is outselling the Acura MDX and the Caddy CTS is outselling both the Acura TL and Lexus ES combined. Cadillac's miraculous comeback and the success of their "Art & Science" design language shows that sometimes a company must go in a radical design direction to differentiate itself.

The ZDX is an interesting (albeit somewhat impractical) concept. It was never meant to be a major seller and I hope Acura takes the lessons learned from the ZDX and applies it to future models.

One more thing: I've had a 2005 Acura RL for nearly 6 years now. I remember when that car first came out, people complained that the design was plain and boring. Now, some of those same people complain that the ZDX is too radical. Can some folks ever be pleased?

 

Despite the negativity of this article, reading between the lines, it seems that the only thing the ZDX is missing is a more powerful engine.

Despite the fact that the ZDX already equals the FX35 and X6 3.0 in power (the only cars in it's class despite the articles mention of MB, Audi, Cadillac, and Lexus), I wonder if Motor Trend bothered to consider the fact that the next more powerful engine in this class starts at around $11,000 more than the starting price of the ZDX (FX50)? Or the X6 5.0 which costs a mere $22,000 more than the starting price of the ZDX. For Infiniti, the FX50 is a $15,000 premium over the FX 35 and for BMW that X6 5.0 is a $10,000 premium over the 3.0. Would the ZDX's impracticalities be accepted as it is in the FX and X6 if it had a 400 hp engine, even with a $15,000 price hike?

 

From the latest issue of Motor Trend:


Long Term Update 4: 2010 Acura ZDX
From the April, 2011 issue of Motor Trend / By Allyson Harwood / Photography by Motor Trend Staff
|



Click to view GalleryThe ZDX has proved itself to be a sporty, reliable conveyance for long drives. One staffer recently drove it to Las Vegas to cover a trade show, "and was pleasantly surprised by this crossover. Good acceleration and excellent passing power, but it could use a little more juice or a little less weight. I really like the way this thing handles, and I like the ride. It wasn't nearly as rough as I'd feared. I found the seats comfortable and never needed to stop and stretch. But things do get noisy at speed. Also made it home from Vegas on a single tank, with a good amount of fuel left. Getting inside is a little tricky; how exactly do you get into the rear seats without hitting your head?"

According to executive editor Edward Loh, "The only thing missing is breathtaking forward velocity."







Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...#ixzz1G2f5TnHS

 

Factory bolt-on supercharger for $5,000 for the 3.7L TL, MDX, RL and ZDX to add extra 50-75hp. Everyone is happy.

 

It occurs to me that the ZDX would have been the perfect model (at least in the current line-up) for Acura to try offering a really breathtaking Type-S or even Type-R variant. I'm talking a $10K-$15K price premium over the base model with performance and looks to match.

Don't get me wrong--I know they'd sell very few of them. But it would address the main complaints, create the "halo" effect, and perhaps let some performance versions begin again to trickle into the rest of the line-up.

 

So, in short, it needs more testosterone. Wasn't the designer named Michelle?

 

article hit the nail right smack dab in the middle of the head... everything he said is the reason I never considered actually buying one, and is the reason i still read through these forums once in a while.