Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

2013 Acura RDX



  • mrso1mrso1 Posts: 4
    I'm assuming this is normal I get the same effect as described by you on my 2013 AWD RDX. And by what's it saying word by word, I'm assuming it's just cutting off the fuel when you are coasting just enough to keep the engine on. But this is just my assumption, and i'm assuming combined with the variable cylinder it makes it more noticeable for those who have driven cars that doesn't have this. It's after all to save on the gas mileage, I guess it's just something we have to get use to. Anyways, I went and did a little research and found this on the camry forum from edmunds who was experiencing similar effects, hope it is helpful:

    "#93 of 293 Re: 2011 transmission etc [puru] by wwest
    Jan 20, 2011 (11:23 am)
    Replying to: puru (Jan 19, 2011 8:43 pm)
    It used to be, with automatic transmissions, that when you lifted your foot from the gas pedal and the car was still in motion, "coastdown" mode, the engine was prevented from stalling via, primarily, feeding it just enough gas to keep it running well into the idle range. The early torque converter's often did not provide enough "back-torque", compression braking, to keep the engine turning fast enough not to stall out.

    That has now changed with the advent of more "robust", heavier duty, torque converter lockup clutches. Nowadays the engine/transaxle controlling ECU can engage the lockup clutch, eliminating the torque converter "slippage", and then sequentually downshift the transaxle as roadspeed declines. That serves to keep the engine turning over at or above idle. So when fuel feed is restored the engine simply "restarts". Once roadspeed declines enough, too much, the lockup clutch is disengaged, fuel feed is restored, and in some instances the transaxle is even upshifted. That's most typically when you get that forward "lurch" seat of the pants feeling.

    So yes, you now have more effective engine compression braking during coastdown periods. But for FWD vehicles not so much as to really threaten directional control loss due to tire slip/skid in most instances. For FWD and F/awd vehicles the coastdown fuel cut technique shift pattern, "downshift" pattern, becomes a bit more aggressive if the driver applies the brakes during the coastdown fuel cut technique period of use.

    The driver's use of the brakes "implies" knowledge that the roadbed traction is sufficient to support the more aggressive engine braking downshift pattern.

    With all these variables it's easy to see why one only notices the effect 6 out of ten times.

    So go ahead and save gas by fully lifting the pressure on the gas pedal and trust that the computer will prevent the engine from fully will. "
  • mrso1mrso1 Posts: 4
    edited June 2012
    I love the rdx but the mpg varies wildly from what acura has stated. On local city roads i get an avg about 15 mpg and on the highway with enough consistency and being conservative at around 80 mph i can get a little above 30 mpg. Unfortunately I live in NYC and well i should've thought about leaning more towards the city mpg. But honestly this car is a gas killer in the city imho. Anyone have the same impressions as i do, or is it just me? I do use 93 octane gas on my car.
  • dibbyddibbyd Posts: 10
    I don't have an RDX so I can't test this, but I read on another Acura forum that in the TL if you push the ignition button while you are stopped and the car is not in Park (not sure if it needs to be in Neutral), it will leave the electronics on, but turn off the engine. Give it a try and let us know if that works.
  • @dibbyd That worked!

    I put the car in Neutral and pushed the ignition button and the car switched off but accessory mode stayed on. Awesome. I can't thank you enough. Maybe I will keep this car ;-)
  • htxrdxhtxrdx Posts: 2
    I've noticed the same. I'm only on my second tank of gas but first tank was about 17mpg - mainly city driving and also a lot of sitting in the car with it turned on, not moving while I play with all the features and get stuff set up.
  • Similar experience here. Too early to draw conclusions.

    First tank city driving averaged 15mph and 14.5 mpg.

    Second tank mostly city driving so far averaging 20mph and 20.3 mpg.

    I'm also going to do the math myself rather than trust the computer.
  • "Entertaining" is not one of the first words I'd use to describe the new RDX.
  • Stever@EdmundsStever@Edmunds YooperlandPosts: 38,931
    How about "spammy"?

    Guess you would have had to have seen the post Kyfdx removed. :shades:
  • kyfdx%40Edmundskyfdx%40Edmunds Posts: 25,876
    Quick on the draw... ;)

    Moderator - Prices Paid, Lease Questions, SUVs

  • dibbyddibbyd Posts: 10
    Glad to help! I actually brought a TL SH-AWD Tech home tonight for an extended test drive and was able to verify the advice. I'm taking it back tomorrow after work and *hoping* to pick up an RDX Tech for another extended test drive. Unfortunately, my salesman told me when I picked up the TL that he didn't think they'd let me take an RDX overnight as they don't have many Tech's and they are selling them so quickly. Oh well, if that doesn't work out he said I could take one for half a day to drive around.
  • pdlpsherpdlpsher Posts: 4
    Could the coasting be caused by a on-demand AC and/or alternator? The 2013 BMW has this feature to save gas.
  • I'm no engineer. I'm just having trouble understanding how this saves gas. Playing around with it, there are occasions when I'm coasting downhill and by either switching into neutral or using the paddle shifters to upshift, the RPMs drop, the car speeds up, and the real-time MPG meter shoots up dramatically.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    edited June 2012
    During coast down periods with the DBW accelerator pedal fully released the fuel flow to the engine is COMPLETELY shut off, NO voltage to the fuel injectors. To keep the engine turning over such that it doesn't stall until/once fuel flow is restored the transmission is downshifted, sequentially downshifted, as road speed declines.

    Once the roadspeed is too low, <10MPH, to sustain a non-stall engine RPM the transmission is upshifted (feel that "lurch", surge, forward?) and now will not downshift into 1st until/unless the vehicle comes to a full and complete stop.

    As a result of FWD and F/awd vehicle's patently unsafe nature in wintertime adverse roadbed conditions the effect might be reduced or even disabled with OAT near or below freezing. Basically the same as the FWD hybrids like the Prius, INSTANT disabling of front wheel driven regenerative braking once even the slightest level of wheelskid/slip is detected.

    If the alternator, for "regen" purposes, is added to the coastdown load all the better.
  • I appreciate that you're trying to explain what happens when I lift my foot from the accelerator, but I still fail to understand why it's more fuel efficient to slow the car down.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    Given that YOUR input (or lack of, actually) is that you wish to coastdown to a lower speed, which would conserve the most fuel..?

    1.) A long coastdown distance with the engine fueled at idle the full time.


    2.) A (slightly) shorter coastdown distance with ZERO fuel consumed...?
  • OK I guess I get it. I look at RPMs, but I guess that isn't a proxy for fuel consumed.
  • twwilliamtwwilliam Posts: 17
    edited June 2012
    I love this 2013 RDX Tech, especially compared to the 2009 RDX Tech I traded in. To some the new ride is boring, not me. It is a by far smoother and quieter and with better gas mileage (up to 6 mpg thus far on both local & highway).
    I have been driving 4WD & AWD vehicles for 50 years and very much like everything about the 2013 RDX Tech, EXCEPT for the awful new hard drive phone system, especially when compared to the 2009 RDX or my wife's 2012 MDX. The new phone system only allows 20 voice tag numbers, compared to 50 for the other Auras we have owned. I feel sorry for traveling salesmen who need to access their clients phone numbers. Then to boot, one cannot enter the main phonebook once the car is moving. The same holds true for the navigation system. My wife cannot change the system when she is the passenger with me. One has to find a safe place to pull off the road to properly access the phone or navigation system. This could cause more dangerous situations than the so called safety features to protect the public.

    Also no remote start is available from ACURA, which may be a blessing in disguise as the "factory system" in our 2912 MDX is the worst I've used in over 20 years of using after market systems in our vehicles. The after market system in our previous Acuras and a friends 2005 RL are far superior.

    Perhaps the solution for those considering the new 2013 is to not purchase the Tech package. One could save a lot of money, even after installing after market Bluetooth & remote start systems.
  • stickguystickguy Posts: 13,584
    as to bluetooth, the base car still has that, right? might be a different set up not having the hard drive set up, but it still has it standard.

    2013 Acura RDX (wife's), 2007 Volvo S40 (when daughter lets me see it), 2000 Acura TL (formerly son's, now mine again), and new Jetta SE (son's first new car on his own dime!)

  • stickguystickguy Posts: 13,584
    for a new car for my wife. After almost 17 years in a minivan, she is ready to downsize. We still need something with reasonable utility for hauling stuff around (vacations, and occasional bulky object). So, a small SUV/CUV was a natural fit.

    looked at most of the usual suspects (MX5/CRV/new focus/Santa Fe/Subaru outback). All had their plusses and minuses, and any would likely do the job, but nothing that really "wowed" her. CRV she liked the first time we saw/drove, largely because it was very similar to her Odyssey. I was indifferent to it.

    Of that bunch, the Outback actually came out on top. I really liked it, but she felt it looked like a (dirty word coming!) "wagon". we stopped to look again and she got over that. Can also get for a very good price.

    But, after a few looks, she still is fixated on the RDX. She just really likes it, and was pleased after driving on roads today. So, of course she picked the most expensive option (well, the BMW X3 was the most expensive, but we eliminated that!).

    It certainly is a nice car. And very quick with this engine. Steering to me was overly light, but I'm sure could get used to it.

    so, it will come down to price vs. cache. She just seems to want something fancy/cool/upscale for a change (things the Subaru doesn't really have).

    The outback actually has every feature the RDX has, other than push button start (which I don't really like) and is roomier inside. And of course, cheaper, with a much better AWD system.

    Actually, I am debating still just getting a FWD model to save money. We never really needed AWD with the van, and I don't expect that to change. Pretty much would only be for resale, but we anticipate keeping whatever we get for a long, long time, so not really and issue.

    2013 Acura RDX (wife's), 2007 Volvo S40 (when daughter lets me see it), 2000 Acura TL (formerly son's, now mine again), and new Jetta SE (son's first new car on his own dime!)

  • carteachcarteach Posts: 179
    I test drove the new RDX, after that the CR-V and after that the Outback. All I can say is I wish I could afford the RDX. Coming from a 2006 TL I loved its power, weight and steering. Instead I'll be deciding between the CR-V and the Outback.
Sign In or Register to comment.