Howdy, Stranger!

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





Acura RDX vs Infiniti EX35

2

Comments

  • lynn3808lynn3808 Posts: 2
    the turbo is to die for. When you get the bill when it fails and Acura has no idea why it failed. Just wonder how many miles the new one will take before it fails. The originial failed at 50,000 miles. I wasn't looking for a throw away car when I bought an acura. very disappointing.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    How many "boy-racers" see the turbo label and go out and buy one with too high expectations..? And then begin "modding" it with CPE CAI's, Hondata reflash and such and then question why the turbo fails taking the engine along for the "ride".
  • mayoarceomayoarceo Posts: 2
    I would choose the EX35 hands-down. Why? Well let me tell you a little thing that irks me about Acura.. When you buy an Acura you are basically buying a gussied up Honda... Don't get me wrong, I love Honda, I drive a 2007 Honda Civic SI. Anything Acura is based off a Honda platform. The RDX comes from the CRV and the CRV comes from the Civic. Now I know what you are thinking, the Infiniti is a gussied up Nissan... Well i'll tell you why it is different. All of Infiniti's new cars are all truly sporty(except the QX56) because they are derived from the 350Z platform... So the EX35 comes from the G35, which comes from the 350Z. Seriously, I dont think the RDX is the same value as the EX35. And besides the EX35 is faster, gets better MPG, handles better, best safety rating in the segment, and I know someone will bring up Honda reliability but the EX35's engine has been a top engine across segments for the past 14 years. In the end where is your money best spent? A crossover derived from a RWD sports car or a crossover derived from an economy sedan?
  • depdep Posts: 79
    Toyota, Nissan, and Honda all share a huge % of components between their regular and lux brands. No question there.

    However, just to pick a nit, the RDX was designed first with the CRV inheriting many of the components, etc in its redesign.

    Now, if you really think that all the Infinity models are "derived from the 350Z platform" then you have a world of disappointment coming your way. They pair up with their Nissan counterparts just like Acura and Lexus cars do.
  • depdep Posts: 79
    I am not sure what RDX you drove but the one I drive is not under powered at all. Once you take some time to learn how the systems work together in real world driving you get a smooth, powerful, and very responsive SUV that drives like a TL. It corners like it is glued to the road and can play on the expressways with the best of them.

    That said, I don't expect the RDX to drive like a sports car not do I often have the need to 'floor it' so if one is expecting that you might have a different take on the RDX.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    All that you have said is very true but the really important point you missed was that Infiniti's are traditionally RWD or at least, for R/AWD, built on a RWD "base". I have heard that at least one of the upcoming Acura sedan is to be RWD....

    Finally...!!

    Acura is current trying to climb one of the last steps on the ladder to being a fully upscale (read: knowledgeable and/or experienced buyer/driver) automotive manufacturer.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    What I actually said was that the RDX is UNDERPOWERED until the turbo boost comes on line.

    In order to accomodate the turbo boost pressure level once it "arrives" the engine is detuned/derated (<10:1 CR) from the "norm" for non-turbo DFI engines. A normal I4 with DFI (12:1 compression ratio) of this displacement could probably "loaf" along at a much lower RPM, fewer frictional losses.

    Another aspect of the detuning/derating design is it puts more "WASTE" energy in the exhaust manifold....notice how quickly the turbo spools up....and KILLS your MPG.

    RDX and CX-7 "turbo" equals POOR engineering compromises.

    Therefore the abismal hwy MPG.
  • depdep Posts: 79
    I did misread then. My bad.

    However, I don't consider 22 MPG (what I get in real hwy driving) on an SUV of that size and performance to be 'abysmal'. If it had the normal 2.4 making 170HP or something then I would be looking for more MPG. But for a 240HP/260ft/lb engine I think it is doing OK. Not amazing but not at all abysmal.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    Abysmal in the sense that the larger V6 in my '01 AWD RX300 easily gets 22 hwy. And I understand the newer RX350 does even better than that.

    I would have thought the smaller I4 would (should..??) do better since most hwy use would be off-boost.
  • depdep Posts: 79
    I will give you that the Toy 3.5l is an amazing engine. I recall when they replaced the 3l in the Avalon with the 3.5 the power went way up but so did the MPG! It is smooth and enjoyable under all conditions.
  • Read ANY major automotive press review of any Infiniti except the the QX56 and it will say they share platforms with the G coupe and sedan, both of which share the same Front Mid ship Rear wheel drive architecture as the 350z. Only exception is the addition of All Wheel Drive in certain models. Take a look at the vehicle specs, their wheelbases and widths are nearly identical only different by a couple of inches. No Nissan other than the 350z shares any of the architecture with the Infiniti cars. Even the engines on the Nissan cars use the VQ35 while the Infiniti cars use the dual intake VQ35HR not to mention the engines in the Nissans (Altima, Maxima, Murano) are mounted horizontally and they are all front wheel drive.
  • Hey there!

    you sound knowledgeable -- well back in June I posted the question - which one is best for me -- the RDX or the EX and now I am considering the EX again. Would you comment please on the car in terms of MPG and its reliability? I will pay up to 36,000 for afully loaded car that performs up to par. Was considering a "used" LEXUS 400 but they want about 37,000 and there aren't very good rates for finance, yet. So for a car with 40,000 on it - am holding off. I will go and test the EX again to compare but a need a car soon. Please let me know your thoughts about it --- can't make out whether it's a good car or not from all these posts!!!
    did you look into RX 400 hybrid, too expensive? used are available now and there are many out there -- new tech and all "new generation" as they love to say.

    thanks!!
  • docrwdocrw Posts: 94
    The EX is a great car if you or anyone else you know never plans to sit in the back seat. It is beautiful from the driver's perspective and if you are single or have no children or friends it would be a great car. Just on aesthetics alone the dash and front passenger compartment easily beat just about any other small SUV.

    The problem is that it really is not an SUV or even a CUV. I looked at one yesterday and thought, why did they even bother to build this car. I have never even heard of a car with 4 doors having only 28 inches of rear seat legroom. The X3, which is 3 inches shorter has 7 inches more rear legroom and 12 more cubic feet of storage. They ride on an identical 110 inch wheel base, so where did BMW find all that extra space? Or, more to the point, how did the Infiniti designers squander all that space?

    Personally, to me it just seems like a G37 hatchback with less rear legroom, the G37 coupe has 29.7 inches of rear legroom. Not to belabor the point, but even a BMW 135i coupe, which is almost a foot shorter, has 32 inches of rear legroom. I think they should have just dropped the pretense and made it a 3 door hatchback, but that's not considered luxury to American buyers.
  • I just bought an 08 rdx today. I did test drive the ex35, loved the handling. But as noted before the rear seat is cramped. But even worse was the visibility out the back window. I felt like I'd never be able to change lanes in that car.
  • We are considering a RDX but comfortable seats for long trips are a must - would anyone know what the seats are like? Righr now we have a 2005 3.0 Outback and the seats are quite uncomfortable on long trips. We are giving back the Outback soon (lease is up) and looking for safety, AWD, and good seats! Suggestions? Thinking about the 2009 Forester XT, the RDX and the Toyota Venza.

    Thank you!
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    Buy the vehicle you want and the seats from ebay.com
  • My husband who usually drives a Volvo S80 (because the seats are comfortable) drove the rdx from upstate NY to NYC (and back) and had no problems with the seats.
  • >>>You appear to be so knowledgeable - would you be able to comment on the Subaru Forester turbo? We are undecided between the two and FE is a key factor. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, sorry, Subaru simply doesn't warrant my attention.

    Any manufacturer who touts the safety of AWD (AWD simply does not address the issue of safety) and patently UNSAFE "symetrical" [SIC] AWD to boot, doesn't warrant anyone's attention IMMHO.

    Compare the SH-AWD system with ANY AWD(symetrical)/FWD/F-AWD system to see the shortcoming of all these "other" systems.

    Care to be a little less Honda Fanboi and a little more specific? Are you at all familiar with the Subaru VTD drive system and VDC systems? We'll see how adding clutch packs to the rear axle holds up for the 150,000+ miles that the Subaru drive trains have demonstrated for 10 years.

    You don't think that AWD delivers a safety benefit in low traction conditions?
  • Got some more information on the RDX drive system and claims that it is the equivalent of any of Subarus three AWD systems, or that of the Acura RL is way off base.

    According to the Wiki on SH AWD, "SH-AWD in the Acura RDX and Acura MDX use a default power split of 90% to the front and 10% to the rear. Like the unit in the RL, both can power the rear wheels with up to 70% of the engine torque. With this variant of SH-AWD, there is no acceleration device. Instead, the rear differential is constantly overdriven by 1.7 percent. During straight line performance, that difference is scrubbed off by the clutch packs. When cornering, the difference is used to overdrive the outside rear wheel."

    This is similar to the AWD system used on automatic shift Subarus in the 90's, with the addition of the clutch packs on each side. It might be more accurate to call it a "three wheel drive and temporary four wheel drive system." The Acura RL system uses a planetary gear set and is likely far more durable as well as being more efficient and capable. Compared to Subarus VTD system or the DCCD system in the WRX STi, it's tractor technology.
  • Thank you! It looks like wwest seems to be a bit of a Honda fanboy with little knowledge of how different AWD systems work. The SH-AWD system is more FWD than anything. All you really need to do is read the Wiki article, it sums it up. Not to mention various magazines covering SH-AWDs inner workings before it's release. The thing that scares me is 150,000 miles down the road. Those electronic packs out back taking all that excess abuse. SH-AWD falls short of what an AWD system is in my mind. Why is it missing a center differential. While my Subaru out in the driveway is utilizing a Torsen differential. When the snow falls this year I know I'm gonna be far happier than if I were driving an RDX. I know this because my good friend has one. I took it out last winter and it really just doesn't feel controlled to me in the snow. It doesn't feel as "on cue" as my Subaru does. I've also been in the auto industry as an employee and enthusiast for some time. What it comes down to for me in terms of AWD system I would like, it's Subaru Symmetrical or Audi Quattro (the true Tersen Quattro systems.)
2
Sign In or Register to comment.