Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Acura MDX 2007
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Now if Acura chose to go to a shorter gearing with a wide spread (in other words, a 6-speed automatic), the engine will show its true character.
Speaking of RL, many dismiss it as lacking performance, but it isn't a slow car! Compared to V8s, sure.
Compared to the TL 6-speed as well. The dealer keeps giving me one when I take my TL in for service thinking I'll "trade-up". If I do, it will be to a 550i.
On the MDX, in addition to the gearing, I believe it's relatively slow feel also has to do with the nature of Honda VTEC engines producing their power high in the rev range.
0-60 in upper 6 seconds is quick for a midsize luxury sedan with AWD.
Now if they could lower the interest rate on the lease...
It didn't feel or drive any better then my Subaru B9 Tribeca and i have touchscreen NAV in that.
it doesn't have certain things my B9 does like puddle lights but will have some stuff my B9 doesn't.
i think my wife is getting an 06 TL now instead of 07 because she can get a much better deal obviously, so i dont think its going to work out to help me get a better deal on MDX if we get both at once from same dealer. i mean i'm sure it will a little, but shes already getting below invoice i think and MDX is still too new. if i can get invoice i'd do it but might not happen so i'll wait. better time to buy would be in summer when noones getting suv and when the 08 comes out, the 07's will be discounted. its just never a smart time to buy when its first year model or first year of redesign when it just came out.
they're going to try to get you to pay top dollar and then 6mo later you will see ppl getting same vehicle for much less and kick yourself for being impatient. only reason i'm considering it , is depending on how good of a deal they can do on two vehicles but like i said i dont think its going to puch the 06 tl price any lower then we can already get without getting the 07 mdx. if we can get below invoice on the tl as we already are and then invoice on the mdx as part of 2 vehicle deal then maybe, but even then i'm not totally sure and plus theres a good chance no dealer offers that.
anyway, they might improve/change some things for the 08 mdx they always do the second year of a new model or redesign
Don't I wish. The 550i 6-speed is about as quick from 60-120 as the TL 6-speed is from 0-60. They aren't in the same state, let alone zip code or neighborhood. In the real world, a friend's 193 hp RWD 328cic 5-speed will match my FWD TL 6-speed unless I perfectly modulate the clutch letout to avoid wheel hop and spin. The 360hp/360 ft lb 550i would crush the TL towing a boat.
Regarding the MDX and RL, both are quickness hampered by the fact that the power is high in the rev band and, compared to say BMW, Mercedes, and even (gasp) Lexus, the automatic transmissions of Acura are a (very) weak link in their overall performance. Way too much slush in that slushbox. At least that's my opinion based upon our 2005 MDX and my drives of other Acura automatics.
Bodble: No brother in law at the dealership. I had expressed passing interest in the RL and it happens that the GM has an RL executive demo that has been available my last two times in for service. But they are not selling well, as everyone knows.
Regarding the MDX and RL, both are quickness hampered by the fact that the power is high in the rev band and, compared to say BMW, Mercedes, and even (gasp) Lexus, the automatic transmissions of Acura are a (very) weak link in their overall performance.
Two things addressed here. One the engine, the other transmission. I will say that Acura's choice to go with relatively tall gearing doesn't help make a case for all those strong horses coming from its V6 engines. It is a problem with RL, and I predicted the same couple of months ago with MDX that people won't "feel" power eventhough it is there.
Your conclusion on engine's powerband, however, is wrong. Compare MDX's 300 HP @ 6200 rpm to X5's 260 HP @ (I'm assuming, 6200 rpm). Peak torque? It gets worse for BMW. 225 lb-ft at peak just doesn't compare to MDX's 275 lb-ft. In fact, the Acura V6 likely produces more than 225 lb-ft just off idle. Don't even think about comparing what happens from 1500 rpm onwards.
MDX's V6 guarantees more power than X5's Inline-6 at *any* engine speed. Now only if Acura would implement a six speed to go with its fantastic engines, will the powerplants in vehicles like RL and MDX get the deserved appreciation.
BTW, even 2005 MDX was delivering more torque at lower rpm than any of its BMW, Mercedes or Lexus competition, much less in the mid-range or higher rpm.
07 MDX - 300HP/6000; 275lb-ft/5000
07 X5 (3.0) - 260HP/6600; 225lb-ft/2750
I guess the torque has more to do with the actual acceleration than the horsepower. Rarely on normal driving conditions that a person would have to rev the RPM up to 5000 or 6000. So if you could get maximum torque on lower rpm, you would get the sensation that the vehicle has more pick-up and go.
As for the MDX, you would only get max HP and torque when revving at higher RPM so you really do not get the power on normal driving conditions, typically at 2500-3000 RPM. That is why it feels sluggish.
X5 has the Drive Sport, "DS" mode that will keep the RPM up higher. Therefore, acceleration and power is maintained.
Now, MDX could use shorter gearing. THAT is the problem. Acura went for more speed in each gear than thrust for all that horsepower. And people feel thrust more than speed.
BMW AT first gear overall drive ratio (4.17 * 3.64): 15.17
Acura AT first gear overall drive ratio (2.70 * 4.53): 12.23
BMW has 24% shorter gearing than Acura (in first gear). That is a huge difference. I can only wish at this point to see Acura being as aggressive. If it is, then that V6 is going to feel like a true V8 in terms of thrust.
I'm sure BMW is preparing that bi-turbo 3.0L for the X5 as soon as they can ramp up production.
Again, for the heft and to utilize the power, MDX (and RL) will benefit immensely from a new 6AT that would provide a nice gearing span while allowing for short low gears. For some reason, Acura has taken a slow route to adding a cog. I hope it is for a good reason not just because they are content with the 5AT.
BUT, getting back to a previous suggestion that German "horses" are bigger than Japanese ones, I have to say the actual acceleration of our 2005 MDX is pretty UNimpressive for what its claimed power ratings are. There certainly does not seem to be the "90% of peak torque" at 2,300 rpm.
We didn't buy the MDX to take it to the track. And we are reasonably satisfied with it's fuel efficiency and overall performance. But when Honda/Acura had to restate virtually all of their horsepower ratings on every model downwards in 2005, it gives me little confidence in ANY numbers they publish. According to another Edmunds forum, the new BMW 335i, rated at 300hp/300 ft lbs, has been dyno'd to show MORE than that level of power "at the wheels". Someone joked that it would be advertised as a 400hp/400 ft lb engine by Acura. Unfortunately that's not probably as much of a joke as intended.
If you are looking for performance, it's important to test drive cars using your own buttmeter. There are different standards of ethics when it comes to manufacturer's claims.
And unless I am missing it, you’re disputing my numbers. But then, they aren’t really mine! They are official. You may choose to not believe official words like “Broad and flat torque curve with 95-percent of peak output available from 2500 to 5500 rpm” which comes from Honda’s website for 2006 MDX when the V6 was rated 250 lb-ft @ 3500 rpm to 5000 rpm. But that would be your opinion. And opinions don’t count as facts.
You haven’t gotten my point on the discussion about gearing yet. MDX engine has more power and torque than BMW that you think. It was true in 2005, and it is true now. Prove it otherwise. Butt-meter doesn’t count as it is affected, in this case, only by gearing.
As for the stronger horses argument , it is something I have been laughing about for 5 years after getting into one of the first arguments with somebody after C&D had a comparison test between CL-S and 330Ci. People ignored 150 lb weight difference, launch difficulties with a front driver in a drag run, and suggested that 230 HP 330Ci had stronger horses since it beat 260 HP CL-S. Well, sure it did in 0-60 run (5.8s versus 5.9s). BUT, why did those stronger horses ran out of breath in quarter mile, and better yet, in rolling start acceleration (6.5s for 330Ci and 6.2s for CL-S)?
10-15% shorter gearing in 2007 MDX will make a huge difference. Again, engine has plenty of oomph, its just that Acura gave it a docile gear ratio.
Of course, the results will vary depending on whether you use a chassis or a hub-style dyno. I've seen the phenomenon play out with both.
As far as the MDX is concerned, Robertsmx is right about the torque curve. Something like 95% was available from below 2,500 rpms. In fact, the old spec sheets read "245 lbs-ft @ 3000-5000 rpm" They didn't list a single rpm point because it was flat for 2K revs.
However, as the MDX gained HP in 2003 and again in 2004 (pre SAE changes), the torque peak rose a bit to 3,500-5,000 rpms. A shift of 500 rpms isn't going to change the character of the engine radically, but, in the interest of accuracy, that's what they published.
When the SAE changes were made, the total output changed slightly, but the HP and TQ peaks did not.
So, if the engine's torque curve is so formidable, why doesn't it feel like it'll jump off the line? I've got three possible answers for that.
1. The throttle tip in is not very aggressive. Probably to save fuel during the EPA city cycle. However, if you push the go pedal all the way, tires will bark and trees will blur.
2. As mentioned above, gearing. Probably for the same reason as above.
3. DBW. Which, I suppose, is related to #1. The drive by wire system employed by Acura in all cars but the NSX seems to have a nasty bit of lag in it.
The DBW doesn't bother me ordinarily, but when I switch back to my wife's 2001 TL (mechanical pedal), I can feel it. With my normal, conservative driving style, the TL actually feels more spirited. However, if I get on MDX with a heavy foot, the 3.5L makes its torque advantage known.
Anyway, I expect the 2007 MDX will be more of the same - for best results, press the pedal with authority. I don't consider it a bad thing. When I look at how poor the fuel economy is for the BMWs, I'll accept the compromise.
That is what most if not all people judge a car by, "feel".
We have seen that with Honda being one of the first automakers choosing to re-rate its engine to follow new standards when it wasn’t required, even though it played against a marketing strategy.... Where was BMW?
Excuse me? Acura/Honda didn't do ANYTHING by charitable choice. Their engines had been rated overly aggressivly and, under the new standards, HAD to be downgraded. BMW used more conservative standards all along and didn't have to downgrade a single engine rating. As a matter of fact, even the Big Three only had a few engines that didn't meet their published ratings under the new standards. Spin that any way you want, but the fact is not a single other manufacturer had to make anywhere near the fleetwide horsepower revisions that Honda/Acura needed to make under the new standards. It appears to me that Acura chose the most liberal measurement method and got caught with their pants down.
As far as the MDX performance, if the gear ratios really are killing the performance to the extent you claim, shame on Acura. I am quick to criticize the idiot engineers at Chevy that take 7 liters and 400 hp / 400 ft/lbs in the lighter weight Corvette and manage to make it slower than the heavier 911S with "only" 3.8 liters and 355 hp / 295 ft-lbs. The Porsche is so precisely geared as to hit its top speed of 182 at almost exactly redline (7,200 rpm) in 6th gear. Every gear is matched to take over from the previous gear to maximize perfromance. The Corvette can't even manage 5,000 rpm in 6th and actually hits top speed in 4th and 5th. Unfortunately, from what you are saying, Acura's engineers went to the same "stupid is as stupid does" transmission gearing class. Too bad they don't offer the MDX in a 6-speed manual. They seem to know how to do those quite well.
Again, I'm not trying to turn this into a BMW vs. Acura debate. I just want Acura to do a bit better on the engineering front. They proved they could with the S2000 on the Honda side.
Or below for cut and past.
www.acura.ca/assets/pdf/en/brochures/2007_MDX_Brochure_Eng.pdf
It will be nice if you actually elaborated on what was pig headed about my statements.
Acura/Honda didn't do ANYTHING by charitable choice. Their engines had been rated overly aggressivly and, under the new standards, HAD to be downgraded.
Once again, it is your opinion. Nobody HAD to follow the new standard. BMW didn't. Acura/Honda did. How do you explain that? You do know that the new SAE standards were voluntary. Don't you? No its not about charity. I brought it up because you questioned "ethics".
As far as the MDX performance, if the gear ratios really are killing the performance to the extent you claim, shame on Acura.
Yes indeed. Thats something I have been saying all along, and for a while. Not just on Edmunds but on other boards too. Varmint has read my posts in another board on the same topic and related to RL/MDX that I posted couple of months ago. I knew the gearing would become a "marketing issue" since a typical test driver relies more on buttmeter than an overall understanding of how things work together, and how each component plays a role in the overall effect.
Do you think MDX's performance wouldn't be affected at all if it used 10-15% shorter gearing in the lower gears?
It is also my opinion that the problem with MDX is the gear ratio. When I first test-drove the RL (#1 on waiting list), I was disappointed after the testdrive (coming from BMW 540 V8 with ONLY 282hp). The claimed 300hp (now 290hp) was not impressive. Therefore, my decision to pass it on. Acura lost a sale of RL because of the gear ratio (now I know why). It makes the vehicle seem heavy and sluggish offline, which is bad for city driving.
Anyway, I will hold on to my Odyssey until the MDX carries a well-spreaded 6-speed tranny. And, they better start the 1st gear at 3.5+.
Technically, that's not correct.
The new SAE standards require that any NEW engines be rated using the new rules. Existing and old engines were grandfathered under the implementation of the regs. Most all other manufacturers elected not to retest their engines until they receive significant upgrades. Honda and Toyota chose to retest all their engines. That was voluntary.
Having said that, I agree that they were messing with things prior to the rule changes.
My first impression after driving the 07 was that it just seemed a little sluggish, don't get me wrong it's a sporty suv for its size, but perhaps I built it up too much after hearing all the performance claims from Acura, track tuned, etc. I got to drive the 07 pretty hard on the test drive so I had a good feel for it. Smoother than my wife's 03, although my butt dynometer certainly prefers my FX35 off the line every time.
The 07 is a very nice vehicle and it should be sales winner just let the engine be free!
That's exactly Acura's probelm with the RL as far as I am concerned. The initial "hype" in Acura's marketing was all performance oriented. TV spots showed an RL winding through the Bavarian Alps while the narration touted the "300" horsepower engine and world class "super handling" all whell drive. It looked like the RL was going to send BMW's 5-series back to the drawing board.
Well, the RL may be a very nice luxury car and technology showroom for the latest and greatest do-dads from Japan, but it is NOT, in any way shape or form, a serious performance sedan. The performance is ho-hum at best. It is a grossly overweight, bulky car which might beat a RWD 5-series in a rainstorm or snowstorm, but so would an MDX. "Super" handling? Compared to what, a Buick? And it's - oops only 290 hp - engine/transmission is only good for acceleration that barely matches my marketing director's E320 CDI DIESEL (which gets nearly 40 mpg on the highway).
Acura should stop overselling performance until they make a serious commitment to deliver it. Honda did that with the S2000, maybe Acura could borrow from some performance engineers from it's little brother.
Don't they all, from Kia to Mercedes, and everything else in between?! I've never heard a car company hype its model as having "adequate performance". But it's all just advertising & marketing hype. Take it with a grain of salt. Use your own buttmeter to judge.
Your posts have been very amusing. First of all, you don't seem to understand the term "power". Buttmeter isn't the end of it, only a part. 300 HP is 300 HP, no matter how you want to look at it.
That said, it is funny anybody would call a car that can run 0-60 in 6.3s or have a rolling start of 6.9s, and run the quarter mile in 14.8s @ 95 mph as lacking performance. Delivering it all, along with a 0.87 on the skidpad on all-seasons and suspension tuned for comfort. Yes, thats RL for you, and those are numbers from C&D.
Except that Acura's 300 hp is 290 horspeower under the SAE standard. And their 270 hp is 258 hp. Not a huge deal, except when you consider that Acura is now marketing it's 286 hp TL-S at a healthy price premium over the previous TL 6-speed, based primarily upon an extra 28 horspower.
Yes, thats RL for you, and those are numbers from C&D.
That same Car and Driver officially tested a 911S at 0-60 in 4.1 seconds in November, 2004. Later they tested one that had been fully broken in at 3.9 seconds. Porsche didn't run out and change their marketing materials and still list a conservative figure of 4.6 seconds. I'm not disputing C&D's numbers for the RL, just pointing out that if you don't do well by their "reckless abandon" testing methods, heaven help you.
I'll agree with you - "power" is not the issue. Even the single-dimension published performance figures are not worth debating. I've spent some serious seat time in an RL. If you have, and find it to be an exciting to drive sport/performance sedan - quick, nimble, good steering feedback, etc., well, very good for you. I don't. I'd pick it over an E350 4-Matic or A6 AWD for comfort, luxury and technology. But I sure as heck wouldn't pick it over a 550i for performance, or even over a "less powerful" 530i/525i. We'll just have to agree to disagree if you find the RL in the 5 series league relative to driving dynamics and overall performance.
Again, I own a TL 6-speed and like it. Have recommended it to friends and neighbors. Even the (gasp) slushbox automatic version. Not for someone looking for a serious sport sedan, but rather a very well balanced family sedan. I have no trouble recommending the Honda S2000 over the Porsche (base) Boxster based upon performance. However, if (as with the RL) the MDX has performance limitations due to poor gearing ratios and transmission design, their engineers obviously aren't taking performance as seriously as their marketing department.
My God, how many cars do you need?! 4-Runner, M35, Camry, Odyssey. And you want to considering adding the MDX to the stable? :surprise:
But, the primary point of discussion here is, and should be, MDX which is rated 300 HP not 300 HP. Unless you decide to use two different standards for measurement of power. You do realize how power helps, don't you? It is clear that Acura hasn't made MDX a drag racer for the streets doing the quickest 0-30 mph runs. The gearing appears to be done to utilize the available power during highway acceleration.
But, if you push it on a 0-60 run, it just might defy the reading off your buttmeter. I'm expecting the stint in low 7 seconds, reasonably quick for its purpose (its not a track or a drag racer, as far as I see it).
I collect cars for pleasure. I keep those that I love and let go of those of the others within a year or two. I am hesitant to bore you with the list of cars and SUVs I have cycled through in the last 5 years.
Back to the MDX, if Acura rework the gearing (and may be redo the grille), I think it is a worthy and true competitor to the X5, with better reliability and pricing being additional plus.
In my quest for the perfect car, it has been an illusion over the years trying to find the perfect SUV or car. Because it simply does not exist. Lexus sell tons of RX each year even though they are the least fun to drive. But they score high on comfort, luxury and resale value. MDX pricing undercuts X5 by several thousands but probably gives you 9/10ths the driving pleasure of the X5. May be that is just the compromise. From my 20 years of owing all sorts of cars, I have come to realize that you can't always have it all. Our complains about acceleration in the MDX is probably strange to most previous MDX owners that would see the new MDX a huge improvment over its predecessor, which truly I think it is.
And I actually like the grill, and wish Acura were as passionate about exterior styling elements (especially grill) in its other cars, especially RL, RDX and to some extent TSX. Now only if Acura does what seems to win a lot of sales for BMW... competitive lease rates. Not many people "buy" cars in this price class, so lease rates define sales.
Honda/Acura has very powerful V8 used in F1. They don't use it or modify it for mass market because it is against Honda/Acura's "green image" as their CEO said in an interview. Honda is working to release a new bread of Diesel engines (likely start with new Accord) that is much cleaner than what it is today. They are also working on a V10 (why? because CEO said "no V8", the engineers have to improvise...) for the new NSX with 500hp+.
Whether that V10 will be used for top of the line Acura (RL or MDX) is everyone's guess.
http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt2610b.shtml
Curiously, they got significantly slower 0-60 and quarter-mile times than the 2001 (though the exit speed at the 1/4 mile test was the same). A smidge longer braking distance too.
Obviously those are two tests under different conditions years apart. But I thought the 2007 would do better in Motor Week's test. Motor Week's 2001 0-60 time was one of the fastest published. Here's the 2001 test:
http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt2001a.shtml
I should have been clearer.
In May 2004, I purchased my new 2004 TL 6-speed Navi for $31,800 (not including taxes). According to Acura, I was getting a 270 hp engine. The 2007 TL-S, at MSRP, would run me $38,995 for a (really, this time) 286 hp engine. A 23% increase in price.
In January 2005, we purchased a 2005 MDX Touring, Nav/Entertainment for $41,000 (not including taxes). According to Acura, I was getting a 265 hp engine. The 2007 MDX at MSRP would be $48,465. An 18% increase in price.
In both cases, the 2007 vehicles are being promoted as significant increases in performance. In the case of the TL, the difference is barely measurable. It's still FWD and you can add all the horsepower you want to it and the returns in real performance will be minimal.
In the case of the MDX, it does appear that the 2007 redesign offers better handling, a better AWD system, etc. But, at least according to Motorweek, the real performance out of the 300 hp engine in a lighter MDX only "matches" the 3.0 liter 225 hp X5.
Let's leave it at this: I bought both of our Acura's on the basis that they were the best balance of vehicle attirbutes and price value at the time. I still feel that way. At some point in the near future, when the 2007's are selling at or near invoice, they may provide a similar price/value relationship. But certainly not at MSRP and certainly not justified by significantly better performance.
As for the RL, I can only say that it's getting the sales it deserves (or doesn't as the case is).
My 545 lease is up in August 2008. At that time, if Acura has put in parking sensors front and rear, changed the console compartment to opening away from the driver, and the car is selling at maximum, invoice; I will take a look. (I've given up on expecting real wood.)
With all the competition out there, and the perceived lack of prestige for the Acura name, invoice seems to be its eventual destiny.
That said, every first drive I've read commends the new MDX for being faster and more stable on the track than V6-powered X5. Only the Porsche Cayenne matched it for overall track performance. If that's not sportee, then what is?
At the same time, the MDX rides better and offers a great deal of technology and luxury for a whole lot less money. Only a small percentage of the market wants a full-blown sports SUV. The goodness of the MDX is that it strikes a good balance between sport, utility, and luxury. Judging it solely on one of the those categories is IMO an exercise in tunnel vision.
That balance is why the old MDX out-sold the X5 and Infiniti FX by a ratio of more than 2 to 1.