Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Acura RDX
sockpuppet1969
Member Posts: 308
in Acura
I saw the photo of the upcoming Acura RDX in the August issue of Car and Driver. They report that it will be powered by a 200hp 4-cyl engine with Honda's IMA hybrid technology. It will be a 2006 model year vehicle on sale in the fall of 2005.
I am hoping that this vehicle will come "loaded" (similar to the new TL and TSX) with a navigation option. I am guessing pricing will be a little higher than the TSX.
Has anyone heard anything more about this vehicle?
I am hoping that this vehicle will come "loaded" (similar to the new TL and TSX) with a navigation option. I am guessing pricing will be a little higher than the TSX.
Has anyone heard anything more about this vehicle?
0
Comments
I still have a sneaky suspicion that the rumoured upgrades on the '05 CR-V that people have been posting about will actually end up on the RDX (and not the CR-V). Just my speculation.
If you've seen the original Acura RD-X concept car shown in 2002 and compared it to the Honda FR-V/Edix, note that the overall shape of both vehicles have a lot in common. This means the FR-V/Edix platform was designed to accommodate four-wheel drive in future models.
In short, the Acura RDX will look very close to the shape of the FR-V/Edix, but will probably have a somewhat different front and rear end designs. It also portends that the successor to the Honda CR-V could also be based on the FR-V/Edix; the next-generation CR-V is essentially the FR-V/Edix but with a somewhat different rear end design.
http://www.autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=100791
Autoweek is a little late since Car & Driver (August) has already shown pictures!
I just hope Honda/Acura will not make the RDX as a baby MDX like the bmw x3 is a baby x5. The RDX should not be sold as a MDX wannabe, but as a high performance hybrid SUV with a choice of a 6 speed manual . Such a vehicle would let Honda re-invent the high performance SUV market like BMW reinvented the high performance sport sedan market. This would be a bolder move for Honda versus introducing a baby MDX just because BMW is doing that with its x3(which by the way is selling below BMW expectations).
I agree. It could sell well in Canada. And most likely the USA. But would there be a 6 month waiting list? I dont think so.
Why not aim higher. Since the RDX is a new vehicle, why not seek something more than a smaller version of an MDX. This vehicle may just cannibalize sales of the MDX as the BMW X3 is doing to the X5.
It would be opportunist for Honda to take advantage of the hybrid craze. Introduce a smaller SUV based on the CRV that performs and gets better mileage than a RX400h and is significantly cheaper. The only unfortunate part of such a vehicle is that it would involve longer waiting lists than the Prius or Lexus RX400h.
The problem with moving the RDX to far upmarket is that I'm not sure if the Acura brand can support it. Acura is not really regarded as an upper-echelon brand -- not mentioned in the same breath of MB, BMW, Audi, or even Lexus. You may hear comments such as "why would I pay that much for an Acura". That's the reason why I think the sales prospect of the new RL, with MSRP of almost $70K, is pretty dicey.
If not hybrid, Acura should use (at least) a 3.0-liter version of the MDX 3.5 delivering 225 HP/220 lb.-ft with VTM-4. For anything less, CR-V works just fine.
Dimensions: 5-seat (compact SUV)
Price Class: $30K-35K
I am talking about a cheaper CRV based Acura not a premium priced Porsche Cayenne beater.
"since they seem to mostly have appetite only for all things big."
I dont know about that? Americans love the Prius and Mini as much as we Canadians love small vehicles. The key is to develop a vehicle that has exciting technology ,performance, handling and utility. Candadians and Americans would stand united in their quest to own such a vehicle as a hybrid RDX.
I couldn't disagree. There are plenty of intelligent buyers out there, more so in this price class ($30K-40K) than above it.
X5 goes against MDX by the same logic that X3 would against RDX. What do you think about the former? MDX has hit its targeted market extremely well. I expect the same from RDX.
But I have two reservations about the above statement.
The key reason for the MDX's success, especailly during its intro years is its differentiation. Among premium German/Japanese SUVs it was the only one that had passenger volume for more than five. For larger familes, the MDX was a more exciting alternative than a minivan. Ofcourse today the competition is changing with the offerings from Volvo and the soon to be Subaru B9X.
So what would be the key differentiator for an RDX vs. X3. Price! Unfortuanately at about CDN 39k there is so much competition out there: Honda Pilot and Toyota Highlander(I was told by a Toyota sales rep that the hybrid version may sell for about CDN$40k)
My second reservation about the possible success of a non-hybrid RDX is that the X3 is selling below BMW expectations. For many months I have seen a lot of compelling dealership clearance sales for the BMW x3. I have a friend who got a fantastic deal on his x3 3.0 . For BMW, it is pretty sad when you can get good deals on vehicles that were introduced just months ago(sad for BMW not the customer). I tried getting a good deal on my 99 BMW 323 shortly after its introwith little success.
However, you're only about $20,000 off of the price of the RL. The MSRP of the 2005 Acura RL is $49,470 including destination. I do not believe the RL will have any impact on the RDX.
70k Canadian dollars. We Canucks do not get paid in Greenbacks.
Regarding Canadian pricing--if the RL was priced to today's CDN-USFX rate of 0.83 an RL would be priced as (49,470/.83)=59,600. In other words we Canadians are being ripped off compared to Americans. We have to pay 70kCdn$ for a car that would cost 59kCdn$ in today's exchange rate.
On top of that Canadians pay 15% total sales tax. I am sure there is not a single State down south that has such a hefty sales tax.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6480056/site/newsweek/
On the website above, the NEwsweek article writes that the RX400h will sell for 52K US$.
This is one helluva premium price over the non-hybrid version. Ofcourse Lexus will add luxuries to thee RX400h,but still the price for me is a bit steep.
If future high performance hybrids turn out to be this expensive then I will re-evaluate my alernatives.
Save fuel--buy a Prius or a Jetta TDI.
High performance SUV---buy non hybrid versions.
The RDX would have to use the same strategy, only in reverse. It will have to leave the utilitarian appeal to the Pilot, Highlander and others of that ilk, but instead offer X3-like performance, with above-average luxury, at a cut-rate price. It's a tall order. Maybe too tall? But they should be able to do it by raiding the parts bins of Honda's other models -- platform from the CR-V, the 4WD system from the MDX, and how about the 3.0 V6 from the previous generation Accord (a real jewel of a motor, IMO).
bodble2, the market may be receptive to such a vehicle.
Although maybe not for the previous generation 3.0 V6 Accord engine. The newest engines or gizmos are among the main causes of excitement for new vehicle buyers.
I made a point about MDX being comparable to X5, and RDX should be comparable to X3. While MDX and X5 compete in $36-45K price class, this is a class that is also served by some utilitarian behemoths. There is plenty of outside competition to be had, and MDX has held its own for 4-5 years.
BMW X3 and Honda CR-V are virtually identical in size, at least on paper (pretty much like MDX and X5, run a compare on Edmunds, and you should see it like I did). There is a market for more utilitarian SUVs and not unlike the higher price class where MDX and X5 reside.
What really is a tall-order, IMO, is the assumption that RDX will have to be as cheap as loaded CR-V. In fact, Ford Escape Limited treads into $28K price class!
Acura RDX is likely to be placed in $30-35K price class. For the added premium, it is likely to deliver a lot more than CR-V can. How it fares against BMW X3, we shall see about that, but my bet would be that the story wouldn’t be much different between X3 and RDX than it is between MDX and X5.
For use in Accord, the engine is in slightly detuned form. For Acura, things can change. Just look at the difference between the 3.5/V6 used in MDX and the same used in Odyssey/Pilot.
The MDX unit is tuned for stronger low/mid-range and doesn't give up at the top end either. If Honda follows the same formula on its smaller displacement version (the 3.0, the 3.2 and the 3.5 are essentially identical in architecture), 230 HP @ 5800 rpm, 220-225 lb.-ft @ 3500 rpm would be possible.
This is the reason I quoted that 225 HP variant of the 3.0 would be just fine for RDX, especially if the curb weight can be kept in check (hopefully no more than 3800 lb).
J30A shares its architecture with J32A (TL) and J35A (Odyssey, Pilot, MDX and RL). Until now, the RL used C35A which was based off the original "C25A" (later became C27A and eventually destined to be put in 1995-1997 Accord before it was put to rest).
"Acura RD-X Concept Debuts at North American International Auto Show
DETROIT 12/16/2004 -- The Acura RD-X Concept vehicle will make its debut at the 2005 North American International Auto Show in Detroit. This concept version of the upcoming Acura entry SUV, which will go on sale in 2006, combines the performance of a sports sedan with the versatility and utility of a premium SUV.
Aimed at active urban professionals and packed full of performance and technology, the RD-X Concept is designed to knife through traffic on crowded city streets and carve up twisty mountain roads. It features aggressive styling, a wide track, bold fender flares and a unique wood and leather interior based on the feeling of an upscale loft apartment.
Additional details on the RD-X Concept will be announced on Sunday, Jan. 9th at the North American International Auto Show in Detroit. "
additonal images available at
http://hondanews.com/CatID3046?mid=2004121646719&mime=asc&- ;archives=t
RDX is a type of Explosive!
http://www.ordnance.org/rdx.htm
ksso
Based on above site, there will not be a hybrid RDX. In fact there will not be a hybrid SUV from Honda in the next three years!
Mind you, it may not BE necessary for a hybrid SUV from Honda. Thanks to Variable Cylinder Management and the likely application of direct fuel injection and stratified combustion starting with the 2007 model year, the Acura RDX could actually get the same or better fuel efficiency than the current Honda Accord sedan with the K24 2.4-liter I-4 engine.
With hybrid option (on top of the V6), I would expect another 25% (city) and 15% (highway) gain which could make for the compact SUV to be rated something like 27/35 mpg.
How do you figure?
I suppose if the CR-V or RDX stays the same size and weight, that would be possible, but I don't have high hopes for that scenario. With a V6 under the hood, Honda will probably have to move to a more robust transmission, and it's likely the vehicle will be based on a variant of the Global Mid-size platform. (I'm thinking Elysion.)
That would fit the trend we're seeing with small SUVs not being so small any more.
Saturn VUE 3,641 lbs and 19/25 mpg
Santa Fe 3,946 lbs and 17/21 mpg
Chevy Equinox 3,775 lbs and 19/25 mpg
That's getting pretty close to the V6 Highlander with AWD and a 3rd row of seats (3935 lbs 18/24 mpg). Toyota's 3.3L engine is no slouch when it comes to fuel economy and would be a reasonable match to Honda's 3.0L. The VUE's 3.5L engine and 5AT are Honda products.
The Accord, which is lighter than any of these SUVs, only gets 21 mpg in city driving as a FWD model. On the highway, its vastly superior aerodynamics give it a big advantage.
Don't mean to be contrary. Just explaining why I think 20 mpg is about all we'll see for city driving.
FWD Vue 3.5/V6 is rated 20 mpg in city (19 mpg with AWD). I assume 3.0/V6 to be fractionally better with and without AWD than 3.5/V6. On highway, I will not be surprised to see 28 mpg (compared to Accord V6’s 30 mpg), although 27 mpg can be a safer bet with AWD. Even if it were to get 19 mpg with AWD (like Vue’s 3.5/V6), VCM could make it 20 mpg in city (like Odyssey’s 3.5/V6 which is a 4600 lb vehicle).
Honda could slightly detune the 3.0/V6 for its light truck application like it has done for Odyssey, Pilot and MDX for peak power to arrive earlier with a lower redline. This can translate to lower peak power output, however (220-230 HP).
EPA standard also provides for a (relatively) wide range of curb weight within a model for it to be assumed within the same class not requiring a separate test, and I believe that range is something like 250 lb. Greater impact on fuel economy will come from curb weight and aerodynamics.
Also, no one seems to even know if this is a re-done CR-V or not... Any one know for sure?
Perhaps I missed this info..
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
I expect RDX to be a sportier and luxorious alternative to CR-V (along the lines of MDX/Pilot duo). This could even mean slightly smaller dimensions.
With NAIAS, we should be able to see a near production prototype (as has been typical of Acura/Honda in the recent past).
At least that is what I am expecting... I guess we'll know by Monday morning...
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
In Japan, the Accord is a TSX (smaller than our Accord) and it uses a 2.0L block, if I'm not mistaken. While the JDM CR-V is the same size as ours and uses the 2.4L block. So, unless you meant to be comparing the Inspire, I don't think we have an apples to apples comparison.
If you want to compare the Accord 2.4L vs CR-V 2.4L as a basis for estimating how the Accord V6 will do in the CR-V, then just look at the US market selections. The I4 Accord gets 24 mpg city and the CR-V gets 22. That's a 9% difference in fuel economy with 300 lbs of variation in curb weight.
BTW, I'm assuming an AWD CR-V because, quite frankly, who cares about a 2WD SUV.
If we put the V6 in the current CR-V and assume the same 9% drop in fuel economy, then we can expect a 19 mpg city rating.
But that's assuming the next CR-V or RDX does not gain any weight, which I think is a mistake. I think we should expect the weight variance to grow from 300 to at least 500 lbs. And, as you say, a greater impact will come from weight and aerodynamics.
In the US market, while Accord and CR-V both use K24, the engines are tuned differently (note that Accord gets 160 HP at 5500 rpm compared to CR-V which gets the same at 6000 rpm). But bigger difference is in gearing. CR-V is using one of the shortest gearing of any vehicle around perhaps to compensate for lower torque for its weight and enhance performance at lower speeds.
But with 3.0/V6, gearing similar to Accord's V6 would work just fine and that could result in only slightly poorer fuel economy (primarily due to poorer aerodynamics and additional driveline loss due to AWD).
At least 19/28 mpg on AWD RDX/CR-V 3.0/V6 is a strong possibility IMO. An interesting part about this, if true, is that EPA fuel economy measurement doesn't account actual use of AWD. They simply chop off a percentage based on assumptions. I read this at their website but a while ago (quoting it as... not all scenarios are possible to simulate).
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Based on the fact that the X3 3.0 is $36K and ~$5K less than the X5 3.0... and also the Nissan Murano SL AWD is ~$30K, would it be reasonable to estimate that the RDX (base) will be ~$32.5K?... it would be $4K less than the base MDX but also $2.5K more than the Murano...
sound reasonable?... or deos anyone have any other details by any chance? thanks...