Acura RDX

bbydad · September 2006

thanks for the info. would you (or anyone out there?) know about MA?

stever · September 2006

Most states have their DMV info online. Here's some car tax stuff from Mass:

Mass.gov

bbydad · September 2006

thanks steve. that was helpful for my ? about registering 2 cars, etc. but didn't see any comment about just taxing the difference between a new car and a trade-in vs. taxing the whole car - did I miss that?

bellorusha · September 2006

What is the LCD can display when you listening XM or MP3? is it all the info (song, artist, chanel name) on display? or just one line? is there difference BASE and TECH?

What I saw on a test drive that XM channel was showing on sub line only (tech package).

picture would be very great.

Thanks.

kyfdx · September 2006

MA Dept.of Revenue

I think this answers your question..

Sales by Massachusetts Dealers/Lessors:

If the sale is by a Massachusetts dealer or lessor in the regular course of business and the purchaser either previously paid a tax on the vehicle traded-in or is exempt from tax on the vehicle traded-in, the sales tax is computed on the sales price less the amount of the trade-in.

regards,
kyfdx

alexbharris · September 2006

The gas mileage is bad. 12.8MPG on 800 miles on an otherwise very nice car. Expect your fuel costs to double if you are currently driving a Honda or Acura sedan (as I was).

I'm very sorry I didn't read posts like yours before I purchased this vehicle. I would not have bought this car had I known that the gas mileage is so bad.

"My daughter's boyfriend sells Acuras, and he says they aren't moving. People comment about the poor gas milage, and the fact that they can get an MDX for the same price. Just wanted this out there. He says they will have to start discounting soon."

graphicguy · September 2006

Acuras (and Hondas) are pretty good in hitting the EPA numbers. I have found that there's a wide swing in MPG after break-in miles are achieved. That's just about true of any car I've had in recent years. I'd wait 1,000, maybe even 2,000 miles before I'd sound any alarms and see where you're at then.

I would say the MDX would be discounted because Acura is getting ready to introduce a new model. They are offering "deals" on MDX's in my 'burg. Haven't heard much in the way of big discounts (or factory support) for the RDXs. They've just hit the market. I'd think the dealerships are going to see where they're at in a couple of months with them. Then, of course, when the first snow flies, they're thinking things will pickup for 4WD/AWD vehicles.

Gas prices around me have dropped nearly $1/gal in the last few weeks. That won't hurt SUV sales in general, either.

ateixeira · September 2006

800 miles is very, very green. Give it some time. 12.8mpg is awful, though, even for a new engine.

Hope it improves for you.

-juice

grinnin · September 2006

So, I've looked at the specs of the RDX vs. the CX-7, and they are nearly identical. Then I drove each, and could hardly tell the difference. Then I looked at the prices and the RDX is $3500 - $5,000 more comparably equipped, and the Acura doesn't have anything compelling to differentiate from the competition. I've owned two Legends in the past, but I'm taking a pass on the RDX.

wwest · September 2006

SH-AWD is, will be, a BIG selling point for those truly requiring a fully functional AWD system.

bodble2 · September 2006

You observed no difference in the interior quality, if nothing else? If you're merely comparing specs on paper, then you may as well throw the new CR-V, RAV4 into the mix.

varmint · September 2006

I like the CX-7. It's a good vehicle with ample portions of both style and sport. For someone on a budget, it's a wise choice. I would also add the Forester XT to the list of such a buyer.

But the RDX has more of the sport and adds a whole lot more style and content to the interior. Drive them harder and you'll find the differences in acceleration and handling performance. Spend some time with the NAV units in both and you'll find how much better the Acura is. Listen to the stereos in both and you'll learn how amazing Acura's ELS can be.

Now, if you are a buyer who doesn't care about handling at the limits, a top notch NAV, and one of the best sound systems around... that's cool. Everyone has different priorities. (For example, I would never pay extra to fly first class.) It just means you were never really the target buyer for the Acura. They are trying to reach the people who do value those differences.

c_hunter · September 2006

SH-AWD is, will be, a BIG selling point for those truly requiring a fully functional AWD system.

Yeah, it's good, but not even close to the true AWD systems available. The fact that it's based on a FWD transverse engine layout is the first nail in the coffin. The vehicle is already handicapped by that major architectural choice. The other thing that has been noted about SH-AWD is that you have to know how to drive the car to realize its true benefit. Otherwise, the RDX understeers like a FWD car. That said, it's still one of the most sophisticated AWD systems on the market, and I am glad Acura is developing it. Unfortunately most buyers won't care.

Why? For years, Subaru has had some of the best AWD systems around. But only a small fraction of buyers realize and/or care about it. Most buyers can't discriminate between part-time AWD systems (which primarily enhance wet-weather traction) and higher performing AWD systems (which enhance peformance throughout the entire envelope). I don't expect it to be much different for the RDX. For most shoppers, SH-AWD will simply be a buzzword.

ateixeira · September 2006

To be fair, a Ford 500 with the Haldex AWD system (very similar to the one the CX7 gets) did very well in an AWD test by one of the car mags recently (I forget which one). The CX7 basically uses the same supplier as Volvo, so it ain't bad.

But that wasn't the issue I had with the CX7. It's a bit heavy, so you feel some lag before it gets up and goes. I drove it on a tight course that Mazda had set up, but it failed to show its strengths, never let the engine get going. Honestly? The Mazda5 felt quicker and more nimble in those tight situations.

Also, the CX7 felt very wide, with poor visibility. They had a course where you had to come with 6" to 12" of several cones they laid out. You had to get close to 3 of 7 cones they had, and I failed both time. Bob was with me and he managed to do it once in two attempts. Most people were failing, most likely due to the visibility issues.

Any how, the point is it was very hard to place it accurately at the apex, and the turbo engine lagged a bit before it would spool up. It failed to convince me that it was sporty at all.

The MX-5, RX8, and yes, even the Mazda5 they had at that same event were more fun to toss around the cones.

I have yet to drive an RDX, but I sure hope it impresses me more than that.

-juice

anythngbutgm · September 2006

lol

anythngbutgm · September 2006

As a Subaru fan and I believe an owner of a Turbo X/T?, I'd be curious of your impressions of the latest Acura.

ateixeira · September 2006

I actually still own the original Forester, a 1998 model. We were thinking about upgrading our fleet, but decided to buy a beach condo instead. :sick:

I get the last laugh. Our condo has appreciated by about $60,000 in the 3 years we've owned it. I could sell it now and buy 3 brand new Foresters with the capital gains. :shades:

But we'll hold on to the condo. At least that's the plan. We're just a little house poor right now, so yeah, the Forester is 9+ years old.

I have not yet driven an RDX, though I plan to. I may be in the market next year, I'm hoping. I'll probably have to buy something used, though.

Guess I can't have my cake and eat it, too.

-juice

steveaccord · September 2006

Hi all,

I t has been a while since my last visit and I am glad to see some of the old timers have not deserted this or other posts (i kept checking now and then, just no posts).
Well, now time has come to go out there and buy some of these new exciting vehicles.But I fear I am getting mixed feeling about model roll-out as to the implementation of the new advanced safety technologies.
I was personally running to replace my wife 2002 C-RV with the RDX, having misinterpreted that technology package woul bring along the CMS just as it happens for the RL. Well you know that is not going to happen, for this year model anyway.
So I was going to ask you guys help on refreshing my vision of things to come.
Do we have a credible timeline as to the deployment of CMS along the Acura lineup (RDX would actually be the model for which I could use that info).
Also I am going to replace soon my 2003 Accord EXL as well. I have been offered a 50K figure (all inclusive with high Chicago city taxes bumping that figure). That would be a top of the line 2007 model (tech package included). It htat a keeper or I should keep looking around?
I am appreciative of all your responses to my queries.
Truly,

Steve

c_hunter · September 2006

Do we have a credible timeline as to the deployment of CMS along the Acura lineup (RDX would actually be the model for which I could use that info).
Also I am going to replace soon my 2003 Accord EXL as well. I have been offered a 50K figure (all inclusive with high Chicago city taxes bumping that figure). That would be a top of the line 2007 model (tech package included). It htat a keeper or I should keep looking around?

How do taxes push a $37K vehicle to $50K?

steveaccord · September 2006

Sorry hunter,

My bad, that quote was for a 2007 RL (only vehicle in so far already sporting the CMS technology). I believe I will wait until final specs for the MDX are released before I take action. If the MDX will not offer CMS I will look in keeping a 2 vehicle to 2 vehicle rotation (C-RV 2002> C-RV 2007 or RDX [at least it does have SH-AWD and other vehicle stability/safety gizmos], and Accord 2003> RL). But if the MDX will offer the CMS I will consider going 2>1 (I do not really need the second car other than for fun etc, put only 22k miles on my accord!).
Sorry for omitting the model for that quote.
Truly,

Steve

ateixeira · September 2006

RLs have not been selling that well, despite the sweet AWD system. May be a lack of a V8, or Acura just isn't perceived as being par with other lux brands, but that should make one a bargain.

Off topic, but I browsed some used 2002 or so RLs, and they cost no more than a TL of the same age. Wow. Too bad they only went AWD later.

-juice

varmint · September 2006

Ditto your point about AWD being a selling point. Most buyers are not tech-savvy enough to understand the benefits of one system over another.

Not sure I agree with you about SH-AWD being handicapped. Based on my test drive and the reviews I'm reading, the RDX handles as well as (if not better than) the X3. Yet the X3 is RWD-biased with a longitudinal I6 engine under the hood. While there are differences in things like steering feel, which might steer a buyer or reviewer toward the BMW, this has little to do with the AWD.

Being a FWD/transverse design is a problem in theory. However, other factors can over-ride it in reality.

And... besides... if buyers aren't swift enough to understand AWD, they aren't going to be worried about whether the engine points north or east. It's the end result that matters.

varmint · September 2006

I doubt we're going to see CMBS added to many Acura's for quite a while. I've read that Honda is suspect about whether or not buyers will pay for it. Like ATTS for the Prelude, they are offering it one car to see what happens. It will only be added to others if the market appreciates it.

ateixeira · September 2006

The X3 is tuned pretty darn stiff to get that handling. While I doubt the Acura can match that, I bet it rides a whole lot better.

-juice

bodble2 · September 2006

Interesting enough, that's the opposite of Acura's marketing spin. They say the X3 is tuned for comfort v. sportiness for the RDX.

upstatedoc · September 2006

Am I the only one who doesn't know what CMS stands for? I own two newer acuras and I have never heard of it. For that matter whats ATTS as well? Thanks.

bodble2 · September 2006

ATTS = Automatic Torque Transfer System

CMS = Collision Management System (I think).

varmint · September 2006

Based on the reviews, the RDX does handle as well as the X3.

Based on my test drive, I'd be very surprised if the X3 was significantly better. The RDX corners flat, turn-in is sharp, steering is accurate, and it stuck to the corner like no other CUV I've driven. Hard to imagine that another CUV could take that off-ramp any faster.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if some prefer the BMW for reasons based on personal preferences, but, if you clocked these two on a track, I've got doubts the current X3 would hold up.

In terms of ride quality, the one I drove had the optional 19 rims under it. It would be okay once I grew accustomed to it, but it was definitely as firm as I'd want to go. Any tighter and it would probably get blasted the way the X3 did.

varmint · September 2006

It used to be Collision Mitigation Braking System (CMBS), but they started leaving out the B sometime since development.

ateixeira · September 2006

I drove early X3 models, but supposedly BMW softened them up a tad because people complained the ride was too stiff. It was. We felt every single joint in the pavement, and this was in a relatively new parking lot (Fed Ex Field).

-juice

bodble2 · September 2006

To be honest, if price is not in the equation, I would choose the X3 hands down, because, well, it's a BMW, and it makes no bones about its mission in life, and it delivers as advertised, which is the case with most BMWs.

varmint · September 2006

Understandable. Acura still has a problems with service and image. Their marketing has never left a consistent brand image on me, either. That's why Acura has to compete using price as heavy artillery. It's going to take them a while to get that perception turned around.

IMO, the RDX and TSX are both good vehicles in assisting them to achieve that move. Both offer compelling-enough packages on their own. But their placement in the line-up also allows Acura to take a few more liberties with the more well-known vehicles higher up the food chain.

wwest · September 2006

Yes, it "delivers" you to the BMW service bay 4 to 5 times a year, reliable as clockwork.

ateixeira · September 2006

Interestingly some Bimmer purists argue it's not, since it's made by Magna-Steyr in a non-BMW plant and the interior isn't up to par with other models.

-juice

bodble2 · September 2006

Well, the crowd over at the X3 thread seems to embrace and defend their X3 as vigorously as anyone anywhere else. Actually what I meant by "deliver as promise" is the performance aspect.

varmint · September 2006

That's where you and I part company. I can understand buying the X3 for the BMW prestige, service, and general "experience".

But I don't see the X3 delivering the same level "ultimate" performance that is a characteristic of cars like the 3, 5, and X5. This is the area where the RDX matches it most closely. The Acura is faster and corners just as well. And it does it without being as harsh over well worn pavement. Those are the areas where the Bimmer is supposed to shine.

ateixeira · September 2006

They handle well, but they're a bit heavy and sluggish off the line. Until you get the revs up the I6 actually feels a bit slow, even the 3.0l models I've driven. I'd hate to be stuck in the old 2.5l.

Compare that to a Forester XT, which is a rocket, and the Bimmer is slow. At least in a straight line, the Forester is a bit too soft and rolls too much (at least they're giving it bigger rims).

-juice

bodble2 · September 2006

we have to judge the X3 by the new '07 upgraded version. I think that's only fair since the RDX is a new design.

And Varmint, don't get me wrong, the BMW prestige, service, experience, the posh showroom, service department, etc, etc are also things that I would value. And I think you'd be hard-pressed to find any X3 owner who doesn't insist that the X3 drives like one of the BMW sedans.

robertsmx · September 2006

I think you'd be hard-pressed to find any X3 owner who doesn't insist that the X3 drives like one of the BMW sedans.

Insisting is one thing, reality is another. That said, I've been hard pressed to find an X3 owner, much less someone I can talk to about it. :P

I just took a 3000 mile r/t road trip in the midwest, and was surprised to find two RDXs in Colorado. And saw one here in Dallas today. Thats three times more RDXs that I have spotted in a few days than I have spotted X3s in couple of months. X5 is a whole another story.

bodble2 · September 2006

They're not that hard to find. They're all over the place in my town.

ccacp · September 2006

Hello Everyone, to my surprise the Acura Canada window sticker for the RDX has an EPA rating of 23/30 mpg. There is no way that I think this car will attain those numbers ! How could they even venture to post those numbers when Acura USA has 19/24 on their window stickers !

On top of that, one of the cars that was on display outside was UNLOCKED ! Dealerships in Quebec, Canada are closed on Saturday and Sunday and thus the lot was unsupervised ! I could clearly see the package to activate the Navi !
I opened the door, locked the door through the central mechanism and left still surprised at these 2 findings !

What do you think about these numbers !

rdxsteve · September 2006

That is surprising. Are Canadian EPA numbers typically higher than U.S. EPA numbers? If so, they must use a different method for measuring.

bostnwhalr · September 2006

Those Canadian RDX's sound like they have the same mileage as the FWD CR-V. Do they sell a decontented version of the RD-X with the 166hp motor and no SH-AWD?

rdxsteve · September 2006

Just saw a post on another board that pointed out the Canadian gallon is larger than the U.S. gallon. That explains higher Canadian RDX mileage over U.S mileage. It's not apples to apples.

robertsmx · September 2006

Yep, Imperial Gallon. Same thing in UK.

bodble2 · September 2006

Imperial gallon is approx. 20% more than US gallon.

bodble2 · September 2006

RDX today, on the streets of Vancouver. A black one. Couldn't get close enough to see whether it had demo plates on it. Don't know whether or not it was due to the black color, but first impression was that it looked kinda chunky.

ateixeira · September 2006

23/30 - I thought you had found the Holy Grail. :surprise:

A co-worker owns an X3, and we work together a lot so I end up riding in it all the time. It does *not* handle like a BMW sedan.

BMW's SUVs (and I'm including the X5 in this as well) ride much, much stiffer than their sedan counterparts. A 3 series will eat an X3 for lunch, just as a 5 series wagon will eat an X5 for lunch. In both ride and handling. There is just no comparison.

You have to add the "for an SUV" caveat for that statement to apply.

-juice

varmint · September 2006

I didn't mean to suggest that the X3 should handle as well as a 3 series sedan in absolute terms. And I think Bodble2's reply took that into account.

The Bimmers tend to offer the best possible compromise between performance, ride, and feel. The sedans are as good as a sedan can get. The coupes are as good as a coupe can get. If they made a pick-up truck, it would be as good as a truck can get. Each type of vehicle will have a different level of performance as their maximum, but the BMW should reach it.

With the X3, I think they left some performance on the table and a whole lotta ride quality. I think the X3 might have the edge in terms of 'feel'. The RDX's turbo is more potent (expecially down low), but power delivery is not as linear. I didn't have a problem with the RDX's steering, but I know the X3 is very strong in that suit. However, based on my own 'tush-ometer' as well as the reviews from the press, the X3 is far stiffer and bouncy than the RDX. And despite the harsh suspension, I do not see it enjoying any significant advantage in handling. The RDX corners flat, fast, and the chassis is remarkably well-balanced.

ateixeira · September 2006

I smell several comparos coming our way....

Toss in a CX7 loaded to the gills, and maybe do a Forester XT vs. Saturn Vue Redline sidebar for us cheapskates. :shades:

-juice

Acura RDX

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles