By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Yup
I've looked at both cars up close pal, and I can't see where one would come to the conclusion that the Hyundai has the same fit and finish as a Accord. it's like comparing a BMW to a Pontiac.
Rocky
Honda has made Acura a somewhat upscale car line. They don't seem to have the goal of producing a line of world beating Acura vehicles.
Toyota has Mercedes, BMW and Cadillac squarely in the cross hairs with Lexus. They are willing to put whatever resources are needed into their vision for the Lexus brand.
Your point has a good implicit insight that I'd like to clarify.
Toyota and Honda have taken fairly different approaches to their upscale brands. Lexus was conceived to compete squarely with the German luxury makers, and to give Toyota a global presence in the luxury car market. In contrast, Acura is strictly a North American badge, which sells vehicles that are either badged as Hondas elsewhere (for example, the Acura TSX is the Japanese and European Honda Accord) or else are unique to North America (e.g. the Acura TL is built on the US Accord platform, built in Ohio, and is not sold abroad.)
As a company, Toyota tends to be more ambitious, while Honda remains a mid-sized player with a greater consciousness for cost controls. As the auto industry continues to consolidate, this difference in strategies will probably create more benefit for Toyota than for Honda, or otherwise ensure that Honda remains a smaller company.
And the value quotient of the new Hyundais are very compelling. But there is more to a car than the number of features per dollar it is true. The Honda and Toyota V-6s are pretty awesome engines. I haven't checked out how the new Sonata V-6 drives. I know some car mags thought it was every bit as good as the class leaders.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Look at the C&D comparo from a couple of months ago, the Accord won, but it was close. The Sonata still hit 60 in the 6s, and remember it's priced like a 4 cylinder Accord, even cheaper.
Indeed, the Sonata LX V6 with the 03 package comes in under $19,707 at fitzmall.com. An Accord EX V6 runs $24,568 at Browns Honda (both no-haggle, same market).
That's more than $5 grand after you factor in MD taxes.
$21,738 for an Accord EX w/leather 4 cylinder. So even that is $2 grand more.
I don't think most people realize just how big the price difference is. For $2-3 grand more, I'd probably pick an Accord.
But at $5 grand, I'd lean towards the Sonata. Too bad they don't offer an AWD option and GPS NAV.
-juice
Rocky
P.S. not to mention the Honda is way more american than any Hyundai
I bet if you had bought $5k in Hyundai stock 5 years ago, well, you'd probably be shopping for an Acura now. :P
-juice
Honda may someday use the Acura name elsewhere.
Toyota has not used the Lexus brand in Japan until this year.
Europeans probably laugh at the fact that the TSX is a Honda in Europe and a near luxury Acura here.
-juice
A 2006 Civic is a vastly larger car than a 1986 Accord. And, for that matter, a 2006 BMW 3 series is a larger car than the 1986 5 series. Even my 1995 Maxima weighed in at only 3,001 lbs with a V6, which is over 400 lbs less than the 2006 V6 Accord. I'm not sure how large you would want the Accord to be, but they certainly have grown over the years. You won't see me lining up to buy a Honda/Acura equivalent of the Crown Vic. A friend bought his 5'2" wife a Toyota Avalon. She might as well be piloting the Queen Mary. We stuff our kids in the back of a 911 and they love it.
On ergonomics, I happen to think my Acura TL 6-speed and former Honda S2000 were as about good as they get in their respective categories. The S2000 seats were exceptional, without the need for power memory adjustments, heating ventilation, butt messaging and any other do-dads. The TL, in spite of it's FWD weakness, won out over any other Japanese models and even the 3/5 series, in part because of the attractive, functional interior and features. I can't comment on the Accord/Civic and other Acura models, since I haven't owned or driven one for a couple of decades.
In Japan, Toyota will have a challenge introducing Lexus. Lexus models sold here have been Toyotas in Japan.
Toyota also has the premium Century line with V-12 Vvti engine that has long been the car at the pinnacle for wealthy Japanese businessmen.
Most Hondas have great ergonomics. They add a funky tough here or there, like the speedo on the Civic and the handbrake on the CR-V, but generally speaking they're very ergonomically friendly. Especially the Accord.
The munchkin argument makes no sense - they build a bigger car for the USA specifically.
-juice
I am 6'2" and 200 lbs and I fit well in Hondas, even a Civic or S2000. I never have thought of myself as munchkin sized. If something like an Accord or a Pilot is just too small for you, I assume you are at least 250 lbs and/or over 6'5". If so, you just can't expect a mainstream maker like Honda to go out of their way to fit people of your size.
Depends what Honda you are talking about. If you are sitting in a Civic Coupe of course its going to be small. However I have seen some well heavy people that drive Civics that can fit in them fine. My Acura CL is not small to fit into. I find my CL more comfy to sit in than the current BMW 3 Series or Audi A4. My mom has never had complaints about sitting in the backseat of my CL.
My Dad has sat in my CL in the front seat and he has never had any complaints as well. The RL I might agree is too small inside for its class. The TL is ok to fit in for me. The TSx is too small for me. It doesn;t feel roomy enough to sit in. One of my relatives used to have a 2000 Honda accord 4dr and it was fine to sit in.
Well Honda has nowhere else to put the TSx in their Honda line-up so they had to put it back in their Acura line-up in the US. I'm not a big fan of the TSX because of price point which I find too expensive and its smaller than the accord and yet it costs more than the Accord transaction price wise. Besides, Merecdes are used as taxi-cabs in europe anyway. I;m not saying that Mercedes isn't prestigious but I don;t think they are prestigious in the US like they are in Europe because they use Mercedes as taxi-cabs in Europe.
BMW-The 318I failed in the US so BMw has tried selling a cheap car in the US but failed. Don't get me wrong i do respect BMW.
Yes Acura of the 1990's did have the CL/Vigor flop which in my opinion Honda should take more flack over than BMW should take for the 318I flop. I;m saying this even as a Honda fan. What was Honda thinking with the Acura brand back then?
I think Honda had said a while back in a press release that I read on the internet that they want to bring the Acura brand to Japan. I myself just don't when will do that in regards to bringing the Acura brand to Japan.
Rocky
The Hyundai dealership is basically a attatchment of a Ford dealership and based on my lack of seeing many on the road they aren't very popular in this part of the country.
Rocky
P.S. I see more Acura's "seriously" with no dealership, then I do Hyundai's. So what does that tell you ? :P
Acura's behind. But it's hard for them to go global until they separate Honda and Acura styling. Actually, each Honda market seems to have its own unique design language and that's not good.
I wonder what their long term strategy is. It seems very disjointed right now.
I can't get the gadgets I love and want in any american car unless I'm willing to pay through the nose. The Lexus IS 350 is the second cheapest and it's $13K more because your going to basically pay sticker. So yes a Acura makes good dollars and sense, something I can't say about any other car company if one desires more than minimal conviences and a boring car to go from A to B
Rocky
Any how, I hope the Entourage minivan ends up carrying the same $5k price edge over the Ody and Sienna. If so I'll compare those 3, by then hopefully Toyota would have placed the 3.5l in theirs.
-juice
Rocky
-juice
.....and more interior room maybe in the backseat.
Rocky
Could you imagine a twin turbo SH-AWD Acura TL w/ a 6-speed ? :shades:
The RDX is already the Benchmark in the compact SUV market. Boy it's also a tempting vehicle and if I had enough money, I'd own one of them also. My only "beef" with it I'd would of wished Acura would of tuned it for atleast 300 hp.
Rocky
170 hp/170 ft-lbs and gas mileage better than a Civic? Sign me up, please...
It is? It isn't even at dealers yet, is it? And what exactly makes it better than the Mazda CX-7, particularly?
How could we even know yet?
Heck, how about a loaded RAV4 Sport with the V-6?
Terms like benchmark tend to get thrown around much too loosely, IMO, especially at Edmunds.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Questioning my facts, eh ?
Motor Trend did a test on the RDX and said Quote: "The chassis is balanced when pushed with little trouble transitioning from a hard left, then a hard right. This where the RDX walks all over the X3" (hats off to Acura engineers on this one)
They also talked about the $10,000 savings factor and pretty much how the X3 doesn't stack up to the RDX in Gadgetology or performance. Bottom line the RDX is one helluva lot of bang for your buck, thus making it the Benchmark in all categories
Rocky
P.S. The SUV's you mention aren't even in the same leaugue pal
There were some turbocharged Honda Legends in the late '80s, but Honda went with VTEC instead to increase the specific output of their engines. It's a more elegant solution from an engineering standpoint but it has finally reached its practical limitations, and turbocharging has developed to the point where it's not incongruous with the refinement Honda engines are known for.
Amen.
We own an 2004 TL 6-speed, a 2005 MDX and a 2005 911S. I'm a fan of Honda/Acura, but I would never proclaim either of ours as the "benchmark" for anything. Very nice cars that provide a good balance of luxury, utility and performance, but don't set the standard for any single attribute.
And how dare you question Rocky's "facts" on a car that isn't yet available. After all he read the magazine review himself, and re-read it to get a second opinion. :surprise:
Sorry, Rocky, for having have a little fun at your expense. But you bring it on yourself. You want to proclaim a vehicle that you have never actually seen or driven yourself as a "benchmark". And in another forum you criticize Porsche because they have continued to revise and refine the 911 for 40 years, maintaining it's status as a world class sportscar. (Apparantly, you are upset that, notwithstanding your acute reading ability, you can't visually distinguish between a 993, 996 and 997). Please tell me that even you can see the irony in that - I really want to be able to give you some credit for powers of observation.
I will be interested in seeing the RDX in person and giving one a test drive myself. A novel approach to forming my own opinion.
ROTFLMAO
It's all spec racing at this point, but I don't see the RDX being or becoming a benchmark. To be the benchmark, you have to leave the others in the dust. You need to equal them in most ways and clean their clocks in some other very important manner.
The RDX seems very competent, but nothing about it screams "holy cow" the way a new benchmark would.
Rocky
Do a comparison list against the "so-called" Benchmark named BMW X3. Acura engineers exceeded the X3 in every way. They baught one and reversed engineered it. They added a boat load of technolgy and at the end of the day they have the new Benchmark and that wasn't factoring in atleast a $10K sticker difference. :P
Rocky
I know from a Porsche fans perspective it's hard to understand my logic. Others like me feel the same. It seems other car company's have to change styling significantly and often to avoid backlash and Porsche get's a pass by offering the same dual " frog eyeball" headlamps and retractable spoiler for the last half-decade.
Hey it's working so why change, right ? :P
Rocky
I own an Acura TL 6-speed, and I like it very much. But if it handles almost as good as a RWD BMW 330i, then I'm almost as good as Tiger in golf, almost as good as Derek Jeter in baseball and almost as good as Michael Jordon in basketball.
My 8 year old daughter has read all of the Harry Potter books, for which I am pleased. There is one sitting in the back seat of our 911 right now. It therefore pains me to have to suggest that I think you read too much. :surprise: And take it too seriously.
You have a driver's license, I presume. Go use it, along with your left foot, to give serious test drives of the TL 6-speed, 330i 6-speed and IS350 slushbox. Throw in a few other compact sport sedans. Then tell us which sets the benchmark as a drivers car. If you really can't tell the difference, apply for a need-based scholarship to Skip Barber and repeat the process.
That's my point. Yes a BMW is a drivers car, but is that enough to make it the Benchmark ? I'm also interested in what the car can do when I'm not tethering the curves. This is where the Lexus IS 350 and Acura TL play like Karl Malone (MJ is over-rated) and Tiger Woods.
Rocky
P.S.
I'm sure your Porsche is very nice and to each there own. I could easily make a list of cars I would of baught over it and used the extra change to take a vacation, but hey that's me.
"with its front-based power delivery, the RDX behaves like a front-drive vehicle and understeer is its defining characteristic"
Puh-leeze, dontcha just hate FWD? I do. They set up the SH-AWD in the RDX to run 90/10 front to rear as the default. And any car whose "defining characteristic is understeer" is far from the benchmark in my book.
"we wonder how it will fare against less-expensive and similarly-powered newcomers, such as the Mazda CX-7"
which, BTW, costs $6000 less than RDX's estimated price (which should have been under $30K, as far as I am concerned). And is within 0.4 seconds to 60 and through the quarter when compared to the RDX. And the CX-7 is a vehicle they LOVED in a review earlier in the same issue, which happens to make the same fuel economy, weigh LESS, and provide an extra gear in the auto trans, all with the same power.
RDX is another car for the Honda faithful, who will love it I am sure. But as soon as the comparos start to appear, the only category that the X3 will lose to the Acura is price. Much more interesting will be the comparos with the crossovers costing thousands less.
BTW, the CX-7 employs direct injection - is Honda doing the same with the RDX? Certainly, direct injection is the cutting edge of fuel delivery right now. That would be one indicator of a "benchmark". :-P
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Mazda is a rebadged Ford brand that is trying to be a Japanese elite brand. :confuse:
Every Mazda ever car made is a total rip-off to the consumer and are cheaply made like "Hykias"
I'm sure Honda is shaken in their boots over the CX-7 which comes with what sophisticated technologies ? Oh you get dual climate control, a base bose stereo and a moonroof...WHOOOOOOOOPIE. Hell I can get all those features and then some in a stripped down 10 yr. old Chevy Blaser S10 :P
Your right when talking about faithful and Honda has alot more than Mazda who would be BK if it wasn't for Ford keeping them on life support. My gosh some are acting like Mazda is a reborn car company. The only decent car they make is the Plasticky expensive Mazdaspeed 6 and you better have a MAZDASPEED authorized dealership nearby to get it fixed if needed.
Lets face it Mazda, doesn't have the clout that Acura or Honda has and are supported by a company that is a few mistakes from going BK. Sorry nippononly, but isn't it true ?
Rocky
P.S.
You better reread those specs again. The only thing the outdated X3 has on the RDX is a big sticker price. The X3 doesn't have the "State of the Art" Technology, styling, build quality, reliability, and performance of the all new benchmark.
Yes, it is. Anybody can throw a bunch of do-dads and semi-useless gizmos into a car to make up for their lack of serious engineering. On the aesthetic front, who's to say Acura interiors as nice as lexus, as nice as Volvo as nice as Audi...? :confuse: "Benchmark" should be used to define something that is reasonably objective and purposeful. That BMW's 3 series has defined the Benchmark as a drivers car is as close as you will get to universally accepted - by unbiased divers who can acutally tell the difference between FWD and RWD dynamics. And would not be gullible enough to think that Lexus throwing a 306hp engine into a slushbox only, suspension challenged IS350 is a serius contender.
"with its front-based power delivery, the RDX behaves like a front-drive vehicle and understeer is its defining characteristic"
You have got to be kidding me!
P.S. Yes, Rocky, I bought a TL 6-speed. It gave me the balance of attributes I was looking for at the time. But I don't have an ego problem that forces me to call it a "benchmark" to justify my decision. It's not.
P.P.S. On the Porsche front, I would never fault anyone for saying that's too much to spend on a car. Five years ago, I bought an S2000 because it gave me 90% of the performance of a Boxster S for 60% of the price. Upon being able to comfortably afford the 911, I still test drove everything that was marketed as a serious contender - and frankly, for my preferences, all fell far short. But again, I think you need to formulate your own opinions from your own serious test drives. Formulating opinions based upon reading magazine reviews is both dangerous and unnecessary.
I drive an '04 Mazda6 with the 3.0L V-6 and a 5-speed. The car handles like it's on rails and has a top end that will compete with most cars on the road. Granted, it's not much off the line (low torque), but I'm not a drag racer anyway. Most importantly I have not had a single problem with the car since I bought it. Change the fluids, rotate the tires and go.
As far as being cheaply made, the fit and finish on my car are top notch. Check the resale on Mazda vs. the Korean makes.
Mazda's financial numbers look pretty good to me. They pump tens of millions into Ford's bottom line, not the other way around.
http://media.ford.com/mazda/article_display.cfm?article_id=23278&make_id=227
I can't argue with that. They aren't perfect cars in every respect, but in terms of onroad performance (at least during good weather conditions), the 3 Series offers the benchmark that defines the "sports sedan" genre.
Lexus has it nailed for reliability, Audi leads the class for interiors and AWD, Mercedes offers the "dignified" choice, Volvo has a brand image for safety that is second to none, and Acura and Infiniti both make respectable showings in this segment, but the BMW leads the pack on driving dynamics, without a doubt. Any automaker that can surpass BMW in that arena is going to make a lot of money and frighten a lot of people in Munich, but for the moment, the Bavarians still maintain a comfortable lead.
Soon enough, the magazine crews will get their hands on both an RDX and an X3 for several days (not a short test drive). They will have several staffers test the vehicles, not just one representative being taken on a holiday paid for by Acura. Only then can the journalists form an educated opinion about these vehicles.
Even then, you're better off driving the vehicles yourself.
And while you're correct about C&D's critique of the SH-AWD system's 90% FWD bias, the CX-7 you mentioned has a 100% FWD bias. When you give it half-throttle, the RDX sends 70% to the rear, while the CX-7 will do nothing - unless there is slippage. Only then does the Mazda send 50% aft.
I believe Tony Swan did the RDX preview for C&D. I dunno if he did the article on the CX-7, but I sorta doubt it. So, even though we've got an opinion on each car from the same magazine, we don't have opinions from the same source.
More to the point, I suspect Tony was being hard on the RDX because it is being labeled a luxury sport SUV and it should be held to a higher standard. Likely, he was comparing it with the X3. The Mazda is not being judged against the same standard. It's being compared with the RAV4 and CR-V. What is "good" in the mainstream is not good enough when you move up a tax bracket.
This is not the first time we've seen this. I recall many people claiming that the Mazda6 would kill sales of the Acura TSX because you could get the same performance for less. That didn't exactly happen. The image and content matters.
Mazda is not a rebadged Ford. as a matter of fact the Fusion and Mercury Milan are based on the Mazda 6 platform.
"Your right when talking about faithful and Honda has alot more than Mazda who would be BK if it wasn't for Ford keeping them on life support. My gosh some are acting like Mazda is a reborn car company."
Thats not true Mazda has been profitable since 1998 for the most part. They did post a net loss in 2001 however.
" I know I'm offending the Mazda 3 crowd, but that vehicle is as Ugly as the Pontiac Aztec. Was the Design engineer drunk when he carved those lines out.
The Aztec? The 3 is best looking in its class in my opinion.
"Lets face it Mazda, doesn't have the clout that Acura or Honda has and are supported by a company that is a few mistakes from going BK. Sorry nippononly, but isn't it true ?"
Thats true Mazda doesn't have as much as money as Honda does. I'll agree with you there.
I am a hardcore Mazda and Honda/Acura fan. I have to stick up for Mazda here.
The 6 does outsell the TSX.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
(And yeah, I know the Saturn Aura is a contender...but the Malibu and the G6 sure aren't.)
Mazda is a hell of a car company, and doing very well (based on financials, etc) in their niche. Everyone doesn't need to be ToyHonda or GM.
That most certainly did not happen. TSX sales keep going higher and higher. The apparent reason being that people do value the luxury touches or image (dare I say prestige?) provided by the TSX.
When you compare the CX-7 and the RDX, you have a (potentially) similar situation. The CX-7 is very close to the RDX in many, many ways. The Mazda represents a downmarket, or "value" alternative to the more expensive, tarted up RDX.
But I think when people are spec racing these vehicles, they do not give enough consideration to the luxury and image part of the equation.