Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Acura RDX

sockpuppet1969sockpuppet1969 Member Posts: 308
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?
Tagged:
«13456755

Comments

  • sockpuppet1969sockpuppet1969 Member Posts: 308
    for those not familiar, the RDX will be a small SUV. It looks kind of like a cross between an MDX and a RSX. I also found it very interesting that the piece in C&D did not mention a non-hybrid option. It sounded as though the hybrid powertrain will be the only powertrain.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    I thought it actually looks like a small RX330.

    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.
  • vcarrerasvcarreras Member Posts: 247
    the RD-X will not have the spare tire hanging off the back like the CRV and RAV4. Does anyone know? You can't tell from the pictures from Car and Driver.
  • raychuang00raychuang00 Member Posts: 541
    I have this feeling that the Honda FR-V/Edix minivan that was just unveiled recently for the European and Japanese domestic markets will become the basis of the Acura RDX small SUV due about a year from now.

    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.
  • vcarrerasvcarreras Member Posts: 247
    on the RD-X.
    http://www.autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=100791

    Autoweek is a little late since Car & Driver (August) has already shown pictures!
  • deweydewey Member Posts: 5,251
    Latest rumors I read in the Toronto Star is that the next hybrid vehicle will be a hybrid Pilot. They also mention a smaller SUV will be introduced by Acura with no mention about it being hybrid.

    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).
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    Personally I think if Honda/Acura offers a CR-V sized RD-X but with a small V6, and TSX-level sportiness, luxury and amenities, and prices it under $39K CAD, they'll sell a boatload of them in Canada. I think there are a lot of people in Canada who wants Honda reliability and efficiency in an SUV, but think the CR-V is too economy-class, but the Pilot and MDX simply too big and thirsty and too soccer-momish.
  • deweydewey Member Posts: 5,251
    Honda/Acura offers a CR-V sized RD-X but with a small V6, and TSX-level sportiness, luxury and amenities, and prices it under $39K CAD.

    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.
  • jchan2jchan2 Member Posts: 4,956
    Well. I think it'll sell well if it's priced at $27K USD, comes standard with a Hybrid engine, and has all the Acura luxury features.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    I'm not sure if a "deluxe CR-V" would sell as well in the US, since they seem to mostly have appetite only for all things big.

    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.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    I’m hoping that Acura RDX will be Honda’s first hybrid-only SUV with the more powerful version of IMA, along the lines that Acura RDX demonstrated couple of years ago. 220-240 HP in AWD format would be enough.

    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
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Acura RDX is supposed to slot under MDX, not well above it. We're talking X3 competitor here. At about $35K (US) fully loaded, RDX would be a brisk seller.
  • deweydewey Member Posts: 5,251
    "The problem with moving the RDX to far upmarket is that I'm not sure if the Acura brand can support it. "

    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.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    I know where you're coming from, but I wasn't thinking about a Cayenne beater either, but a X3 competitor. But even at that, IMO, if the RDX even approaches X3 2.5 prices, it (RDX) would have trouble selling, because...well...a lot of people won't buy an Acura if, for similar dough, they can get a Bimmer, even if the Bimmer is a stripper, relatively-speaking.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    IMO, if the RDX even approaches X3 2.5 prices, it (RDX) would have trouble selling, because...well...a lot of people won't buy an Acura if, for similar dough, they can get a Bimmer

    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.
  • deweydewey Member Posts: 5,251
    Yes, an RDX based on your description could be a likely success as the MDX has been.

    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.
  • chico1454chico1454 Member Posts: 1
    Your opinion is obviously appreciated. The RDX may take a little while to find its niche.

    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.
  • deweydewey Member Posts: 5,251
    "However, you're only about $20,000 off of the price of the RL'

    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.
  • deweydewey Member Posts: 5,251
    Maybe my expectations for an affordable hybrid RDX are a bit too high.

    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.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    dewey hit the nail on the head regarding the MDX's success -- it offers passenger AND cargo room for a family which the X5 does not, but instead targets the sporty demand of the market.

    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).
  • deweydewey Member Posts: 5,251
    "but instead offer X3-like performance, with above-average luxury, at a cut-rate price"

    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.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Not exactly.

    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.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    I agree that 3.0 V6 is probably considered "dated technology", but I still think it is a gem -- smooth, rev-happy, powerful, relatively economical, and proven reliability. I love it in our Accord. For my money, it offers a level of civility unmatched by the 3.2 in my TL, or the Type-S motor in the CL-S that I traded. I would find it perfectly acceptable if using it enables Honda to cut cost, and price. Now, whether it's 195 lb-ft of torque is adequate for a 3500+ lb SUV with a AWD system is another story.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Accord's 3.0/V6 is rated at 212 lb.-ft and that is with regular grade gasoline. In at least one form, it is delivering at up to 228 lb.-ft with higher compression (11.0:1) which will warrant use of premium grade gasoline.

    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).
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    I'm trying to think of another SUV (midsize, not a behemoth) which offered the power, amenities and reliability of the MDX, and with 3rd row seating, at that price. The appeal of the MDX was (is) that it offers image-conscious soccer and carpool moms a 4WD alternative to the minivan. It is basically a 4WD Odyssey. I think the MDX had a monopoly for a couple of years. Now, of course, there are a bunch of direct competitors, including the 4Runner, Pathfinder, Highlander, Durango, and Honda's own Pilot, etc, all of which are comparable to the MDX in size, passenger and cargo capacity, and seating configurations.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    I was thinking of the 3.0 in the '98-'02 Accord. The current 3.0 would work (I haven't driven it, so I can only heap praise on the old 3.0), but I figure if cost-saving is the objective, they could dust the mothballs off of the old 3.0. Wasn't the V6 used in the '96-'97 Accord from the old Legend?
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    The 95-97 Accord V6 was a patch work engine. In this case, however, J30A used in Accord is really an updated version of the J30A introduced with the 1997 CL and also used in 1998-2002 Accord.

    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).
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    Wow, you know your engines! :)
  • raychuang00raychuang00 Member Posts: 541
    ....It appears that the Acura RDX small SUV (note that this vehicle will be smaller than the MDX SUV!) will be derived from the Honda FR-V/Edix "tall wagon" that just went on sale in Europe and Japan recently. Think of it as an FR-V/Edix with a different nose, different tailgate design, NO staggered seating for the front passengers (only two in front), and likely a derivative of the K24 i-VTEC engine used on the TSX sedan.
  • l943973l943973 Member Posts: 197
    From HondaNews.com

     

    "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&amp- ;archives=t
  • lumber2lumber2 Member Posts: 184
    RDX is a bad name for anything.

    RDX is a type of Explosive!

     

    http://www.ordnance.org/rdx.htm
  • deweydewey Member Posts: 5,251
    Nothing wrong with explosive performance, unless you are trying to avoid getting speeding tickets.
  • ksomanksoman Member Posts: 683
    or the goverment could ban the vehicle because the name fails airport security rules... if you own a Honda RDX, you are not allowed within 20 miles of the airport... hehehe.

     

    ksso
  • deweydewey Member Posts: 5,251
    http://autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=101529

     

    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!
  • raychuang00raychuang00 Member Posts: 541
    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.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    Doing the math with both the HAH and the 2005 Odyssey, it looks like VCM is good for a boost of approximately 5% in the city cycle and 12-13% on the highway. Using similar-sized vehicles like the Highlander and VUE as a basis, I guesstimate that a 3.0L CR-V or RDX would get about 20-28 mpg when equipped with VCM.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Non-VCM 3.0/V6 in RDX (or CR-V) could deliver 20/28 mpg if gearing isn’t any shorter than the same in Accord. With VCM, another 1-2 mpg in city, and 2-3 mpg on highway should be possible.

     

    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.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    "Non-VCM 3.0/V6 in RDX (or CR-V) could deliver 20/28 mpg if gearing isn’t any shorter than the same in Accord."

     

    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.
  • l943973l943973 Member Posts: 197
    RDX is an appropriate name if the crossover is suppose to handle like an RSX but be versatile like an MDX. Lets just hope it isn't a rebadged CRV.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    In Japanese market (and fuel economy standards), Accord w/2.4 is rated 12 km/liter as is CR-V. With AWD, however, the rating drops a little for CR-V to 11.6 km/liter. The same should translate if V6 were shared between the two (in our case, the Accord is bigger and heavier). And if RDX (or CR-V) were to get 3.0/V6, they could use the same transmission that Accord V6 uses.

     

    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.
  • kyfdxkyfdx Moderator Posts: 236,681
    If they are announcing this at the Detroit auto show this weekend, shouldn't there be some good spy pictures of this car? Rather than just some cheesy concept drawings?

     

    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

  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    CRV and RDX could potentially share a platform (new or not). In fact, RDX could tell us a little more about the next CR-V!

     

    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).
  • kyfdxkyfdx Moderator Posts: 236,681
    Well.. I would bet that way.. An upgraded CR-V, with a variation on the same 2.4L powerplant... maybe a full-time AWD system..

     

    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

  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    "In Japanese market (and fuel economy standards), Accord w/2.4 is rated 12 km/liter as is CR-V. With AWD, however, the rating drops a little for CR-V to 11.6 km/liter."

     

    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.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    In Japanese market, Accord is available with K24 (K20 is standard). In CR-V, until this year I believe, K20 was standard, but now K24 is.

     

    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).
  • kyfdxkyfdx Moderator Posts: 236,681
    If it is a modified CR-V with a V-6 and full-time AWD, I still only see about a 200 LB weight gain.. No point in bringing out a pig that would be 500 lbs. more, if it is CR-V based..

    Edmunds Price Checker
    Edmunds Lease Calculator
    Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!

    Edmunds Moderator

  • nowakj66nowakj66 Member Posts: 709
    So the proof of concept has been unveiled. Anyone know if it is based on the Accord or CR-V? I see some Toureg, Pacifca and Murano in there, as well as the MDX of course. It looks promising but 2006 is a long time to wait.
  • jchan2jchan2 Member Posts: 4,956
    look very nice.
  • canuck1933canuck1933 Member Posts: 6
    I like this a lot... I had mixed feelings about the Murano... too curvy/bulgy looking for my tastes... and the interior was a little dissapointing... but tho the RDX resembles in some senses the Murano (overall shape/size), it looks a lot more sculpted and based on the interiors of Acura's current lineup, I'm pretty certain I'll enjoy the RDX's interior as well...

     

    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...
Sign In or Register to comment.