Acura RDX

ralston1

No idea on the towing, but probably enough room under the hood for a pwr steering and transmission cooling kit like the MDX. I just don't think you would want to pull more than a jetski and trailer with it. Acura probably doesn't think that the demographic intends to be too rugged with the RDX.

wwest

Doesn't acura already use electric power stearing"

robertsmx

Besides NSX? I'm not sure. The only EPS offerings (in the USA) from Honda are in NSX, S2000, Civic Si (not sure about the latest iteration), Insight, Civic Hybrid and Accord Hybrid.

j2kva

I have an MDX and I have to say it handles and accelerates pretty well for an SUV. I expect the RDX with its tidier dimemsions and available turbo engine to be an even more engaging drive, albeit maybe not to the level of the BMW X3. I think Acura will see how well the RDX sells in the 1st year or two, and if there is the demand for a sportier manual transmission version, they will sell that as a cost option later. Remember how tame the TL was when it debuted, Now it has much more serious performance.

ateixeira

The MDX concept will debut at the NY show, probably on April 12 or 13. Should be interesting to see what direction they take it in now that the RDX will be in the lineup.

-juice

wwest

If the SH-AWD is done properly, as well it could be, I expect the RDX will substantially outperform and out-handle the X3.

Does anyone know why the SH-AWD system wasn't used on the Ridgeline?

robertsmx

Ridgeline doesn't need SH-AWD handling dynamics. I suspect, VTM-4 will be relegated to Honda lineup, and Acura keeps SH-AWD.

ateixeira

The X3 is tuned with a very stiff ride, in order to obtain the handling it has. Even the non-sport models let you feel every crease in the road. I kind of doubt Acura will go that extreme with the tuning; it should be more compliant.

-juice

varmint

SH-AWD is designed to enhance performance. And it's probably a good deal more expensive.

VTM-4 is actually better for utility purposes. The ability to lock the rear half-shafts together can be an advantage in low traction situations.

Besides, Acura needs to have a few things to keep it a step ahead of Honda. SH-AWD is a very sensible tool for making Acura a little more exclusive.

varmint

With SH-AWD providing a boost to handling capabilities, Honda should be able to tune the RDX suspension a little softer than the X3 without sacrificing handling ability. They just need to do a better job of it than they did with the RL.

I expect that the RDX will "perform" as well as the X3 on the skidpad, in the slalom, and other performance tests. (Probably not braking, though.) But magazines will give the X3 the nod for having better steering feel and other subjective attributes.

Still, the RDX is likely to come in $5K less than the X3, which will give buyers something to consider.

kyfdx

Don't know if you've driven a late-model X3, but they tuned a lot of the harshness out of it, since '04... I think in response to reactions exactly like yours..

I've had a couple of '05s as loaners.... and, they both had a pretty compliant ride..

Of course, this is with the standard 17" all-season tires.... If you got the sport pkg, with 18" summer performance tires, it might be a different story..

regards,
kyfdx

kyfdx

I think the RDX will be much cheaper than the X3, as you state... But, leasing deals on Acuras are few and far between... I think the lease payments will be comparable..

wwest

Isn't SH-AWD already in use by Honda?

The really nice thing I noticed about the X3,5 is the level of engine compression braking that results from a sudden lift of the accelerator pedal. Having such a long history of FWD and thereby inherent adversity to engine compression braking makes me wonder if the new capability of SH-AWD has been well thought out for engine braking.

ateixeira

So far it's exclusive to the RL.

I'll have to sample an X3 again. I drove a few the year they came out at a BMW Ultimate Driving event. Won that little traffic cone they hand out for "Best Performance", too. :shades:

-juice

varmint

Engine braking will depend on gearing as much as anything else. So, at this point, who knows...

jchan2

SH-AWD is exclusive to the RL although rumor says that it will be stuffed into a TL at some future point...

navigator89

ateixeira

Too bad it's so far away.

Is that a trailer hitch or an exhaust pipe?

-juice

x5killer

man that picture really looks like a Subaru B9 Tribeca. I guess its just the rear which is mostly whts shown in the pic that is similiar.

I wish the RDX was bigger so I could consider it as a possible B9 Tribeca replacment but its just not. I dont like the small ugly X3 or that size range so i can't do it.

I like Acuras technology but am the designated suv in my fam and like to keep a sporty midsize one. I dont like the MDX but hopefully the new redesigned MDX will be better and to my liking so I can consider it as a choice for my next and get it on the delicous acura tech.

How much smaller is the RDX compared to a B9 Tribeca? I will test drive and check one out when it comes out but am afraid its just going to be too small.

They're already making an X3 competitor when they haven't even matched let alone beaten the X5.

varmint

I think you will be disappointed in the size of the RDX. It is intended to be a sport SUV, not a utility vehicle. The current MDX (I have one) is a nice blend of utility and enough sport to make it a decent drive. The RDX does not appear to be aimed at the same target. It's more like the BMW and Infiniti. Utility was sacrificed to make it perform.

Not sure what part of the RDX you think looks like a Tribeca.

As for not matching the X5, I'm not sure Acura would want to. The MDX is in it's 6th year of production and is currently selling 8 to 5 over the Bimmer (which isn't as old). It doesn't match the performance of the X5, but the german can't hold a candle to the MDX in terms of utility. Seems like two different approaches to the market.

wheelz4

Note that the next two vehicles in the background are supposedly the new CR-V. The guy who took the pics says the rear 3/4 window was taped up to look like a conventional window but underneath the camo was the Stream-type window we've seen in a few renderings.

hlady

Does anyone know when we will be getting any info as a release date or the dimensions of the vehicle? price?

varmint

Honda is pretty tight with hard data on new or redesigned models. The latest rumors suggest a launch in July. If (big if) that is true, then expect some information in June.

Pricing probably will not be announced until the week when the RDX goes on sale. (Whenever that is.) The only clue we have thus far is one of Honda's execs saying "mid 30's range" back at the beginning of the year.

ateixeira

Perhaps he's talking about the shaved rear bumpers, i.e. the rear bumpers don't stick out like they do on other competitors.

Besides that, the Tribeca is curvy and upswept, while the RDX has hard edges and has a very different D-pillar (upside down Tribeca maybe).

I don't see much in common. To me the profile looks more like the Infiniti FX. Even then not much.

-juice

la4mead

I agree, I don't see much similarity to the Tribeca from the photos. It appears what they both have in common is that Acura and Subaru tried hard to keep their own style unique.

dewey

Do you guys eat a lot of carrots?

I am amazed that forum members have such great eye vision, since all I see on that photo is a indistinguishable wagon that can resemble almost anything.(it could also be a 1975 Ford LTD station wagon?)

la4mead

There are lots of photos available other than the one posted on the site... You're right I think I need glasses for that one! It was nice to see one spotted on the road somewhere.

robertsmx

Finally, saw one in person at Dallas auto show. It was displayed within an enclosure and with dark tint all around (interior was barely visible), but on the outside, I was pleasantly surprised to see it didn’t look as tall as I expected it to be, in fact, it looked “hunkered down”. And looks better in person than it did in the pictures (I may have said that for just about every Honda/Acura, though).

ateixeira

Have you guys seen the sketches of the MDX? Edmunds has it up now in the NY Preview.

I'm not sure they sorted out the (lack of a) grille properly, but I like the overall shape, which closely resembles the RDX. Certainly more daring design from Acura.

-juice

robertsmx

It will be nice if it looks like RDX. That grill in the sketch (also available at acura’s website under “MDX Concept”) is perhaps a bit too outrageous and will definitely be toned down.

robertsmx

The Acura RDX (Production) information is out...

Link

rsholland

ain't great, at 1500 pounds.

http://www.hondanews.com/catID3093?mid=2006041234739&mime=asc

Many cute-UTES can tow 2000, and some even 3500.

Bob

robertsmx

And yet, never seen one tow. Heck, I was pleasantly surprised seeing a Grand Cherokee pull a small trailer last week. Towing... who really cares about it?

JBaumgart

1500 lbs. won't do it for me - I need a minimum of 2500. My current FX45 will handle 3500 lbs and handles my 18' fishing boat just fine. The motor alone weighs 425 lbs.

robertsmx

Or you could get MDX which should be rated 3500-5000 lb. If you NEED that much, not even 2500 lb rating is going to cut it.

rsholland

I tow with my Forester, which has a higher tow rating—so towing is important to me. The RDX is nice, but poor towing knocks it off my short list of possible Forester replacements.

MDX? Too expensive.

Bob

stldon

Is the production information on fuel mileage lower than expected? Has anyone else heard a release date of beginning of June?

kyfdx

ooohh... Who wants to guess how much that technology package will be?

I say $4000-$4500...

la4mead

Thanks for the news! I was really looking forward to the introduction. The specs that are out confirm a few things I too was afraid of...

You're right, the towing limit is even lower than expected for a turbo ute; lower than the conservatively too-low CX7's 2000...

1500 pounds, that not much more than a motorcycle or a jet ski (or a bicycle!) on a good trailer. Not that I tow that much often, just for the few times I do... I want things like cooling systems built to dissipate the heat. I want to be able to avoid driving a hulk of a truck if I don't need it.

The fuel economy figures aren't as efficient as I expected, either. My '90s technology RX300 was rated higher and gets better than that, without premium.

I never liked the MDX. It was too big and rattly, and had too much fake wood. And it cost too much. Smaller and nimbler is better to me, that's why I like the size of the MDX.

Also, the great technology we thought would be included is packaged separately. It means there will be a more basic model for those of us who don't need to pay extra for all those neat gadgets, however they won't be included in that low base price, either. Then there's still that issue about only the two front windows with "auto". I'm still puzzled why they cheaped out on that... :confuse:

ateixeira

That's very low, wow.

Gosh, though, just 1500 lbs? I towed more than that last weekend - 700 lbs trailer plus a yard of pea gravel (at 1200 lbs) is about 1900 lbs.

That's right near the limit for my early Forester, but new ones are rated higher. All that torque, you think it could do a little more work. :confuse:

-juice

ateixeira

But I agree that's only so-so. The Forester XT gets 21/26 with an old 4 speed auto.

-juice

robertsmx

I suspect the permanent AWD set up in SH-AWD (all wheels are powered at all times) costs 1-2 mpg in EPA testing. VTM-4 could have given it a higher rating.

How does Forester's AWD system work with automatic transmission?

varmint

I believe the tow rating is set by the lawyers and beancounters, not the engineers. And Honda does funny things with their tow ratings. That 1,500 lbs number may include 4 passengers and their gear. We don't know, yet.

Fuel economy is not good. But it's not that bad, either.

The (new) Turbo Forester does +2 in both city and highway, but it's less powerful and 600 lbs lighter (because it's smaller and not as well equipped).

The BMW X3 (the real competition) gets 17-25 mpg, which averages out to about the same as the RDX and the Bimmer is significantly less powerful and slightly heavier.

I would have preferred a number like 20-25 mpg for the RDX. This turbo thing was supposed to be more efficient than a V6, after all. But it is a luxury performance crossover, not an economy car.

ateixeira

It varies, but some SoA techies told us it's 80/20 default split in 1st, 2nd, and reverse gears, and then adjusts constantly when needed. So it is still full-time.

Forester XT now makes a conservatively rated 230hp, so it's closer than you think.

-juice

ateixeira

1500 lbs is the same as the CR-V and Element, right?

I guess they just went with those numbers. But I'm sure the RD-X has bigger brakes and higher load ratings on the tires (better heat resistance, too), plus more power, torque, and a beefier trans.

I guess I expected higher-than-CR-V numbers to go along with those upgrades.

-juice

robertsmx

And isn't any different from standard towing rating seen for years in Lexus RX... the best selling small luxury SUV. Obviously, towing and offroading isn't a reason people buy these vehicles for.

varmint

Raves:

Wider stance than the current small SUV platform. The front and rear tracks have been increased by 1.5" and 1.8".

Slightly longer wheelbase, but no change in overall length. This allowed them to give the front seats a little more footroom, without making the rig a limo.

SH-AWD, ACE, CARB LEV II ULEV, HIDs, and ELS. (Say that three times, fast.)

The fact that the front bumper with the boy racer styling appears to be optional.

The dash looks great.

Rants:

4-way MANUAL passenger seat. (Is there a baby chicken under my chair? I keep hearing, "cheap, cheap, cheap...")

Stoopit shelf/cargo cover unit. (Though the cargo space does look decent.)

Weight. It needs to lose about 100 lbs.

The fact that ELS is linked to the ($) Tech Package.

robertsmx

The BMW X3 (the real competition) gets 17-25 mpg

With automatic, X3 is rated 16/23 mpg.

ateixeira

I dunno, I almost picture this competing more with other Asian-brand SUVs, like the FX35 and loaded up CX7s. Who knows?

robert's right, though, while a few of us care most shoppers won't even know what the tow ratings are.

-juice

varmint

Forester XT now makes a conservatively rated 230hp, so it's closer than you think.

I don't consider the 10 hp difference to be significant. That's like 2% in the grand scheme of things. But the XT is short 25 lb-ft. That's a little more telling when it comes to engines. I think it's safe to say Acura is pushing this K23 a little harder.

But, I digress, there are many other factors in determining fuel economy. I just think the engine is one of them.