Road tested one last night and was very impressed. I tried the canadian base model.
1) As reported elsewhere, you do have to depress the gas pedal more than you would think to get strong acceleration. Disconcerting at first but I quickly adjusted Once you get use to it, it is very fast. 2) Great handling, this thing corners like a sports car. Very impressive for it's size. The little graph showing which wheel gets power is fun but distracting but you can turn it off. 3) I liked the way the transmission worked, not constantly shifting gears; unlike the 2004 I road tested 3 years ago. 4) Very comfortable and quiet, great seats. 5) Very nicely equipped.
On the downside...
1) I really don't like the front end, but that's personnal taste. That big plastic piece under the bumper level looks like an add on. 2) Some details inside are not to the level of the car. For example the interior door handles are plastic and look cheap. You can see the mold mark...My current XC90 has very nice metal handles. Finish in the cargo area was not to the level on my Volvo either.
Overall very impressed; a huge step above previous version. Performance and handling on par with a 3.6 Audi Q7 i road tested earlier. I prefer the look and interior of the Audi but for the same level of equipment it is $10K+ more....
>> 2) Great handling, this thing corners like a sports car. Very impressive for it's size. The little graph showing which wheel gets power is fun but distracting but you can turn it off.
what you experienced was 0.85g lateral road-holding. Very impressive for an SUV. Some BMW can't even pull that numbers, just for your info. My Prius does 0.72g if you care to ask
>> 1) I really don't like the front end, but that's personnal taste. That big plastic piece under the bumper level looks like an add on.
I am sure aftermarket product will start to pop up shortly if so many people hate it. After all, it is just piece of plastics.
>> For example the interior door handles are plastic and look cheap. You can see the mold mark...
Acura never really learnt from Lexus. Whatever the people touch inside the vehicles should be made from 1st class materials. That is Lexus formula.
Acura never really learnt from Lexus. Whatever the people touch inside the vehicles should be made from 1st class materials. That is Lexus formula.
On the other hand, the 2005 Lexus GX470 we considered last year felt like it had a 0.5g lateral roadholding. Lexus needs to rework their suspension and chassis formula. Even the SC430 might as well be built on a Buick platform.
Gene00 has it right...I have an 04 TL which recommends premium gas. But based on the explanation provided by Gene00 and confirmed by my Acura service people, I have used regular for the past 76,000 ks and I haven't experienced any problems with engine operation or sensed any dimunition of power. And the service people haven't found any negative effects either.
Just came back from a car show where the new MDX was displayed. I noticed that the engine is made in the US, and not in Japan. Is anyone else worry about this? I have always thought that the Japanese engines in these mid-size SUVs are what potential buyers should be looking for in terms of reliability.
All Honda/Acura V6 engines are manufactured here in the USA. Its never about where something is manufactured, but all about quality control. That said, in a Honda, the last thing one should worry about is the engine.
The engine has a 11.0:1 compression ratio! The engine computer can electronically retard the timing but then you just negated the extra power that the added compression ratio gave you! Plus, like Varmint stated, Acura requires it! It is in their sales literature! The 3.7 liter motor is near its full potential (100% volumetric efficiency) as a naturally aspirated motor. I am sure a few more ponies can be inched out but like the 306hp Nissan 3.5L the hp gains above this level will be tough without some help. Help in the form of either raising compression or adding supercharging! The old adage still holds true that 'there is no replacement for cubic inches'!
I am not sure I agree with you, Steve, at least not entirely. Direct injection alone would boost torque by 5-10% thanks to better mixture of fuel and air. I hope to see it in Honda's next-gen engines lineup.
My '01 Honda Odyssey REQUIRES 91 Octane (in the manual). I have been using 87/89 on it for 6 years. I have seen no significant differences in MPG. The only downside is the slower acceleration (retarded timing). For a minivan, I don't intend to RACE anyone up the hills.
89 Octane seems to be the best balance (cost and acceleration). That is what I have been putting into my Odyssey.
Does your manual read "requires", or do they use the word "recommended"?
Everything I've ever read stated "recommended". Although Honda's own media site does not list an octane in the specifications, they do state HP figures with and without premium. That suggests the use of regular is okay.
With the new MDX, they clearly state "required".
While I do not doubt that you could probably run your car on regular without any more trouble than reduced performance, shoppers using Edmunds should know they would be doing so against the specific recommendation of the manufacturer.
Perhaps the recommendation is based on higher towing capacity? Perhaps concerns over high altitude performance? Perhaps they are guarding against the potential of increases in Ethanol in our fuel? Perhaps it's just Acura's over-protective lawyers? Dunno... but I don't want to be the guy shoveling out thousands for a new engine just to shave a couple bucks off the gas bill each year.
IIRC, the original power plant with 1999-2001 Odyssey was rated at 210 HP/229 lb-ft with the "recommended" premium but that grade wasn't "required". With regular, the output was said to be 205 HP/217 lb-ft.
It changed when the Odyssey's 3.5 was uprated to 240 HP/242 lb-ft, and this time with regular grade. No word on premium grade with that one.
Chaps, I bought my 2007 MDX week ago. I am hearing some kind of noise. I believe is coming from the front. I could not really tell whether is coming from the wheel or drive shaft. I hear this within 200 to 500 yards of driving just a one off noise till next time I start the car up again for driving. Wondering any one had this problem at all. Also I am not getting the MPG.I am already onto my 2nd tank of gas. I average 300 miles per gallon.
Need to give back to the boards after all my research/help from these pages. Have owned the MDX for nearly 1 month now and have a few things to report, mostly good. Positives: great exterior -- a very stylish car that doesn't quite match the hip styling of the BMW or the Range Rover Sport but has it's own unique styling qualities; handling is wonderful -- quite surprising actually, the SHAWD really performs (and I love BMWs), interior features are quite nice (great seats, nice touches like the auto-lift tailgate on the ENT package, etc.); best value in the mid-size class. Negatives: gas mileage is very poor - after 1K miles, we've averaged 16.8 MPG and that's with 20% highway. How can it be less than the average city MPG? Only other negative is that the car pulls (just slightly) to the right when on the freeway. Complained to the salesperson about it the first day and they said "new car owners love to find problems with their car even when everything is ok. want to come in a drive a demo?" i'm not kidding. weak response from an anxious sales person -- should I be worried about the new model? I'll wait to have this looked at when we do our first service -- it's really very subtle. Overall, it's \an awesome car and I am quite happy with the purchase. We looked at mostly high end SUVs -- X5, XC90, 400H and the Range Rover Sport and decided that Acura had everything we were looking for. Just wish the gas mileage was north of 20.
On it, you'll see the actual EPA numbers. The city mpg estimate is probably something like 15-19 mpg, while the highway range might be 20-24 mpg. I don't recall the exact figures.
Point being, the 17-22 mpg that is most often quoted is just shorthand for the more accurate (though much wider) range given by the EPA.
Comments
1) As reported elsewhere, you do have to depress the gas pedal more than you would think to get strong acceleration. Disconcerting at first but I quickly adjusted
2) Great handling, this thing corners like a sports car. Very impressive for it's size. The little graph showing which wheel gets power is fun but distracting but you can turn it off.
3) I liked the way the transmission worked, not constantly shifting gears; unlike the 2004 I road tested 3 years ago.
4) Very comfortable and quiet, great seats.
5) Very nicely equipped.
On the downside...
1) I really don't like the front end, but that's personnal taste. That big plastic piece under the bumper level looks like an add on.
2) Some details inside are not to the level of the car. For example the interior door handles are plastic and look cheap. You can see the mold mark...My current XC90 has very nice metal handles. Finish in the cargo area was not to the level on my Volvo either.
Overall very impressed; a huge step above previous version. Performance and handling on par with a 3.6 Audi Q7 i road tested earlier. I prefer the look and interior of the Audi but for the same level of equipment it is $10K+ more....
what you experienced was 0.85g lateral road-holding. Very impressive for an SUV. Some BMW can't even pull that numbers, just for your info. My Prius does 0.72g if you care to ask
>> 1) I really don't like the front end, but that's personnal taste. That big plastic piece under the bumper level looks like an add on.
I am sure aftermarket product will start to pop up shortly if so many people hate it. After all, it is just piece of plastics.
>> For example the interior door handles are plastic and look cheap. You can see the mold mark...
Acura never really learnt from Lexus.
On the other hand, the 2005 Lexus GX470 we considered last year felt like it had a 0.5g lateral roadholding. Lexus needs to rework their suspension and chassis formula. Even the SC430 might as well be built on a Buick platform.
Plus, like Varmint stated, Acura requires it! It is in their sales literature!
The 3.7 liter motor is near its full potential (100% volumetric efficiency) as a naturally aspirated motor. I am sure a few more ponies can be inched out but like the 306hp Nissan 3.5L the hp gains above this level will be tough without some help. Help in the form of either raising compression or adding supercharging! The old adage still holds true that 'there is no replacement for cubic inches'!
Direct injection alone would boost torque by 5-10% thanks to better mixture of fuel and air. I hope to see it in Honda's next-gen engines lineup.
My '01 Honda Odyssey REQUIRES 91 Octane (in the manual). I have been using 87/89 on it for 6 years. I have seen no significant differences in MPG. The only downside is the slower acceleration (retarded timing). For a minivan, I don't intend to RACE anyone up the hills.
89 Octane seems to be the best balance (cost and acceleration). That is what I have been putting into my Odyssey.
Everything I've ever read stated "recommended". Although Honda's own media site does not list an octane in the specifications, they do state HP figures with and without premium. That suggests the use of regular is okay.
With the new MDX, they clearly state "required".
While I do not doubt that you could probably run your car on regular without any more trouble than reduced performance, shoppers using Edmunds should know they would be doing so against the specific recommendation of the manufacturer.
Perhaps the recommendation is based on higher towing capacity? Perhaps concerns over high altitude performance? Perhaps they are guarding against the potential of increases in Ethanol in our fuel? Perhaps it's just Acura's over-protective lawyers? Dunno... but I don't want to be the guy shoveling out thousands for a new engine just to shave a couple bucks off the gas bill each year.
It changed when the Odyssey's 3.5 was uprated to 240 HP/242 lb-ft, and this time with regular grade. No word on premium grade with that one.
If its a Cayman or Boxster, no one will be impressed.
Of course if its a 911, then I am sure everyone will be impressed.
He is funny!
On it, you'll see the actual EPA numbers. The city mpg estimate is probably something like 15-19 mpg, while the highway range might be 20-24 mpg. I don't recall the exact figures.
Point being, the 17-22 mpg that is most often quoted is just shorthand for the more accurate (though much wider) range given by the EPA.