Acura RDX Fuel Efficiency Concerns
nycgirl1024 Member Posts: 1
edited July 2014 in Acura
I started looking at the RDX in mid-August. I fell in love with it. I drove it a week later and was basically sold on the car. My fiance and I put a deposit down on the car and now we have just been waiting for our Acura dealer to locate the type we want. The other night we started reading all of the posts about the fuel efficiency and we are horrified. We went from being 99% sure we were going to buy the car to about 80% sure we are not going to buy the car. Can I get some feedback on the fuel efficiency? Who thinks that the 13 MPG that a lot of people have been getting is the norm rather than a few exceptions? For those of there out there who are thinking about buying the car, how much is this a factor for you?
This discussion has been closed.
If you're wary of mileage, but love the vehicle, I suggest waiting a little and look for more people and real world mileage rather than basing it all on couple of posters comments and a few leadfooted road tests.
Trip was 8 miles on secondary roads at 50 mph with two stops then 21 miles of interstate, changing highways twice and trying to maintain 70 mph. Total trip was 58.1 miles and the computer showed 24.9 mpg.
Same trip in my 2001 RX300 would have given me 19.
I do not want to dismiss the low MPG numbers from the car magazines simply because they drive the vehicle hard. Other vehicles do OK under the same driving conditions, so it's not a good excuse for the RDX's mileage dropping 30-40% below the city rating. I think that's just too low to be explained by spirited driving. I have a similar engined/powered vehicle rated 19/24 and I have never been able to drop the MPG below 18mpg even when doing mountain driving with 4 people in the car and all their gear, during a snowstorm no less!
You asked how much of a factor the uncertain MPG is to me, and I will tell you that it has me sitting on the fence about the RDX (and also has caused more interest in the upcoming 07 Honda CR-V). It's also made me think the typical 20-22MPG I get on my Outback XT is maybe not so bad afterall! I love the concept of the RDX, and aside from a few minor complaints it would appear to be a great vehicle for me and my wife. But there is no way I am going to change to a vehicle that has questionable gas mileage at this point. It's too important of a factor for me.
You're assuming same driving conditions. Some cars are pushed harder than others, more so if you're curious to figure out and curious to explore the limits. How do you think Motorweek obtained 21 mpg?
BTW, Edmunds got 11mpg in their review...
Read the reviews posted by owners like me. I'm averaging 20mpg in mixed driving. To get 11mpg you'd have to HAMMER the car and drive around San Francisco's hills after sitting in urban traffic all day. That's ridiculous.
I shared some of these concerns. After a week and 400 mi with the car I couldn't be happier. GREAT vehicle. And 20mpg for a 3900 lb SUV that goes 0-60 in 7 secs. is actually outstanding. Do the research. Other SUV's and AWD wagons are generally worse - and most of them are slower.
I'm also bring it in for a problem already. During a complete stop, my car does not accelerate smoothly b/c the turbo kicks in either too early or too much all at once and you get a thrust rather than a smooth acceleration.
Once the car gets going, it runs rather well.
i.e 24 mpg at 55 mph, and 19 mpg at 75 mph.
besides its ugliness :P , it runs pretty good and fast and quiet at cruising speed and on good asphalt.
Oveall I'd say Acura's plan for using the turbo 4 to acheive better fuel economy has primarily failed @ the car magazine road test level - where journalists really flog the car to get a feel for its performance. Then they publish mpg results like 'we only got 16 mpg', the bloggers and forum floggers pick up on it, and it's off to the negative buzz races.
But when you read the experience of 90% of the owners writing about their real world experience (like mdrdx and myself) the car appears to be a 19-20mpg car for the most part, with 22-24mpg on the hwy. Which is what EPA ratings of 19 city 23 hwy would lead you to expect if you understand the relationship of EPA ratings to real world mpgs on most cars.
And yes the car runs good, fast and quiet (road noise is a bit higher than I'd prefer) on good roads. On bumpy roads the car is a bit stiff and jiggly. But it outhandles all the other SUVs. Those are your tradeoffs. So far I love it.
It helps if you like the styling (inside and out). I do. Some don't.
Also the way the car is driven has a GREAT affect on the milage. If you keep engaging the Turbo then the milage goes WAY DOWN.
Lighten up on the acceleration
I DO MOSTLY HIGHWAY DRIVING. ANY INPUT FROM ANYONE REGARDING THESE VEHICLES IN ANY ASPECT WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED.
The first, and I'd guess most likely, is whether or not the engine was warmed up before you started the trip. I know from experience a warm engine can make a significant difference in the FE read-out for a short trip.
The engine seem so busy. The interior is really when the car in idle. How does the relibility and durability of the turbo engine?
Lots of cold starts, stop-and-go traffic, and fast acceleration will reduce your mileage significantly.
I have had my RDX for 2 weeks and am getting 23.9 MPG for highway and city. I don't engage the turbo too much and use the AC in the afternoon/evenings. However, I also live in Florida so I don't deal with mountainous terrain.
Take it easy on the pedal and avoid the hard brakes and you should get 380-420 miles per tank. Good luck!!
I know a sales guy will say whatever it takes to sell but his message was that the mechanics say if you put premium in every now and then ...(maybe every fifth fill up) you should be fine.
Only an issue when you start getting over 50K, 60K etc...
Sounds like fiction to me?
In the end the A/F mixture will run a bit on the rich side and the transaxle will be a bit quicker to downshift and/or not so quick to upshift into the next higher gear.
The monetary result....???
But you may very well burn enough "extra" regular fuel to make up for the money you "saved".
IMMHO the FE could be improved dramatically if the driver could somehow choose when the turboes are to be used, say not prior to 2/3's throttle or only with RAPID gas pedal depression.....
When I'm going up mountains or steep hills (i.e., Mt Tam in Marin), the fuel economy drops to almost zero when I'm going too slow. So I give it gas more gas to speed-up and my fuel economy actually improves. The engine is doing having to do less work since the RDX is already moving. I generally punch the trottle/ goose the turbo to get moving and then back off when I get up to speed.
City driving reduces fuel economy dramatically. In my V6 Accord, I'd generally get 270 miles of city driving out of tank of gas vs 450 miles while on the highway.
Surprising that the RDX doesn't have DFI, soon to come..??
Was the TRIP COMPUTER reading or MANUAL calculation based on how much fuel you had to refuel with?
Hell...on flat highway at 75mph I'd be happy to see it get 24-25mpg!
Yes this was manually calculated and I am positve about the number of gallons.
Mostly highway (I95) till Wilson NC where backroads takeover.
This was my driving.
Around town, which for us is rural Carrol/Howard county, my wife consistently gets 22.5 to 23 MPG. This is also manually calculated.
Or even use Toyota's new HSD extended VVT-i technique to transition the engine from "Otto" mode into Miller cycle mode as the throttle opening rises. With the addition of DFI that would allow a 15:1 compression ratio for low engine loading, cruising, and transition to 10:1 to accumodate rising turbo boost with increasing throtte openings, acceleration or high enegine loads/loading.
35 MPG and 300HP.
What's wrong with you?
This isn't an 'engineer your own engine thread'
Or a 'WIRE your wastegate open forum'
Maybe you should spend some more time at your local community college, where
your ideas can be exploited.
Instead of suggesting people self destroy their $40,000 luxury vehicles!
Good luck to you wwest!
Stay away from open microwave ovens...
I'm comfortable, very much so, that anyone following my advice will have the knowledge to do so beyond the requirements of a community college.
Small town community college at it's finest!
Isn't the CX-7 due out soon with a non-turbo I4...??
That will be a good point of comparison as to just how wasteful a factory turbocharged engine is, can be.
Clearwater, FL. I was following a friend towing a jeep behind his truck so our speed never went much over 70. The highest the computer got to was 29.6 and the average, when getting home, was 28.4. I was really impressed. Don't know what it will be at my usual 75 to 80 mph highway driving. The city driving, which hasn't been much in this car this week, has lowered the computer mpg to 27.5. Still running on the gas purchased in Tifton, GA about 300 miles from Clearwater. Turned in my leased 07 MDX and even made $1300 on the lease. The car is for my wife, downsized for $$ reasons and purchased this time. Wife loves the RDX. Hooray! I like it too.
With the advent/use of the new knock sensors the engine control ECU will simply enrich the A/F mixture if need be to prevent knock/ping.
But you're in for some rather HORRID FE in any case.
In order to accomodate the turbo boost when you use it the engine is derated when off-boost, 98% of the time for most of us.