Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Why in the world do we need a 268hp RAV4? It goes against the vehicle's original philosophy of an economical MINI-SUV. It will certainly get relatively poor mileage with this engine option.
Why do I care if they make this engine available? I'll tell you why... Although a more economical 4 cyl will also be available it will most likely not be available in the top trim level with all the goodies. I am sick and tired of car manufacturers making me buy and overpowered vehicle just so I can get all the luxury and safety features I want (and they can take as much of my money as possible).
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
I do hope the RDX comes with a 6cylinder engine. My guess is that they get the MDX's current V6 and the new MDX will get a souped up RL-type V6 or maybe even a V8 finally (if Honda ever decides to do one... don't hold your breath).
Very simple. Maybe they'll do the RDX the same way.
-juice
I suspect we'll see something similar to the MDX, when the RDX bows. A base model plus a touring trim. Then options for both NAV and RES.
Honda developed a turbo 4 cylinder engine for the RDX a while back. However, they couldn't find a supplier who would build the turbo unit to their standards for durability and reliability. (I'm sure there are plenty out there who could do it, but it would cost an arm and a leg.)
So Honda switched to a V6 powerplant. Apparently, they worked out that design and were just about ready to finalize things when...
Somebody figured out a way to get the turbo 4 back into the picture. Now that is back to being the powerplant at the top of the list. Or so the rumor-mongers say...
Looking forward to sampling a turbo Honda of any sort.
-juice
Oh yeah... with Honda reliability, please..
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
I cannot say that I am similarly impressed with the usual secrecy shrouding the RDX.
I guess by now we have grown accustomed to 'not knowing' what we will see once the car is finally released. I still hope some of you may finally find out some more details soon..
Kudos to all of you...
-juice
2 - It has at least as much cargo room as an X3;
3 - Its engine slots between the X3 2.5 (now discontinued) and X3 3.0;
4 - It gets at least 27 (EPA) mpg on the highway.
1 - Lack of memory seats in my TSX is a HUGE irritant in a car I wind up sharing with another driver.
2 - I've got dogs -- if this is an SUV/station wagon substitute, I'd better be able to haul them around. (Otherwise, the full-size SUV we already have will keep dog-hauling duty and we'll look for another sedan.)
3 - Acura was very smart to put an engine in the TSX that outperformed the 3 Series 2.5, esp. at a cheaper price.
4 - Gas costs too much for me to buy an SUV that offers pretty minimal "U." And if Lexus can almost squeeze that kind of mileage out of the RX330 with much bigger horsepower/torque numbers than I expect to see in the RDX, it ought to be a pretty easy bar to reach. Otherwise, we may remain a full-size SUV/sedan family rather than become a 2-SUV family.
[Of course, the BIG reasons I'm willing to wait and see what the RDX looks like rather than run out and pick up an X3 tomorrow result from a very positive experience with the TSX. Great quality & reliability. And a much better price/value prop. than BMW offers.]
What factors are going to drive other's decisions to buy (or not buy) the RDX? I'm sure there are some "must haves" and "must avoids."
That would still undercut an X3 that was well equipped, by the way.
-juice
(Judging by the # of other mini-sport-SUV's that seem to be in the pipeline, it won't be the new kid on the block for long, and we should start to see discounts off MSRP fairly quickly.)
X3 and X5 are actually pretty close in price, more so now that the 2.5 model is dropped.
-juice
ABSOLUTELY, I would take a $35K RDX over a TL. Gotta have room for 2 adults, 2 kids, and 2 dogs. ABSOLUTELY, I would take a $35K RDX over an MDX for $2K more. We already have one battleship SUV that's a pain to parallel park on urban streets; we don't need a second. MAYBE, I would take a $35K RDX (at list) over a $35K X3 (discounted). But I sincerely expect that after the "first RDX on the block" purchases have been made, Acura will wind up discounting the RDX relative to the X3. (See my post above.) And, ABSOLUTELY, I would take an RDX with a discount similar to that the TSX enjoys relative to the 3-Series over an X3. ...
... provided, of course, that the RDX handles as well as the X3 and not like the TL/MDX. I attended the BMW X3 Ultimate Driving Event last summer, and was VERY impressed by how hard that SAV could be driven without coming unglued from the road. BAD handling in the RDX, not a $35K price tag, would be the deal-breaker.
X3 rides stiff as a brick, though, and that wasn't even with the sport package. It's hard to get an SUV to handle well but I'd give up just a tad to have a decent ride.
-juice
Just my two cents.
My favorite? The RDX probably.
If the RDX has a 4 cyl turbo...it needs to be priced well below the BMW...probably a a thousand or so above the comparable Subaru turbo.
$35k tops for a loaded 6 cyl RDX. $30-32k if it is a turbo 4.
I have a lingering concern about the build quality of the RDX. My experience and friends' experiences with US built Acura's....they rattle. Beemers don't. Subaru's are pretty tightly built too.
Also, as mentioned before in pricing, I would be very surprised if Acura priced the RDX at $35K, My guess is that they are looking at $32K to $33K and possibly getting up to $35K with the Nav system. Any more and it will compete with its own MDX. Like the TSX and TL, I think they want some "breathing" room between vehicles. Though, it may just be that at a $35K pricing point, the new MDX would get bumped in price to start in the $40K range. I just hope they can keep the prices down so that people can see that they are not just great performing, reliable cars, but that they are a good value as well.
Take the price of a TSX and add $2-3K for the AWD system. Then add an extra $2K for the fact that it's an SUV with wagon utility and because Americans think SUVs are worth more than cars (it's just ingrained in our culture). Then add a few bucks for those extra bits.
I would not be the least bit surprised if the pricing went like this...
$32,500 - Base
$35,000 - Touring
$36,500 - Touring w/RES
$37,000 - Touring w/NAV
$39,500 - Touring with RES and NAV
I know many potential buyers will be thinking, "I can get a TL with a 6 cyl for mid 30's", and you'd be right. But you can get an Accord V6 for the price of a 4 cyl CR-V. That hasn't stopped CR-V sales. People still pay the premium for AWD and SUV utility.
Others may be thinking, "I can buy an MDX for the price of a loaded RDX", and you'd be right about that, too. But by the time the RDX hits the streets, the next generation MDX will be months away. And you can bet the next MDX is going to start at a higher base price than the current model.
The most recent rumors state that Honda has resolved that issue.
I'd say it's too soon for us to assume the RDX will be turbo-powered. But I wouldn't bet against it.
I also agree with varmint's pricing for the most part, I think prices could be anywhere from $1000 to $500 lower than (s)he posted, but otherwise your on the ball. As I said i a previous post, a 35K base RDX is economic suicide.
I'd say it would topping out at $37,500 and the MDX going on up from there.
For performance purposes, the turbo model has more torque. However the H6 won't suffer from turbo-lag. Pick your poison.
Most of my experience in turbo-powered cars comes from older models, but I generally prefer naturally aspirated engines. A good 6 cyl tends to get the job done with less drama.
Eliminate 2 speakers from the audio set up, or make them cheap paper cone units.
Make that driver's seat 6-way power adjustable instead of 8-way. (The passenger's would be manual.)
Forget about memory seats.
Eliminate the adjustable lumbar support.
Eliminate the telescopic wheel adjustment.
Eliminate SportShift.
Give it an el-cheapo head liner.
Cover the dash in either chintzy faux metal accents or poorly simulated wood.
Stuff like that would probably get the price down to $30,000 for the base model. You'd still have a powerful engine, on a capable chassis, with a very high-tech AWD system. But the total package would be just short of class-leading. Kind of like an Altima.
This choice splits even the usually tight-knit Subaru family. There are fans of both camps.
The turbo performs better, especially at altitude. It uses more gas, though, and has slight throttle lag (not much with a 2.5l with variable valve timing). The power is addictive so most people use it, and then pay at the pump.
The H6 is slightly more efficient in real-world driving (forget EPA), and quicker throttle response. It's also smoother. It's not as quick in just about every situation (even low revs, because it's tuned for high revs).
Pick your poison. There are trade-offs for both and no clear "better" engine.
I'd put the H6 in a commuter/luxury car, the turbo in a performance car. So Acura's choice will be interesting, and likely determine the overall character of the RDX. Since luxury intenders would likely go with an MDX anyway, a turbo might be interesting to spice things up.
-juice
The idea of Acura using both a turbo and 6 cyl is kinda warm and fuzzy, but not at all realistic. Right now, the best information points toward a turbo. The only drawback I see to that plan is what they might do with the CR-V, since it will be based on the same platform. A V6 could be tuned for both. Not sure how the mainstream mass market would react to a turbo CR-V.
As for the notion that luxury-buyers are shy of turbos, I'm not so sure. I agree that V6 smoothness would have great appeal. It's not the American or Japanese way to build luxury. So, my first instinct is to agree.
But, OTOH, the European players (Saab, Volvo, Porche, and Audi) have been offering turbo-charged cars for quite some time. Many of those brands have only done so-so with the turbo offerings, but it wouldn't be the first time Honda/Acura pulled off something the others could never accomplish.
Wanna talk jet engines?
Anyway, the newness of Acura and turbo-power might cause speculation, but, for whatever reason, Honda/Acura has never had a problem with introducing new things. The effectiveness of the design is far more important than the speculation. If the RDX is good, people will laude over Acura for the turbo.
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
will they build a RDX Type S?
Right now, the best information points toward a turbo.
I'd be curious to know where that "best information" comes from. I'm not aware of any Honda/Acura spokesperson suggesting that a turbo-4 is the direction they're headed with the RDX, and I don't know of any current or planned Honda/Acura offering in the US that uses a turbo-4. It would hardly be surprising if Acura -- like BMW with the X3/X5 or the 330/530-- used it's existing 6-cyl powerplant. (Unless the Acura engine is substantially larger and heavier than the BMW engine, it clearly can be done. And what's going to separate the MDX from the RDX buyer is going to be demand for space (esp. 3rd row seating) rather than engine size.
OTOH, the European players (Saab, Volvo, Porche, and Audi) have been offering turbo-charged cars for quite some time. Many of those brands have only done so-so with the turbo offerings, but it wouldn't be the first time Honda/Acura pulled off something the others could never accomplish.
Say what you want about Saab, but Volvo, Porsche and Audi have hardly had "so-so" levels of success with their turbos. For instance, the best-selling Euro SUV in America is predominantly sold with turbos. Honda/Acura would hardly be leading the way.
Maybe the RDX WILL turn out to be powered by a turbo-4. But I'd at least like to see the information sourced to a RELIABLE company source (if not directly then through a journalist with true industry cred.)
And let's not get carried away with the Honda/Acura love. I think they make great cars. I have one now and I will be taking a close look at the RDX when it launches for all the reasons previously posted. But I don't think Acura is exactly breaking new ground here.
We hear rumors and share them. A lot of times you see spy shots or hear rumors from people direclty or indirectly involved with the project, hence the discussions.
Plus, keep in mind the "best information" often comes from a secret source, or even a source not mentionable due to Edmunds rules (no links to competing sites).
So while you're being very idealistic, to say the least, the rest of us will continue to enjoy sharing the rumors and discussing the uncomfirmed possibilities and the pros and cons of each.
Have a nice day.
-juice
For the source of those rumors, try the articles section at TOV. (I think Edmunds will allow me to say at least that much.) If it makes you feel any better, the concept RD-X shown at the auto show last year was powered by a four banger.
As for the success of Audi, Volvo, and Saab, only Audi has had real success here in the US. And a large number of the cars they sell are naturally aspirated. If you look at sales of thier turbo-powered models alone, the picture does't look so rosey.
Lastly, I don't recall anyone saying that Acura is breaking new ground. Other than to say that the RDX is new ground for the Acura line-up.
I think the FR-V and the RDX might be twins (or based on each other). I also think that the RDX pictured here is almost exactly what you are going to get. Take for example the 2004 TL. The top photo is of the concept car, the bottom is of the production car.
About the closest thing we have here in the US is the Mazda5.
Sorry. For my part, I don't see any physical resemblance. It looks like a combination of the Odyssey and the Civic Si hatchback. I mean, there are a few shared styling cues, but no more than I could count with other Honda models.
FR-V is a small platform made roomy, taller especially. Looks very space efficient.
RDX looks wider, more squat and sporty. It's hard to explain but it seems like a smaller vehicle built on a bigger platform.
Vague, I know. Sorry.
-juice