2013 Acura RDX drops turbo four in favor of V6
01-09-12, 11:58 PM
#16
Lexus Fanatic
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Los Angeles/Vancouver
Posts: 6,231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not diggin much of it. The slumped over rear roofline and abbreviated rear window lends a hatchback look, which cheapens the theme and carries a compact look . The Hot Wheels rims are immature and classless, the grille is still unecessarily overstyled, and the coal bin cabin needs some warming up (wood). Also, the taillights and rear hatch are copies of the Audi A7, a look we've all seen since the mid-2000's. Nothing really new there at all.
I also don't think jumping to the V6 is progress. While many manufacturers are creating successful turbo fours with good power and high MPG's, Acura dumps theirs and goes the opposite direction. In my opinion, that shows they could not come up with their own successful compact motor. While the 3.5 V6 is solid, one wonders what would have or could have been if Honda worked their magic on a proper 2.0 turbo. Maybe back in the days when Honda led with technology.
I also don't think jumping to the V6 is progress. While many manufacturers are creating successful turbo fours with good power and high MPG's, Acura dumps theirs and goes the opposite direction. In my opinion, that shows they could not come up with their own successful compact motor. While the 3.5 V6 is solid, one wonders what would have or could have been if Honda worked their magic on a proper 2.0 turbo. Maybe back in the days when Honda led with technology.
and that the 2012 CR-V is more futuristically designed than this RDX "prototype"
but the truth is, i prefer this more conservative design over the so forward and progressive CR-V
jumping to V6 isnt progress
but getting 20/28 on SH-AWD for this car while making 273hp is decent progress, especially considering they've upsized this car
Last edited by UberNoob; 01-10-12 at 12:01 AM.
01-10-12, 04:18 AM
#17
Lexus Test Driver
From what I read they are not using SH-AWD in order to save weight. The Honda/Acura boards aren't happy about this as this will be the only AWD in an Acura that isn't SH-AWD.
01-10-12, 05:50 AM
#18
Guest
Posts: n/a
01-10-12, 06:07 AM
#20
With how much success Honda has had with the CRV, and Acura with the MDX, the fact that they got the RDX so wrong from the beginning was mind boggling.
Now we have a car that looks quite a bit like the last Saturn Vue, and it's lost Acura's trademark SH-AWD. I think the move to the V6 is a good idea, and making it a tad bigger won't hurt either. However, even though Acura is trying to identify and build a design language, this car came out surprisingly...blah. The front end is not particularly befitting for an SUV and looks pretty tame - more family sedan than lux CUV. The side profile is fine, but also a little vanilla, and the same goes for the rear end. At least the interior looks decent.
Maybe Acura is gun-shy on trying to design anything better than vanilla after the TL disaster, but I think this is another fumble for the brand. Q5 and X3 are gobbling up marketshare and the RX is untouchable...Acura should have put a little more personality into this one - I think it would have really paid off, because they got the basic formula right (finally).
Now we have a car that looks quite a bit like the last Saturn Vue, and it's lost Acura's trademark SH-AWD. I think the move to the V6 is a good idea, and making it a tad bigger won't hurt either. However, even though Acura is trying to identify and build a design language, this car came out surprisingly...blah. The front end is not particularly befitting for an SUV and looks pretty tame - more family sedan than lux CUV. The side profile is fine, but also a little vanilla, and the same goes for the rear end. At least the interior looks decent.
Maybe Acura is gun-shy on trying to design anything better than vanilla after the TL disaster, but I think this is another fumble for the brand. Q5 and X3 are gobbling up marketshare and the RX is untouchable...Acura should have put a little more personality into this one - I think it would have really paid off, because they got the basic formula right (finally).
01-10-12, 10:25 AM
#21
With how much success Honda has had with the CRV, and Acura with the MDX, the fact that they got the RDX so wrong from the beginning was mind boggling.
Now we have a car that looks quite a bit like the last Saturn Vue, and it's lost Acura's trademark SH-AWD. I think the move to the V6 is a good idea, and making it a tad bigger won't hurt either. However, even though Acura is trying to identify and build a design language, this car came out surprisingly...blah. The front end is not particularly befitting for an SUV and looks pretty tame - more family sedan than lux CUV. The side profile is fine, but also a little vanilla, and the same goes for the rear end. At least the interior looks decent.
Maybe Acura is gun-shy on trying to design anything better than vanilla after the TL disaster, but I think this is another fumble for the brand. Q5 and X3 are gobbling up marketshare and the RX is untouchable...Acura should have put a little more personality into this one - I think it would have really paid off, because they got the basic formula right (finally).
Now we have a car that looks quite a bit like the last Saturn Vue, and it's lost Acura's trademark SH-AWD. I think the move to the V6 is a good idea, and making it a tad bigger won't hurt either. However, even though Acura is trying to identify and build a design language, this car came out surprisingly...blah. The front end is not particularly befitting for an SUV and looks pretty tame - more family sedan than lux CUV. The side profile is fine, but also a little vanilla, and the same goes for the rear end. At least the interior looks decent.
Maybe Acura is gun-shy on trying to design anything better than vanilla after the TL disaster, but I think this is another fumble for the brand. Q5 and X3 are gobbling up marketshare and the RX is untouchable...Acura should have put a little more personality into this one - I think it would have really paid off, because they got the basic formula right (finally).
01-11-12, 10:13 AM
#22
Lexus Fanatic
Ordinarily I would prefer a V6 over a turbo-4 (though the VW/Audi 2.0T is a real honey of a powerplant). But the last-generation RDX's turbo-4 had one thing going for it. It was (arguably) the ONLY Honda/Acura in-line four I've ever driven that had any REAL torque at low RPMs. All of the others were as peaky as Dolly Parton's bra, and had virtually no low-end torque.
01-11-12, 12:36 PM
#23
Ordinarily I would prefer a V6 over a turbo-4 (though the VW/Audi 2.0T is a real honey of a powerplant). But the last-generation RDX's turbo-4 had one thing going for it. It was (arguably) the ONLY Honda/Acura in-line four I've ever driven that had any REAL torque at low RPMs. All of the others were as peaky as Dolly Parton's bra, and had virtually no low-end torque.
01-11-12, 05:33 PM
#25
Lexus Champion
Tested the turbo RDX for the woman about a year ago but didn't like it. Now when I look at it, I think it's the most dated looking small SUV. New one looks much better.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
