wildeklave

Acura will be debuting their 2016 updated RDX at the Chicago auto show in 2 weeks. It is expected to have all the features available on the MDX and TLX. Rumors also have it getting the 6 Cylinder Direct Injection engine with the 6 speed transmission that produces about 290 horsepower and 267 torque. If pricing is competitive with the NX I can see them competing for customers. Obviously those looking for a sporty look will go with the NX but the average consumer may look at both.

corradoMR2

^^^+1

With the new (finally) safety tech plus the expected jewel LED head lights slated for the RDX, it will better play the role of a compact luxury CUV and be an even stronger value in this segment. People will be drawn to it for its more conservative styling and smooth powerful V6 powertrain while people will be drawn to the NX's segment-standout styling and Lexus reputation among other characteristics. It will be a tight race to see who takes the crown at the end of the year, but the RDX definitely has the upper hand with the 44k units sold last year.

Swacer

I am intrigued by this also. However, I have to say that I am not a fan of the 200 projectors on the front of the current MDX, and if the RDX carries that same look, I will feel the same about it as well.

I have been a honda fan my entire life, but something about that ugly beak on teh front, its just a buzz kill. When i saw the NSX this past weekend, I loved everything about it, except their little touch with that beak.

In regards to hp, I can't see 290hp being any more useful than 235hp when it comes to an SUV. No one is racing you down the road saying "look how fast my family hauler is!" As long as its enough hp to get the weight moving, i think its ok.

DenM54

My third Acura in a row was a 2008 MDX, which I loved and had no real problems with through all the years of ownership, When I began looking for a new vehicle, a year or so ago, I automatically assumed that I would probably get a new RDX. I did not like the redesigned MDX (which was what I was originally looking forward too).

The 2015 RDX came out with what seemed to be the same tech as my 2008 MDX. I knew that 2016 was supposed to be the MMC refresh. I got tired of waiting and then began looking at the NX (because of this forum).

Even with now owning an NX F-Sport, I am still curious to see what Acura comes up with in the new RDX.

Mehul1456

I thought about waiting for the 2016 RDX but I just couldnt wait that long because I totaled my altima and needed a replacement ASAP. I think the Acura woudl have been a good choice. I almost pulled the trigger on the 2015 RDX cause was so much cheaper than the 2015 NX but once I discovered that Acura was going to put out a New 2016 refresh I had to go with the NX. I new I woudl regret the 2015 RDX once I saw the new 2016s. The fact that I need a vehicle soon cannot wait a year basically sealed my choice for the NX, though I wish I could have waited to compare the NX and 2016 RDX.

After looking at the new renderings and reviews of the RDX I can say, on looks alone, it would have been a coin flip. I imagine that t a 2016 RDX with Tech Pkg is going to be cheaper than my NX with Premium&Navigation Pkg and other options which are generally standard on Acura's. It will all depend on the Tech that Acura offers before I get jealous... Right now I think my NX will be better equipped then the new RDX might be ( but I also may have ended up paying more for the NX). Either way, I was able to have the NX NOW (in what would have other wise been a coin flip decision) and thats why I am fully satisfied with my choice.

Husker4the

We are looking forward to seeing the refresh of the RDX. Initially we were sold on the NX but I was unable to have one the way I wanted right away so now the RDX is firmly in play.

I absolutely love the look of the NX F Sport but really don't like the smaller cargo area (relative to the competition) and most of all the narrow seats on the F Sport. The RDX should have similar fuel economy with a larger engine and will finally receive the tech features to compete in the small luxury SUV category (radar cruise, blind spot monitoring, cooled seats, Lane keep assist). I also don't like that I can't get cooled seats or Lane Keep Assist in the F Sport. I'm not interested in the non-F-Sport one bit due to the overbite.

The NX was initially going to be driven by me, but if we get the RDX it will be my wife's and I will then drive our 2014 MDX. My wife isn't comfortable driving a Lexus but is comfortable driving an Acura. We both like the understated luxury of Acura but if it were up to me I'd rather have a Lexus

Downsides of the RDX versus the NX imho include -- no reclining rear seats, not as modern looking. Otherwise Acura may win us over - as long as the tech features are there and there is the option of heated steering wheel, etc. Exterior and interior makeovers (no official pics yet) will play a role as well. As of right now I think we are leaning to the RDX. I like that the RDX in this generation has been around for a few years versus the brand new NX.

I also need to spend more time in an NX and especially in the F Sport seats to make an accurate decision. I had an RDX as a loaner and it was a fun little ride. The NX felt a bit more cramped mostly due to perceived headroom, but I also liked that it felt a touch more like a sports car because of that.

If we wait long enough maybe specs on the soon to be redesigned Audi Q5 will be out and we'll have another option so much competition in this category.

corradoMR2

^^^ Interesting photo Roger and what we can most certainly expect on the production '16 RDX is to have the multi-LED front lighting and grille/bumper changes to the front and similar though more subtle changes at the rear end. Interior updates are expected to be even more subtle mostly to accommodate interfaces for the new expected tech like BSM, pre-collision, lane departure, and so on. Much like the CRV got new safety tech, a new EarthDreams 4-cyl engine, and a new styling refresh for 2015, the RDX will likely receive similar updates in its mid-cyle (not sure about powertrain though). Remember, the RDX was all new for MY 2013 and typical vehicle lifecycles are 5-6 or more years nowadays making a full redesign RDX not at least for another 3 years.

gyrase321

That curvaceous profile resembles the Infiniti QX 50. I prefer Acura's current design language which is very masculine and understated.

rogerh00

I've been informed the image I posted is not a RDX but a concept for a smaller Chinese model.
See this site:
http://www.hondaforce.com/acura-suv-x-concept/ Sorry about that.

GSteg

iTrader: (15)

I have to disagree. HP is not just for racing. Along with more hp usually comes with more torque, and I bet the V6 will be less stressed than the NX's turbo-4 when you're hauling a full load, or need passing power. The NX has enough power to move, but so does a Kia Rio I really like the NX, but I'm waiting for an updated hybrid powertrain. Hopefully it's going to have 250+ hp.

Swacer

I wasn't insinuating racing, but I'm just saying that hp numbers don't really mean anything.

And your comment that more hp usually comes with more torque is not always a true pairing. The average tractor trailer has 400hp, but over 1000ft-lbs of torque. It comes from how the engine is designed. Torque comes from increasing the bore of the cylinder and decreasing the stroke. I can take a 4 cylinder and create a ton more torque than an equal displacement V6. Furthermore, boosting will always optimize torque, thats the reason that the NX is able to produce 258ft-lbs of torque out of a boosted 2.0 making 235hp while the Acura RDX can produce 251ft-lbs of torque but requires 3.5 liters to do it and 273hp.

Your torque number is always dependent upon engine design, not the hp number.

Thus, if you're hoping for the car to have the ability to get out of its way under a heavy load, the NX wins.

EDIT: Another example. Audi RS5 is a high revving 4.2L V8 making 450hp but only 317ft-lbs of torque.

My camaro on the other hand, small block chevy, 6.2L V8 with all low end torque, in which I make (when it was stock) 426hp and 420ft-lbs of torque.

From a dig, I win everytime. Torque means more than hp anyday.

LexBob2

Another advantage to the turbo is they make their torque at low rpm's. The NX's maximum torque is available at 1,650 rpms. Most other 2.0t engine are the same, in the 1,250-1,650 range.

Having said that, there are times when I miss the nice smooth, linear and quiet feel of a good V6.

GSteg

iTrader: (15)

My comment is a generalization. It's not applicable to all designs, but true for the J35. You're not going to get 273hp with less than 200 ft-lbs unless your stroke is really short and you make all the torque near redline, which is dumb for an SUV. Also, you have the bore vs stroke backwards. Longer stroke (more leverage) creates more torque, ala diesel.

I suppose we should see if Lexus releases an NX350. It would have to be down on power compared to the RX350, but I'll bet most will find driveability better with a 3.5L V6 than a 2.0L I4-T. All irrelevant to me though, since I'll most likely be waiting for an updated hybrid variant.

Swacer

Maybe you're right...maybe I do have them switched....hmmm... I"ll check into it again.

Yes, I had them switched. My bad

corradoMR2

From my experience, the RX and IS have more readily-available V6 power than the NX's 2L Turbo. What this means is power delivery is instantaneous the moment you depress the accelerator pedal at any speed. In fact, the 2.5L V6 in the IS feels "torquier" than the RXs and far more than the NX's at initial throttle input, but after that half second or so under heavy throttle, the 2L Turbo sings to a hushed tune and pulls very strongly.

In short, the RDX will have the upper hand with its V6 power and expected similar fuel economy over the NX's.