Edmunds Evaluation: 2007 Acura RDX

[Variance]

Edmunds Evaluation: 2007 Acura RDX

Attenzione, per favore. While driving the all-new 2007 Acura RDX, we were listening to Italian language CDs.

It might seem odd to be studying Italian while driving a Japanese SUV but we figured Honda is learning to speak a new language with its first turbocharged engine, so why shouldn't we? After one minute in the charismatic new RDX, we realized we should have been brushing up on our German. The RDX is a Japanese SUV, made for the American market, but it drives like a German sport sedan.

When the RDX's turbocharger kicked in, we actually giggled in four languages.

Read "Turbocharged language lessons" @ Edmunds

[regfootball]

sure it drives great but it really lacks any sort of true style worthy of being in a luxury segment. why didn't honda give it any looks? guess they don't know how.

Edited September 15, 2006 by regfootball

[Drew Dowdell]

Proof that even a great SUV can still end up looking like a CRV De Lux

[Drew Dowdell]

EPA fuel economy estimates are [b]19 city/23 highway [/b]but those figures are a bit optimistic. We averaged 11 mpg a citta and 17 a l'autostrada but we were admittedly heavy-footed. The turbo boost is just too much fun to drive conservatively. Please note: The RDX drinks premium [b]91 octane gasoline[/b]

!!!!

Put in perspective, the Vue Red-Line has 250hp and gets 19/25.... and yes I know it's a honda engine.

[Drew Dowdell]

gosh that looks cheap....

I do like the over all look though.... the way those verticle silver bars, hide, then reappear below the HVAC, making it look as if the HVAC is mounted on rails.

Edited September 15, 2006 by Oldsmoboi

[Croc]

I don't think it looks cheap at all. That closeup is prolly with some kind of flash (doesn't look like an OEM photo)...so if that's how it looks at its worst I'll take it!

[siegen]

EPA fuel economy estimates are [b]19 city/23 highway [/b]but those figures are a bit optimistic. We averaged 11 mpg a citta and 17 a l'autostrada but we were admittedly heavy-footed. The turbo boost is just too much fun to drive conservatively. Please note: The RDX drinks premium [b]91 octane gasoline[/b]

!!!!

Put in perspective, the Vue Red-Line has 250hp and gets 19/25.... and yes I know it's a honda engine.

193648[/snapback]

They would have probably done fine with a V6, but it would have taken up more room and required a larger engine compartment. This is based off of the CRV, so a 4cyl was the best option. Plus, the economy isn't bad, just look at the BMW X3. Luxury cars almost always get less mileage than their regular counterparts, even if they don't weigh much more. They have a lot more electronic goodies and other things (like SH-AWD) that suck up power and mpg.

[regfootball]

EPA fuel economy estimates are [b]19 city/23 highway [/b]but those figures are a bit optimistic. We averaged 11 mpg a citta and 17 a l'autostrada but we were admittedly heavy-footed. The turbo boost is just too much fun to drive conservatively. Please note: The RDX drinks premium [b]91 octane gasoline[/b]

!!!!

Put in perspective, the Vue Red-Line has 250hp and gets 19/25.... and yes I know it's a honda engine.

193648[/snapback]

you know one of the mags only got 13.8 mpg testing the RDX, right?

My buddy told me last night his new 2007 Avalanche gets 17-18 mpg CONSISTENTLY.

[regfootball]

They would have probably done fine with a V6, but it would have taken up more room and required a larger engine compartment. This is based off of the CRV, so a 4cyl was the best option. Plus, the economy isn't bad, just look at the BMW X3. Luxury cars almost always get less mileage than their regular counterparts, even if they don't weigh much more. They have a lot more electronic goodies and other things (like SH-AWD) that suck up power and mpg.

193668[/snapback]

38k for a tarted up CRV, what great value for your hard earned money! 4 CYLINDERS ONLY!

[siegen]

you know one of the mags only got 13.8 mpg testing the RDX, right?

My buddy told me last night his new 2007 Avalanche gets 17-18 mpg CONSISTENTLY.

193693[/snapback]

Can you stop using giant bolded letters? And also stop it with the double standard. Do you think your buddy drives his Avalanche like the mag reviewer drove the RDX? Does your buddy drive WOT through twisties or do several 0-60, 1/4 runs to see how fast his vehicle is? You said yourself test drives are not a good source for the MPG a vehicle will actually get, and that a magazine should review the car for at least 10,000 miles to get anything worthwhile out of the MPG information.

Quote from the Edmunds article: "we were admittedly heavy-footed. The turbo boost is just too much fun to drive conservatively."

38k for a tarted up CRV, what great value for your hard earned money! 4 CYLINDERS ONLY!

It starts at 33k. And isn't the Escalade just a tarted up Chevrolet SUV? Except it doesn't do anything better. At least the RDX performs, handles, and looks better than its lesser sibling.

Edited September 15, 2006 by siegen

[Drew Dowdell]

It starts at 33k. And isn't the Escalade just a tarted up Chevrolet SUV? Except it doesn't do anything better. At least the RDX performs, handles, and looks better than its lesser sibling.

193710[/snapback]

I drive my Avalanche like I stole it, almost never on the highway, and frequently carrying or towing heavy loads. 14.9mpg.... almost every time. It does go higher if I am going long distance on a highway.

Heck, even with a loaded Uhaul trailer and a full truck bed, going over the mountains of West VA I did 12.9.

Escalade has a 6-speed and a larger engine, it's a bit more than "tarted up"

[sciguy_0504]

The gas mileage is horrible but it does sound like they drove it hard. The exterior is growing on my a little bit. It has style, no denying that, Reg. The interior seems nice, too. You have to give points to Acura for being only the second lux manufacturer to get a product in this segment while everyone else is lagging.

[pow]

I find this car appealing, even though I'm not much of Asian-car fan. The grille/hood opening is unique, the interior is rather nice, the size is just right, and it's loaded with stuff.

[toyoguy]

the reason the RDX is a 4banger is Honda didn't wants lose MDX buyers. Very difficult to sell the two w/o cannabilizing sales.

[regfootball]

I drive my Avalanche like I stole it, almost never on the highway, and frequently carrying or towing heavy loads.  14.9mpg.... almost every time. It does go higher if I am going long distance on a highway.

Heck, even with a loaded Uhaul trailer and a full truck bed, going over the mountains of West VA I did 12.9.

Escalade has a 6-speed and a larger engine, it's a bit more than "tarted up"

193715[/snapback]

I think C/D got 16

mpg out of their 2007 test Escalade.

[regfootball]

The gas mileage is horrible but it does sound like they drove it hard.  The exterior is growing on my a little bit.  It has style, no denying that, Reg.  The interior seems nice, too.  You have to give points to Acura for being only the second lux manufacturer to get a product in this segment while everyone else is lagging.

193729[/snapback]

if you want a turbo 4 suv at a real price, get the cx-7.

for the price of the RDX, it should have a 6 cylinder. Big time miss by honda.

[regfootball]

the reason the RDX is a 4banger is Honda didn't wants lose MDX buyers.  Very difficult to sell the two w/o cannabilizing sales.

193756[/snapback]

old era GM tactics then, "the buick can't get the northstar because then who would buy the Cadillac'?

that's a cop out for Honda just like it always was and is for GM.

[Flybrian]

I'd rather have an actual car, thank you, like a TSX wagon. I still don't like tiny stuff like this regardless of who makes it

[siegen]

I think C/D got 16

   

mpg out of their 2007 test Escalade.

193767[/snapback]

Again you're missing the point. How did the testers drive the Escalade? I have a feeling they were not as aggressive with it at the RDX.

[pow]

Again you're missing the point. How did the testers drive the Escalade? I have a feeling they were not as aggressive with it at the RDX.

193777[/snapback]

Actually, C&D got...

11

[Drew Dowdell]

Again you're missing the point. How did the testers drive the Escalade? I have a feeling they were not as aggressive with it at the RDX.

193777[/snapback]

Perhaps, but you also don't *need* to be as agressive when you have 417 ft/lbs of torque at 4300 rpm and a 6-speed auto.

and please.... Edmunds not beating the snot out of a tester car?

[siegen]

Perhaps, but you also don't *need* to be as agressive when you have 417 ft/lbs of torque at 4300 rpm and a 6-speed auto.

and please.... Edmunds not beating the snot out of a tester car? 

193780[/snapback]

My point is, they are going to drive the RDX more sportingly than the Escalade. If they tried to take the Escalade around twisties or a mountain road it would probably flip over. There's a difference between being heavy on the throttle taking off from each steet light, and being at WOT constantly coming out of every apex.

if you want a turbo 4 suv at a real price, get the cx-7.

for the price of the RDX, it should have a 6 cylinder.  Big time miss by honda.

193768[/snapback]

If you option out the CX-7 to the price of the RDX, they will actually be very similarly equipped. Except with the RDX you're getting a better AWD system, a better sound system, better driving dynamics, a luxury nameplate, and other goodies. If you compare a BMW X3 to those two, you will quickly see it lacks a lot of features that the RDX and CX-7 have standard, and is more expensive at the same time. It is common for luxury brands to get more money out of the same thing, except with Acura, you are actually getting your money's worth. Plus the RDX has a better warranty and isn't a Ford.

[regfootball]

I'd rather have an actual car, thank you, like a TSX wagon. I still don't like tiny stuff like this regardless of who makes it

193775[/snapback]

[regfootball]

The gas mileage is horrible but it does sound like they drove it hard.  The exterior is growing on my a little bit.  It has style, no denying that, Reg.  The interior seems nice, too.  You have to give points to Acura for being only the second lux manufacturer to get a product in this segment while everyone else is lagging.

193729[/snapback]

well, the segment is still new.

Hemi equipped 300's, Chargers, and Magnums get better mpg in mag tests than the RDX did.

The RDX gains its power the old fashioned way, by SUCKING fuel.

The damned AWD RL with its v6 can't even suck that much fuel. I hear Honda had to keep the price down so the RDX buyers could still afford fuel after the car payments and insurance.

And Chipotle and Starbucks habits.

[regfootball]

Actually, C&D got...

11

                 

193778[/snapback]

did u look at the current issue?

[Intrepidation]

193840[/snapback]

eeww

well, the segment is still new.

Hemi equipped 300's, Chargers, and Magnums get better mpg in mag tests than the RDX did.

The RDX gains its power the old fashioned way, by SUCKING fuel.

The damned AWD RL with its v6 can't even suck that much fuel.  I hear Honda had to keep the price down so the RDX buyers could still afford fuel after the car payments and insurance.

And Chipotle and Starbucks habits.

193842[/snapback]

Give me 300/Charger/Magnum with a Hemi over that thing anyday, especially if they get better gas milage than it. Still, the exterior isn't bad and the interior is pretty sweet looking.