2010 Acura RDX
Last Updated:
Not all new, just slightly revised. With the Acura belt buckle grille…
And now available in 2WD. But still, even without AWD the HWY mileage is only 24MPG.
A shame really, for a 4 cylinder car in 2010.
That’s what I got in my Infiniti EX test drive. With a big 3.5 Liter V6! And AWD!
This car is so odd to me. It feels forced, Acura really needs an overhaul of their vanilla, out of sync image.
Man. Honda is just sealing their coffin. Their cars are just getting uglier and uglier and uglier.
Driven normally here in so cal , 80 on the highway and no feathered foot around town and i only get 21 mpg a tank and thats pitifull !
Turbo is bogus for added fuel economy…Like the Ford EcoBoost crap.
Looks like a GMC Acadia fromt with an Acura Grill Insert. Roof is like Mercedes new little 4x4cuv (which is actually Mercedes best work yet, on suv's). Dash has that Pontiac look with a hint of Range Rover put into the consoul. It may all be a mish-mash of conflicting styles to some; but to my eyes this is the best thing Acura has ever done! (No, I'm not saying it's great — just much better than the typical Acura).
Still ugly. And no way anyone would pay $40K for a 4-cylinder under power vehicle like this. Unless they are blinded by the name tag Acura.
The auto RDX gets 22 on th HWY. Downright a turnoff. My 2001 MDX gets 23. Is Honda going backwards?
It is a nice vehicle, but I disliked it after I test drove it because of its stiff and especially choppy ride. Gas mileage just hammered the last nail.
The real sad part is that people will still buy this because "It's a Honda! err Acura". Sad little sheeple
"Anonymous said…
The auto RDX gets 22 on th HWY. Downright a turnoff. My 2001 MDX gets 23. Is Honda going backwards?
July 24, 2009 1:18 PM"
Which one is more performance oriented and is a quicker vehicle by far? That's what I thought.
The turbo lag is a joke but it is fast at 5000 rpm.
"Which one is more performance oriented and is a quicker vehicle by far? That's what I thought."
What has this to do with gas mileage?
5:22 AM…Seriously?
F#$% Hondas are really, really ugly!
but the RDX is way way bigger than an EX35.
still crappy mpg
"Anonymous Anonymous said…
The turbo lag is a joke but it is fast at 5000 rpm.
July 25, 2009 12:56 AM"
You either are retarded or you haven't driven one. The turbo lag is a non issue as the turbo is already spooling up below 2000RPM.
Get real.
The EX35 is an absolute joke.
Smaller than a compact SUV, less practical than one as well. Terrible MPGs and they ride like crap. Have you ever seen the back seat and cargo area of one???? Useless.
Infinity really missed the boat on that one, and its sales prove that. I have seen maybe two in my area since they were released.
"5:22 AM…Seriously?"
Seriously. Weight and engine efficiency are the culprits, and not performance. The Infiniti EX will kick the RDX around 24/7, but despite Infiniti's inneficient engines, it can still manage 23 or 24 on the HWY.
very comfortable seats; lots of leg room for tall drivers; very fast and powerful, same size or larger than X3, and new Mercedes and Audi mini SUVs, much morereliable. What's the problem???
ex35 is king, cx7 is second, this dud doesn't even rate.
"Anonymous said…
"5:22 AM…Seriously?"
Seriously. Weight and engine efficiency are the culprits, and not performance. The Infiniti EX will kick the RDX around 24/7, but despite Infiniti's inneficient engines, it can still manage 23 or 24 on the HWY.
July 27, 2009 6:33 AM"
Check the forums, not many people at ALL are acheiving those figures.
The RDX isn't as quick in a straight line but it outhandles the EX.
"Dr. Zhivago said…
ex35 is king, cx7 is second, this dud doesn't even rate.
July 27, 2009 7:10 AM"
The EX35 is king of what? Have you checked the sales figures and reviews? It isn't the king of anything.
As for the CX-7, check the comments under Vince's CR-V review. Some poor guy (or girl) purchased a CX-7 that sounded like a nightmare. I have seen the reliability data for that vehicle from CR and it isn't reliable or well liked.
I liked the interior and yes it DOES have turbo lag which I *HATE*
There is no replacement for displacement.
" Anonymous said…
I liked the interior and yes it DOES have turbo lag which I *HATE*
There is no replacement for displacement.
July 27, 2009 7:01 PM"
The lag is until about 1500 RPM, which is pretty much nonexistent. Have you ever driven a WRX, Mazdaspeed3 or 6, CX-7, any Volvo/Saab with a turbo motor??? ALL of those have MUCH worse lag.
There is no replacement for displacement, but for some reason this is still one of the quickest and best performing CUVs in its category. It is quicker and better handling than the X3, Q5, GLK, XC60, etc.
The lag is to about 1800 and then it pulls. As a real driver, this sucks! Just give me a GM LS9 a real mans engine.
Low end torque baby…Don't waste my time with exhaust-driven windbags.
"Anonymous said…
The lag is to about 1800 and then it pulls. As a real driver, this sucks! Just give me a GM LS9 a real mans engine.
July 28, 2009 10:23 PM"
Idiot.
A turbo F/I engine that has a lag of about 1000RPM (from idle) is nothing. See the persons post at July 28, 2009 6:13 AM.
Can you turbo goofs even read a power graph?
The two biggest lies.
"The check is in the mail"
"Virtually no turbo lag"
Looks like a Parrot fish with an Ich infection.
It looks like Paris Hilton's panties…No…Wait….
This makes me want to cry.
A proper engine and 28 MPG highway.