Board logo

標題: MDX or RDX [打印本頁]
作者: elan7e    時間: 2009-8-24 21:23     標題: MDX or RDX

62 and 99 want to have a 4WD before coming winter.


RDX has turbo, is it easy to have problem? cost of maintenance will be more? Fuel consumption is no good?


MDX is reliable? It is heavy, fuel consumption is more? How about maintenance cost, which one is less?
作者: 吳孟達    時間: 2009-8-24 21:49

本帖最後由 吳孟達 於 2009-8-24 22:51 編輯

It is a money matter, if you can afford $50k +, go for MDX for room.
If you only have $40k, go for RDX for excellent 4wd and turbo power.

My car agent told me that RDX has better snow handling due to its weight and power.
MDX is not the case.

Last winter, when the car dealer trying to get RDX and MDX out from the lot, all RDX can get out from the snow. But seems some MDX were not the case due to its heavy weight.
作者: chobit    時間: 2009-8-24 21:49

You should drive both.  We brought the RDX, cuz we don't need the extra room from the MDX.  The MDX is actually more popular than thd RDX here in Seattle because it's quite a bit bigger.  But I drove both, the RDX is very resonsive, and feels like a sport car, the MDX actually feels like a pig and heavy..!  When my wife drove MDX as a loner car while our RDX is in for regular service, she was surprise how un-responsive the MDX was...!
作者: elan7e    時間: 2009-8-24 22:15

The old couple concern the TURBO 易唔易壞, 維修(regular service)貴唔貴, 會唔會比較食油? Reliability is good?
Thanks.
作者: Lik    時間: 2009-8-24 22:42

RDX is not exactly easy on gas for a vehicle of its size. And the MDX has been hit with an ugly stick. Heck, all current Acuras (with the exception of maybe the RDX) are either butt ugly or hideously ugly. Not sure why anyone would consider them at all.

For the most part, modern turbos are mostly trouble-free. But being an Acura, maintenance costs (at the factory) is anything but cheap la.

Instead of something with all wheel drive, I'd say a proper set of winter tires would be significantly more useful in wintery weather. That is to say, between an AWD equipped with all season tires, and a 2WD (doesn't matter if it's FWD or RWD) equipped with snow tires, I'll always take the 2WD with the snow tires.

-Lik
作者: Lik    時間: 2009-8-24 22:45

Oh, I take my words back, man. Even the RDX has been hit with the ugly stick now that it has the stupid Acura beak...

There is a reason why Acura is a phenomenal failure in the market right now. And you really don't have to look any further than its corporate beak~

-Lik
作者: ravemother    時間: 2009-8-24 23:31

i bought the RDX for its responsiveness over the MDX. the MDX drove like a boat.

i dun need to extra space anyway.

i got average 13L/100km (MIXED)....not bad for its size IMO.
作者: MSN04    時間: 2009-8-25 00:01

Q5...
EX35...
heck... i would even wait for the X1
作者: ccyip    時間: 2009-8-25 15:57

On a different subject, I test drove the RDX last month, and before any serious conversation with the salesman on pricing here was what he told me:

1. He can slash the freight and PDI - a saving of $2000.
2. $3500 factory rebate.
3. $1500 factory cash back if you are a current Mercedes/BMW owner.

I'm sure there's still some room for negotiation but technically you can buy the RDX for around $36K (maybe even less).  

This shows how desperate Acura is since nobody is buying their cars.
作者: elan7e    時間: 2009-8-25 18:29

7# ravemother

Thank you for everybody's input.

Would you mind, Ravemother, show me how much for the last three service bill? 等我好同老人家(actually not too old)交代一下,等他們衡量一下。
另外 if they drive like a grandmother, 這個Turbo會不會好似老虎困在竉裏，無從發揮而會壞呢？

Richonmd Acura 維修部好唔好?
作者: chobit    時間: 2009-8-25 18:35

So, Acura doesn't sell very well in Vancouver??

We do see lots of MDX and some RDX here in Seattle.

Let me share with everyone my opinions on the RDX.

Pro.
- Probably one of the best FWD Bias AWD for overall driving perforamnce and handling.
- Very little turbo lag when you drive in Sport mode
- plenty of power, you can easily go over the hwy speed limit w/o knowing  (70+ mph)
- Very comfortable front seat (Very nice/soft leather)
- Body-roll is very well control, you can easily drive above speed limit on/off hwy ramps.
- GPS can be operated while the car is in motion
- Sound system is good if not great
- road noise is a non-issue in most situations

Con
- Responsiveness is average when driving in normal mode
- We can do about 22-24mpg hwy, and approx 18-19 with 80% local  (My STi is doing anywhere between 16-17mpg in most cases), and my Miata is at about 26mpg.
- The front of the car is not as visable as either my 1st generation CR-V, or my 2000 Grand Cherokee.  Therefore, it's more difficult to park.
- The Dome light in the trunk is placed on the left, and not at the top, so it can be easily blocked by stuffs you have in the trunk.
- The high-tech GPS/head unit is not very non-english speaker friendly, since it has quite alot of advance features which use voice regonization.
- AC on/off or fan direction settings, etc.. is quite confusing.. you really have to think for a few sec.. before you know what you are doing each time...!  Try it and you would know what I mean.
- Sport suspension tuning, = bumpy ride when compare to typical SUV.  (Only on bumpy roads)
- Brake (Not sure if is a Pro or Con).  It feels more like a European car than Japanese car, where the brake need more pressure to response stronger braking, but other brake very well.  (I could be wrong with my braking experience, since my STi brake system is so good, I found both my Miata and RDX brake not very good)

At last, I suspect the RDX isn't doing well in Vancouver because if you are not a high-tech person, or your English is OK, but not great, than some of the selling points with the RDX are not valid to you.

On a different subject, I test drove the RDX last month, and before any serious conversation with the salesman on pricing here was what he told me:

1. He can slash the freight and PDI - a saving of $ ...
ccyip 發表於 2009-8-25 15:57
作者: ravemother    時間: 2009-8-25 20:11

本帖最後由 ravemother 於 2009-8-25 20:14 編輯
7# ravemother

Thank you for everybody's input.

Would you mind, Ravemother, show me how much for the last three service bill? 等我好同老人家(actually not too old)交代一下,等他們衡量一下。
另外 if t ...
elan7e 發表於 25-8-2009 18:29


Hey elan, bcuz the RDX uses a turbo engine, it needs more frequent servicing and the maintenance cost will be higher than car with NA engine. eg, it uses syntactic oil  

i usually pay $139 for each service at richmond acura. (oil change, oil filter change, inspection, tire rotation, free shuttle service and car wash etc)

you might want to know that the RDX has a build-in service monitor to tell you when to service based on the quality level of engine oil (sprint driving style reduces the oil quality faster). therefore, drivers with different style will have different service interval.

i usually need to bring it in every 5 months. note that: i am usually easy on the throttle.

i sort of agree with chobit, the suspension set up of the RDX might be a little bit stiff, but this is the point of getting a RDX for its handling. i like it!
作者: elan7e    時間: 2009-8-25 20:59

12# ravemother
I always think LYK are great. I get a lot of valuable information from here.

Thank you very much.
作者: ccyip    時間: 2009-8-26 11:15

本帖最後由 ccyip 於 2009-8-26 12:34 編輯

11# chobit

No, there are a lot of RDX and MDX in Vancouver - but they are outnumbered by the X3/GLK and X5/ML and to a lesser degree, the Audi Q5/Q7, especially in Richmond.

I'm not sure how much of a price difference between the Acuras and their European rivals in the US, but here in Canada there is only a $4000 difference (GLK costs 10% more) between a comparably-equipped RDX and a GLK based on their MSRPs (well, if you can live with no-option on the GLK, it actually costs less than the RDX on based price).  Reliabilty wise the Europeans may not be as good as the Japanese but for 10% more of the price a lot of people would opt for the Europeans.  I drove the Merc/Bimmer and the Japanese SUVs (Subaru, Acura, etc) and I can tell you I prefer the European cars' handling over the Japanese's.

The only way Acura sell is to heavily discount their cars, just like what we are seeing now (e.g. $8.5K factory rebate on RDX, $2K on TSX, $1.5K on TL, plus another $1.5K if you are a current Merc/BMW driver).  After the discount on the RDX there is a $10K difference rather than $4K with the GLK and this makes a lot more sense to buy the RDX.   This is perhaps the only reason I see a lot more RDX/MDX on the roads this year.

Also, the fugly Acura grilles are turning a lot of people away.  If you don't believe it please check out the latest victim, 2010 RDX.
作者: mcs889    時間: 2009-8-26 12:43

RDX.....gas meilage....no good. would be same as BMW V8's....15.5L/100km.....><

and turbo lag...
作者: chobit    時間: 2009-8-26 15:42

But Mercedes-Benz reliability has been more than poor wor...!

11# chobit

No, there are a lot of RDX and MDX in Vancouver - but they are outnumbered by the X3/GLK and X5/ML and to a lesser degree, the Audi Q5/Q7, especially in Richmond.

I'm not sure how much  ...
ccyip 發表於 2009-8-26 11:15
作者: chobit    時間: 2009-8-26 15:47

Real world milage for RDX 50/50 is more like 9-10L/100km....!


RDX.....gas meilage....no good. would be same as BMW V8's....15.5L/100km.....><

and turbo lag...
mcs889 發表於 2009-8-26 12:43
作者: chobit    時間: 2009-8-26 15:49

If SUV isn't as much as a factor, so of US/CA availability.  I would like to get a 335Xi Wagon which I believe is only available in Euro. or something..!
作者: shutterbug    時間: 2009-8-26 15:53

8.5k on mdx not rdx right?
作者: ccyip    時間: 2009-8-26 16:20

本帖最後由 ccyip 於 2009-8-26 17:43 編輯
8.5k on mdx not rdx right?
shutterbug 發表於 2009-8-26 16:53


Oh typo.  $8.5K factory rebate on MDX.  You can find it in the Acura website.

And you know why there is a typo?  Just blame Acura for dropping the household names like Integra, Legend, etc and uses the hard to pronounce letter names for their cars.  I don't like it.

Don't get me wrong, I used to drive an Acura and I still like the brand.  But the brand is declining and struggling to find buyers.  And the styling of the corporate grille doesn't help too.
作者: ccyip    時間: 2009-8-26 16:33

本帖最後由 ccyip 於 2009-8-26 17:51 編輯

16# chobit

Yes, MB's not very reliable these days with minor problems here and there and costly to fix.  However, there are always people think of it as "status symbol" and if they can afford it (since the starting price is not that far off from the Japanese SUVs), why not?

I guess it's still down to personal preference.  Some people like orange and some people like apple.

Personally if the price difference is only $4K between RDX and an GLK/X3, I would pick the GLK/X3.  But for $10K difference I would get the RDX.  Afterall, they are just trucks and if I want performace I would get a true sport car.
作者: Lik    時間: 2009-8-26 17:21

No, there are a lot of RDX and MDX in Vancouver - but they are outnumbered by the X3/GLK and X5/ML and to a lesser degree, the Audi Q5/Q7, especially in Richmond.
ccyip 發表於 2009-8-26 11:15

There are lots of RDX and MDX here in Vancouver? Not that I can see, and especially not of the Acura-beaked RDX. In fact, I haven't seen *ANY* Acura-beaked RDX outside of their showroom at all!

Acura's heyday were definitely back in the mid 90's when the DC Integra was out. The car was pretty much ubiquitous among younger folks. The EL, which was little more than a dressed up Civic, was also selling well. Even when it came to the early 2000's, the TL was still quite a respectable car, and the RSX wasn't bad either. The TSX, of course, was a stella car.

But then Honda decided to start designing ugly cars. The FD Civic looks ok, and the CP3 Accord has a passable look, although their looks pale in comparison to their predecessors. But the ugly award must definitely be given to the Acura beak, with the current TL taking top honours (although the upcoming ZDX is a close second). It almost seems like Acura went out of their way to design cars as ugly as they could think of. The completely random 3-letter naming scheme doesn't help either. After all, who remembers what all these meaningless letters stand for, especially when they either start with the same letter, or differ only by the first of the 3 letters?

I really feel sorry for the Acura dealers, you know. They've been totally screwed by Honda.

-Lik
作者: elan7e    時間: 2009-8-26 20:39

如果Acura的銷售量真的下降了，各位認為是因為外觀的新設計不討好，還是Acura近年的質量下降所引致呢？
作者: MSN04    時間: 2009-8-26 21:12

如果Acura的銷售量真的下降了，各位認為是因為外觀的新設計不討好，還是Acura近年的質量下降所引致呢？
elan7e 發表於 2009-8-26 21:39


質量下降
esp. those N. american made.  Simply crappy.
Japanese made still good tho.
作者: elan7e    時間: 2009-8-26 21:15

什麼車款仍是日本做？
作者: Lik    時間: 2009-8-26 21:42

Acura's market failure is a wide combination problems all added up together. Different people will think different aspects played a more important role, and the follow is my take on the issue:

As far as engineering is concerned, Honda (and therefore Acura) is still very solid, although engineering designs and built quality has dropped compared their heyday back in the early 90's. Mechanic parts are not as over-engineered and over-built, and you see more factory recalls issued for Honda / Acura, and some of them could be rather major. When the current gen of Civic was first released, there was a somewhat major recall (on the gas pedal, I think). Before that, another earlier generation of Civic was prone to suspension problems. The 6th gen Accord also suffered from transmission problems.

The biggest problem I see with Acura has to do with market positioning. Unlike Lexus and Nissan, Honda's market positioning for Acura is very poorly handled. Acura was originally the first upscale brand among the Japanese manufacturers, but Honda never defined Acura's role very clearly. Toyota made Lexus to be an upscale, luxury brand that competes with Mercedes, BMW, and Audi, and their brand's cachet missed its goal initially, nowadays Lexus is almost every bit as competitive as the German big boys. Nissan got off to rough start with Infiniti, but they finally found their niche to be an upscale sporty brand that gives BMW a good run for their money. But Acura? In the late 80's, Acura tried to be a sporty version of Honda, and that almost worked. But it was still too easy to tell the cars were only slightly more dressed up than the down-to-earth Hondas. The DC Integra in the mid 90's was a phenomenal success, securing the brand's reputation as young and sporty. But their bigger cars were still too closely related to Honda Accords and it showed, so sales of those never really took off. Worse still, Honda left the DC Integra to languish for too long. In addition to killing the 4-door model, the sporty image that was hard-earned by the DC Integra was widely tarnished when its successor, the RSX, showed up with inferior handling capabilities. And with that, Acura lost its single most valuable asset that it worked so hard to achieve.

The EL sold well in Canada, but then Honda killed it since its market position was too close to the top end Civics and the Integra/RSX. The plan totally backfired, as people didn't want to pay top dollars for a Civic, and the RSX wasn't a 4-door. So now Acura doesn't have an entry level model. When the CSX finally showed up, people found it too expensive and too similar to the Civic, so they just bought Civics instead.

The 1st gen TSX was a phenomenal success, but at the time, the RSX wasn't selling well, and FWD V6 just wasn't people's ideas of what luxury vehicles (or even near luxury vehicles) were. In any case, most Honda can be almost as nicely furnished as the Acuras, so buyers found it perfectly acceptable to buy Hondas instead.

Right now, it seems to me that Acura is trying to sell itself as a high tech, near luxury car company. However, high tech gadgets and near luxury don't work when your cars are a$$-ugly, FWD, and V6-only.

-Lik
作者: ccyip    時間: 2009-8-26 22:11

本帖最後由 ccyip 於 2009-8-26 23:15 編輯

22# Lik

Lik Hing, I think you speak what I have in mind.  I couldn't agree more.

The problem with Honda, and most Japanese car manufacturers in gerenal, is that they try to "Americanized" their products to please the Americans who like (or liked?) big cars.  Take the Accord as an example, starting in 98 Honda splitted the Accord line and offer 2 different styles Accord to the: a) JDM/European market and b) the rest of the world.  While the JDM/European Accord (which would become the Acura TSX in 2004) retained the characteristic of being a good handling FF sedan, the version the rest of the world get has now become nothing more than a Buick with a Japanese namplate.  And to add salt to the wound, Acura is now offering a V6 to the 2010 TSX (which is still the JDM/European Accord) to please the people here in North America who like anything but V6 or bigger.  I think the spirit of the Accord is truly dead.  

Another problem with Acura is that the are trying too hard to move their brand upsale to compete with BMW/MB/Audi by jacking up their price too much.  These days BMW/MB/Audi are offering lower-end models like the 323i/C230(called C250 in 2010)/A4 2.0T for consumers who don't want to break the bank for a luxury car.   While these Eurpoean offerings can be had for less than $40K (except for the A4) when nicely equipped, a TSX is going to cost like $37K or so.   So to the car enthusiasts it's an easy choice to pick anything Europeans over the Acura.  No wonder Acura is now offering $1500 rebate to buyers who current drives MB/BMW (perhaps Audi too).  

I used to own Accord and Integra and liked them.  But those days were gone...
作者: ccyip    時間: 2009-8-26 22:40

26# Lik

Yes, most car enthusiasts do not consider a FWD vehicle to be a luxury car.  It has to be AWD or RWD.   

You can argue that Audi is offering FWD A4 here but really when you buy their Quattro (yes, I wouldn't buy one without it) it has a 40-60 split so you have more of a RWD feel.

Even though the TL and RL are AWD, their SH-AWD is still front wheel biased.  

And I think you said it right: high tech gadgets and near luxury don't work when your cars are a$$-ugly, FWD, and V6-only.
作者: Lik    時間: 2009-8-26 23:19

Fundamentally, there is nothing wrong with Americanizing their cars to be bigger (both in physical and engine size), more powerful, and more luxurious. After all, that's Toyota did with Lexus and Nissan did with Infiniti, and they managed to be quite successful. The problem is, you gotta execute it correctly, and Honda went about doing this the wrong way with Acura.

To the American mind, FWD = economy drivetrain configuration, while RWD is more of a sporty, luxurious setup. It doesn't really matter whether the perception has any factual truth to it -- if consumers believe it, then that's the way it is. Acura's utter failure lies in Honda's ultra conservatism and steadfast refusal to build a mid/full size RWD platform. When you take a look around, the German big boys are primarily RWD or AWD. Lexus and Infiniti both have RWD (and later AWD) offerings in the IS and G lines, respectively. Furthermore, Americans' love for V8 muscle in a flagship vehicle also meant that Honda's refusal / inability to deliver an 8-cylinder engine has doomed them right from the start.

Getting back to Elan, instead of the RDX and MDX, I'd really consider offerings from other manufacturers instead. Specifically, I'd consider every Subaru (or only the Forrester, or all-new Legacy / Legacy wagon, and Tribeca if the Impreza looks too cheap), the Hyundai Santa Fe, Toyota Rav4 and Highlander, Honda CRV (or maybe the upcoming facelifted version in September), Volkswagen Tiguan, and Infiniti EX. Obviously, they come in at different price points, but for the most part, they are all fairly decent. The Volkswagen might be slightly less reliable than its Japanese and Korean rivals, but even then it should be plenty reliable as the MkV cars on which the Tiguan's chassis was built have been far more reliable than the previous MkIV cars. Just as importantly, none of these cars are nearly as foul-looking as the Acuras.

Now, if your in-laws have an obvious preference for Honda/Acura, it would probably be a loss cause to try sell them anything else. Maybe the CRV route would still work, but for the most part, if an Acura is what they want, then just let them be. It'll be sufficiently reliable, even though it looks butt ugly and maintenance won't be cheap. Then again, maintenance won't be that cheap anyway for Subaru, Volkswagen, and Infiniti either.

-Lik
作者: mcs889    時間: 2009-8-27 16:34

not really.......

REAL RDX drive in city is 15.5~15.6L/ 100KMs
Real world milage for RDX 50/50 is more like 9-10L/100km....!



chobit 發表於 2009-8-26 16:47
作者: daimo    時間: 2009-8-27 17:09

not really.......

REAL RDX drive in city is 15.5~15.6L/ 100KMs

mcs889 發表於 2009-8-27 17:34


ouch!
作者: elan7e    時間: 2009-8-27 20:49

I will ask them to try TSX this weekend. As Lik said changing winter tire in fall will be OK. 另外 2010 款會唔會有AWD. 聽講TSX是全日本造，可靠性會唔會好Ｄ。
作者: ccyip    時間: 2009-8-27 21:03

I will ask them to try TSX this weekend. As Lik said changing winter tire in fall will be OK. 另外 2010 款會唔會有AWD. 聽講TSX是全日本造，可靠性會唔會好Ｄ。
elan7e 發表於 2009-8-27 21:49


TSX won't have AWD, the only significant change for 2010 TSX will be the availability of V6 engine.
作者: ccyip    時間: 2009-8-31 14:25

Just an update: I went to Richmond Acura yesterday and was told they only have 1 2009 RDX left.  I guess sales is good for them since there is factory rebate on the 09'.  No such deal on 2010... just yet.
作者: elan7e    時間: 2009-9-1 21:34

峰迴路轉，老人家試完TSX，又試TL。終於愛上TL。貪佢大架重身夠穩重。我想是不錯的選擇。
作者: ccyip    時間: 2009-9-1 21:51

本帖最後由 ccyip 於 2009-9-1 23:12 編輯
峰迴路轉，老人家試完TSX，又試TL。終於愛上TL。貪佢大架重身夠穩重。我想是不錯的選擇。
elan7e 發表於 2009-9-1 22:34


以TL之前衞外型, 我等三十代之輩尚且接受不了.  老人家竟愛上乎?
作者: elan7e    時間: 2009-9-1 22:11

老眼分化看不清，又不是我比錢，I don't care. 最重要老人家喜歡。
作者: ccyip    時間: 2009-9-1 22:18

37# elan7e

How about the Accord Crosstour?  It's just announced today and will be available at the dealerships next month:

http://automobiles.honda.com/future-cars/
作者: elan7e    時間: 2009-9-1 22:44

唔好比佢地知，又要帶他們睇車，好煩呀。太多選擇不是好事。話時話Crosstour都幾靚仔。到時我自已去睇吓。
作者: ccyip    時間: 2009-9-1 23:40

39# elan7e

Styling isn't too bad for the Crosstour, as Honda is only re-using the formula Audi used a few years ago with the Allroad and Subaru with the Outbacks by jacking up the A6 and the Legacy.

I just hope the Crosstour will have a decent AWD - their SH-AWD, but not their Real-Time AWD as use by the CR-V/Element.
作者: Lik    時間: 2009-9-2 14:43

老眼分化看不清，又不是我比錢，I don't care. 最重要老人家喜歡。
elan7e 發表於 2009-9-1 22:11

I quite agree with this. In terms of engineering and reliability, Honda is still a very reputable brand even though it has lost a lot of its former charms. So from a practicality's point of view, either the TL or the Accord Crosstour is a sufficiently safe buy. Looks is a subjective thing, so if they are ok with the radical (or should I say radically ugly) look of the car, then hey, you might as well capitalize on the TL's ugly looks and poor sales to bargain for a lower OTD price.

My only practical concern for either the TL or the Accord Crosstour is, both are fairly big cars, and with the TL, in particular, reward visibility is kind of poor. Now the TL has a built-in rearview camera to address this problem when the car is in reverse, but in general, I suspect the sheer size and outward visibility of the cars are gonna make all-round visibility a little trickier. It would be best to double check that and make sure it is not an issue.

-Lik
作者: elan7e    時間: 2009-9-3 23:14

41# Lik


認同，很客觀。

最近陪人睇車，當然是代入角色才無咁悶，當自已去揀車。發覺自已以前是首先是注重車的外觀ｏ今次發覺車廂的樣貌也非常重要。Carmy無論機件的耐用性，性能都很有口碑，但車廂內的手エ、質感真令我失望，感到很plastic，Honda感覺好很多，Mazda也很好。Toyota Prius車廂內的質感手エ都比Carmy好。因對Mechanic方面全無認識，所以無從評論ｏ呔盤，油門 brake聽話就是好車了 (要求很低)。
作者: 花滿樓    時間: 2009-9-23 13:40

Richmond Acura 唔差, 但我鍾意Burrard多啲.
作者: 花滿樓    時間: 2009-9-23 13:43

如果經常有老人家/小朋友坐, 我建議MDX.



歡迎光臨 溫哥華老友記討論區 (http://loyaukee.com/forum/) Powered by Discuz! 7.2