Acura RDX's turbo...what is it?

[Chris Stack]

I had wet dreams of buying a 1st gen TSX with the RDX motor

Me too, with SH-AWD. When the RDX first came out in '07, I was plotting to trade in my '04 TSX on a '08-09 SH-AWD 2.3T TSX; it was going to be awesome. Like a grown-up's WRX.

And then Honda crushed my dreams like a bug, so I bought a used S2000 instead.

[Chris Stack]

Spammer reported.

[vwwtchr]

I had wet dreams of buying a 1st gen TSX with the RDX motor, or even a CR-V, Accord a real USDM Type-R Civic with this motor. Heck I might even be able to get over the beak in the new TSX if I could have the RDX turbo- four in say a 2011 TSX wagon with a 6-speed manual.

Honestly with any of those motors for about $4000 you can see this.

A very safe 75whp gained from a proven company. I too was hoping Acura would come out with a FI car in addition to the RDX, but there are proven fairly inexpensive (relative of course) options to gain power on K series engines.

[rice is burning]

Are you okay?

Not sure why you are still making this a Toyota vs Honda issue, the OP is asking about the RDX. You also seem to only include what you CAN include, please argue about PRODUCTION V-8s, hybrids, V-10s. You can't, so you bring up F1 and bring up the Celica GT-S

You seem angry, you need to look at your own pic having made multiple personal attacks here. I haven't called you anything.

Again likely this engine will be dropped after this generation. Outside of 3 people mentioned, most don't mod the engine and it hasn't been a great unit. Your own 2.0 liter I-4 makes the same HP rating.

Notice I am not making this a "vs" argument b/c while we can argue about engines past, you can't argue about much anything present and it wouldn't be a fair fight.

Again, you're a dumbass. I've gone nuts to to nuts with some people that have beat my ass in court. And let me tell, you ain't even in spitting distance.

I'll still buy you lunch, though. I'm not a dickface.

[helement2003]

Wow did my thread blow up with haters/fanbois etc.

Anyway...

I'd be looking at one of these 2-3 year old, used with low mileage. They can be had for great deals it seems. Reliability seems to be excellent, even for the first year '07s. I want an SH-AWDer and don't care about the tech package.

Also, MDX is too big. The other plus to the wife and me is the handling/quickness of the RDX. We're both car nuts with a planned kid on the way (hence buying one in around a year). She wants something a bit bigger but doesn't want to lose the fun to drive factor. The RDX seems to deliver in the handling/sporty dept from nearly every review I've seen. One reviewer summed it up saying that it's the perfect car for someone who wants a sports sedan but needs more room. That's us.

I don't care if it has a 5 speed and not an 6-7-8 speed and I'm actually GLAD the engine isn't direct injected. No worry about buildup ruining the engine, as we do plan on keeping it a while.

Oh and everyone needs to chill out! Have some

[unintended acceleration]

This huge gap between HP and torque on Honda engines absolutely pisses me off, it's downright ridiculous

That comment is ridiculous. You do realize that the huge gap is because its a small motor that's N/A and the only way to make them go fast is to spin them up right? Would you rather have a diesel that revs to 4,000 RPM with no HP? If so have fun going slower.

There are tons of very fast cars with "huge gaps in tq vs HP"; its not a problem, its a solution. Just making sure this isn't the twilight zone.

In addition, Honda engines makes tons of torque, more than their competition per engine size a good amount of the time. It's a huge myth that Honda engines do not make good torque.

I promise, Honda engines follow the same laws of psychics that every other car does. Their high performance N/A engines all make about 70 - 80 ft lbs per liter from the factory.

On top of that, the RDX has more torque than HP, so I am not sure what you're getting at here...

Back to the RDX, we picked up our 2009 RDX non tech package with 800 miles on it for $30K out the door about 18 months ago. I agree that the tech package new (which would be close to $40K) isn't worth it, but at about $30K this car is a steal. It's frustrating to see people on a car forum talk about cars and miss the mark by so much on certain topics. I guess ignorance is bliss.

[vwwtchr]

That comment is ridiculous, its pretty clear you don't have a firm grasp of what makes a car fast.

On top of that, the RDX has more torque than HP, so I am not sure what you're getting at here even if what you said made any sense at all.

As previously stated the comment couldn't be more wrong.


And just for the record.
IS350 306 hp @ 6400 rpm 277 lb-ft @ 4,800
G37 328 hp @ 7,000 rpm 269 lb-ft @ 5,200 rpm
CTS 304 @ 6400 273 lb ft @ 5200
TL 305 @ 6300 rpm 273 lb ft @ 5000 rpm

[BRealistic]

The RDX's engine seems like a good mill.
It compares very favorably to the similarly size/spec'd CX-7 2.3 turbo (though the CX-7 is considerably less expensive).

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...s_pricing.html

Note MT's observed fuel economy was 16.2 mpg (premium), though they do drive them hard.

[helement2003]

The RDX's engine seems like a good mill.
It compares very favorably to the similarly size/spec'd CX-7 2.3 turbo (though the CX-7 is considerably less expensive).

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...s_pricing.html

Note MT's observed fuel economy was 16.2 mpg (premium), though they do drive them hard.

Eh...I know the mileage sucks, but I'd be getting rid of the Speed3 for the RDX. Pretty similar if not the same mileage (and premium as well).

[rice is burning]

Wow did my thread blow up with haters/fanbois etc.

Anyway...

I'd be looking at one of these 2-3 year old, used with low mileage. They can be had for great deals it seems. Reliability seems to be excellent, even for the first year '07s. I want an SH-AWDer and don't care about the tech package.

Also, MDX is too big. The other plus to the wife and me is the handling/quickness of the RDX. We're both car nuts with a planned kid on the way (hence buying one in around a year). She wants something a bit bigger but doesn't want to lose the fun to drive factor. The RDX seems to deliver in the handling/sporty dept from nearly every review I've seen. One reviewer summed it up saying that it's the perfect car for someone who wants a sports sedan but needs more room. That's us.

I don't care if it has a 5 speed and not an 6-7-8 speed and I'm actually GLAD the engine isn't direct injected. No worry about buildup ruining the engine, as we do plan on keeping it a while.

Oh and everyone needs to chill out! Have some

Sorry if I blew this up, dude. My apologies.

Bone stock, the RDX is a little slow until the boost builds. You can flash the ECU, if you want.

But I can tell you that if the RDX is what you want, go for it. Your new Acura will give 150k+ of trouble free driving. Al-you-min-eum DOHC i-VTEC, Honda ain't stupid.

I drove the RDX when it first came out. It's fine unless you want to pay more an get an X3/X5.

Also, the ELS audio kicks ASS.

Going to get a

ricey

[1SICKLEX]

Again, you're a dumbass. I've gone nuts to to nuts with some people that have beat my ass in court. And let me tell, you ain't even in spitting distance.

I'll still buy you lunch, though. I'm not a dickface.

Going by what you've posted here and in other threads no wonder you are getting beat in court. I figure a public defender. We are talking about the RDX turbo. I posted my thoughts and a link with info about it (which you are entitled to disagree with). You came in and went completely off-topic and went ape-crap on me. Then you claim to be somehow intellectually superior? Your posts here are full of red-herring tirades for crying out loud.

You then posted YOURSELF you know NOTHING about turbos.

Whats funny is my wife is a lawyer so this is quite amusing.




Re-read your own posts. Attacking people, totally off topic and hardly completely factual.

You're quoting an Acura hating troll. Save your keystrokes.

By the way, every Lexus was designed by a cross-dressing Nazi. See what I did there? Also, Toyota and Lexus gave Michael J. Fox the shakes and created AIDS. That's why their cars suck so much and anyone that drives one has the IQ of bean curd. Every time you say "Lexus" a baby whale dies.

Makes Toyota's DOHC V6s look stupid. No wonder Lotus begged Honda for their engines before settling on Toyota.

I know jack **** about turbos, apparently it's an in-house design with some sort of variable nozzle crap that makes it difficult to upgrade.

You're so stupid. The J series engine has been making 300-ish at the crank for 10 years. Go away.

Every time Toyota needs a REAL engine they hire Yamaha. Well, their pianos sure sound nice.

You're right, it's silly. But my real name is something like 1sixlex. It's Karl Osmus. Look me up on the Georgia Bar website. I do admit, though, Judge Walker continues to call me "Mr. Osmos." Maybe I should tell him to call me ricey? What's in a name?



Hmm. I'm not really upset, and I didn't start this argument. I just know some stuff. I don't own any Honda stock. I don't sell cars for a living. I like cars, and I call it like I see it.



Uhh, RDX sales are up about a billion percent? I never said anything about FWD. I don't care, I like the RDX but I don't plan on buying one. And if I did, I wouldn't spend any time justifying it to an obvious douche like you.



You keep telling yourself that until you believe it.
Showing you what? Honda made V-10s for years. IN FORMULA ONE CARS, YOU JACKASS. AND THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO HIRE YAMAHA TO DESIGN THEM.

Honda has mismanaged their hybrids. But they didn't really ask me for my advice, so I don't feel married to their success or failure.

Granted, Honda hasn't had any F1 success since the Senna days, but Toyota pretty much sucked a big log on that one too, didn't they?

But, still. the J series may well be the best six cylinder engine since the Japanese stopped overbuilding their engines in the mid '90s.

Also, Acura + 20% sales this year.

Toyota, massive recalls, -% sales, and they still have to hire Yamaha to design their engines. Remember the Celica GT-S? Who designed that engine? YAMAHA. And it still sucked compared to the B18C. Like, it sucked so much, they started re-flashing ECUs to lower the rev limiter because it couldn't take the abuse.


ricey

[Toaster29]

Where's Honda when they need to make competitive engines? They make the same POS engines over and over again. let me know when they have a V8, V10, and a superior hybrid system compared Toyota, k?

From all the drivel you've been spewing, I doubt you really care...and though I am not a Honda fan boy, I can't sit by and watch you continue to spout off crap about things you have no idea.

Just an FYI, the K series 4 cylinder that honda uses throughout it's line up is one of, if not the best, NA 4 cylinder in the world in terms of well...everything. Have you ever looked up the flow numbers (I doubt you know what these are) on a 200 hp k series head? It is ridiculous...I mean it blows race ported Evo heads out of the water, much less anything that VAG could produce. They are a phenomenally well engineered engine family.

As for the J series. I agree it is growing long in the tooth, but again they are hardly a POS. They still make class competitive power/ fuel economy, sound phenomenal, love to rev, and are still SOHC/port injected which makes them quite simple and cheap to maintain. Ricey is right in the fact that a simple set of headers would take the 260 hp CLS/TLS motor to roughly 300 crank hp from a SOHC 3.2L..all that with a better powerband than it's more exotic DOHC NSX cousin...that is impressive in anybody's book.

[n2fastuff]

Totally agree

I have owned an RDX for a short time now,maybe a month. My impression is that the I-4 turbo makes far more power than my d/d street car - SC300 0n KEI OFFICE coil overs. it's rated at 225hp/225tq(2000 vvti) and is lighter than the RDX, but doesnt move like it till 5000-6500 rpm. the rdx is more fun simply to accelarate in, but the coil overs on the sc make it carve like japanese kitchen knife point: quit bickering and GO DRIVE!

[turbo_nine]

point: quit bickering and GO DRIVE!

Uh, I wouldn't worry about their bickering if I were you. Half the dudes arguing in this thread got banned more than a year ago.

[NoXenons]

1SICKLEX's quest to get banned on every automotive forum continues..

[DIAF]

I was thinking about the injector technology over the past few days as I drove it around in the snow with the seat heaters on, XM cranking, enjoying the precise steering (for what it is), and the firm, comfortable, thick leather seats. Direct injection would have made it so much better!

Seriously, it's a cute ute. It's my wife's DD. It's never going to see a performance driving event, and it's got all the gusto needed to pass anything in the way.

It has exactly one modification, a rear view camera.

Let's keep some perspective here

Alright, since this thread got necrobumped, I wanted to update this post.

As some of you know, I'm involved with a supercar experience company. This weekend we had an event at Gilette Stadium in Foxborough, Mass. I took the RDX around the course a few times to test the course and later to chase geese.

I have to say it was surprising how fun it was, considering what it is. The rear end would dance and actually come around under power, all in all it was more fun (subjectively, fanboys) and balanced than a MKV/MKVI GTI stock-for-stock around a course like that.

I'm even happier with the RDX now than when we bought it.

[clutchrider]

Always wished they put this motor in the TSX and called it the Type S. Heck they could have offered both a FWD and AWD variant. Too bad they failed miserably and put it in a cute ute.