|
|
|
|
 |
dj_segfault
 |
|
I test drove a TL and a 2013 RDX last weekend (I like the high-tech look of the TL much better, but the RDX may work out more practical for the family). I was surprised that the salesperson said they sell almost exclusively AWD RDXs, and hardly any FWD. I've never driven an AWD before (other than the 10-minute test drive). I know there's not going to be tons of info on it because the previous year had SH-AWD which is a different animal, but...
Is it really that much better? Worth the extra money?
Is the drop in MPG that insignificant?
Aren't people worried about a more complex system costing more to maintain?
I live near Boston and have to deal with a lot of bad weather, so maybe it is worth it. I don't know. Thoughts?
|
JeffX
|
|
dj_segfault wrote:
I test drove a TL and a 2013 RDX last weekend (I like the high-tech look of the TL much better, but the RDX may work out more practical for the family). I was surprised that the salesperson said they sell almost exclusively AWD RDXs, and hardly any FWD. I've never driven an AWD before (other than the 10-minute test drive). I know there's not going to be tons of info on it because the previous year had SH-AWD which is a different animal, but...
Is it really that much better? Worth the extra money?
Is the drop in MPG that insignificant?
Aren't people worried about a more complex system costing more to maintain?
I live near Boston and have to deal with a lot of bad weather, so maybe it is worth it. I don't know. Thoughts?
|
If you live in an area that gets lots of foul weather I'd say the AWD is probably worth it. Not only to live with but in your area resale is probably going to be better for AWD as well.
The AWD system Acura used in the '13 RDX is simple, effective and should be very reliable.
With that said, the RDX is fine with FWD - it's just got quite a bit of power and it's taller than a sedan so if you like "sporty" driving you might find the FWD struggling to put the power down on curvier roads.
|
kidoairaku
|
|
in Toronto Canada where we get a dozen 1 foot snowfalls each winter an AWD vehicle with snow tires is the most relaxing drive. Drive like there's no snow at all.
I've experienced the worst ice storms and snow storms in Toronto and AWD is nice but it has never been necessary. unless you live in Calgary or the mountains I dont see the need for it, buts its nice to have. FWD with snow tires is almost just as relaxing.
Biggest note: AWD doesnt help you stop or get grip laterally. Most poor weather accidents is because of either lateral slide or not being able to stop. I wish OEM's would stop advertising AWD's as "safer in the winter", in the meantime I'll continue driving my FWD snow tire car around SUV's stuck in a ditch.
|
Powered by Honda
|
|
kidoairaku wrote:
in Toronto Canada where we get a dozen 1 foot snowfalls each winter an AWD vehicle with snow tires is the most relaxing drive. Drive like there's no snow at all.
I've experienced the worst ice storms and snow storms in Toronto and AWD is nice but it has never been necessary. unless you live in Calgary or the mountains I dont see the need for it, buts its nice to have. FWD with snow tires is almost just as relaxing.
Biggest note: AWD doesnt help you stop or get grip laterally. Most poor weather accidents is because of either lateral slide or not being able to stop. I wish OEM's would stop advertising AWD's as "safer in the winter", in the meantime I'll continue driving my FWD snow tire car around SUV's stuck in a ditch.
|
I've been to hell and back in my 2001 accord coupe fwd with snow tires. I live in toronto too.
There is never a need for awd. Well almost. I can drive in 1 foot of snow easy.
|
Dream'R
|
|
No question, 4 good snow tires on their own rims are the way to go, no matter what you drive in the snow. One advantage of the RDX or CR-V is the greater ground clearance. My Civic is so low it bottoms out when all the other vehicles along my road are pickups and SUVs. That becomes more of an issue than traction.
I absolutely agree that steering and braking are more important. New winter tire designs are much quieter than before and I've had surprising wear from Michelins. The other brand I'd recommend is Nokian.
If mountain driving is important then the AWD is great. You will pay a penalty in terms of the up-front cost and some mpg loss as well. Honda's newest AWD design is very good and as far as I know in the past they have been relatively trouble-free.
|
Oldguy
|
|
|
I am in Eastern Ontario and do agree that a FWD RDX with a good set of winter tires would be perfectly adequate. However, the erroneous perception that AWD is better in every way might make the resale value lower or at least make it harder to sell. If you plan to keep the vehicle for a long time then go with FWD. If you trade vehicles every few years, then resale potential is a factor. In that case maybe AWD is insurance. The average person expects an SUV to be AWD.
|
CarmB
|
|
Perhaps I'm mistaken but it appears that here in Canada, you can't get the RDX in any form other than AWD.
|
soniccar
|
|
|
Understand how this system works. From what i've read, it's not just some fancy stuck-in-snow system like 4WD. Under hard acceleration, the system transfers up to 50% of the torque to the rear wheels. On curvy roads, it can vary the torque front and rear in a way less dynamic than SH-AWD, but much better than 4WD. Jeff, I know you like to polish up the reviews but can you give us some snippets of your test drive?
|
Brutus
|
|
Easy you live in New England just like me, AWD all the way. I have driven both FWD and AWD in bad weather and I it simply gives so much more confidence with AWD IMO, of course it kills me when those idiots who think because they have a big-ass awd truck can fly in a nawww-easta :-).
I understand those who are talking about snow tires and the such, but for those of us who do not want to buy another set of tires, switch them out twice a year on/off, just too much P-I-A. Plus we get these freak snowstorms like last year when you likely did not get around to throwing on those tires.
If you live in LA or something then I would get FWD, but we are talking NE, better traction, easier to deal with, confidence inspiring and I am sure resale value is a lot better. Why do you think Subaru's are common place where we live, not because they are sexy, because their AWD rocks.
B.
Too bad Sox suck this year, at least we have the Celts.
|
JeffX
|
|
soniccar wrote:
Understand how this system works. From what i've read, it's not just some fancy stuck-in-snow system like 4WD. Under hard acceleration, the system transfers up to 50% of the torque to the rear wheels. On curvy roads, it can vary the torque front and rear in a way less dynamic than SH-AWD, but much better than 4WD. Jeff, I know you like to polish up the reviews but can you give us some snippets of your test drive?
|
it's basically the new Real-Time AWD system that first appeared on the '12 CR-V. They somehow improved its operation while making it simpler, lighter, and more compact.
|
dj_segfault
|
|
Brutus wrote:
Easy you live in New England just like me, AWD all the way. I have driven both FWD and AWD in bad weather and I it simply gives so much more confidence with AWD IMO, of course it kills me when those idiots who think because they have a big-ass awd truck can fly in a nawww-easta :-).
I understand those who are talking about snow tires and the such, but for those of us who do not want to buy another set of tires, switch them out twice a year on/off, just too much P-I-A. Plus we get these freak snowstorms like last year when you likely did not get around to throwing on those tires.
If you live in LA or something then I would get FWD, but we are talking NE, better traction, easier to deal with, confidence inspiring and I am sure resale value is a lot better. Why do you think Subaru's are common place where we live, not because they are sexy, because their AWD rocks.
B.
Too bad Sox suck this year, at least we have the Celts.
|
That's a good point, Brutus. Our "seasons" have a heavy overlap, and it would only be safe to take the snow tires off around, oh, the very end of April ;) So having AWD means you're always ready for New England weather.
I also read somewhere last night that since the RDX is essentially a shorter but taller car, it's got a higher center of balance, and having AWD can help power out of potential tipping situations by feeding the wheels with the most grip.
Thanks a lot guys, I think that convinced me to go for it.
|
CanTex
|
|
CarmB wrote:
Perhaps I'm mistaken but it appears that here in Canada, you can't get the RDX in any form other than AWD.
|
Probably right. Makes inventory simpler.
Way back when we had our FWD '07 Lexus RX350, a Texas car, we went in for a tire rotation at a dealer in the eastern GTA (Toronto area for those outside Canada), I insisted they follow the pattern for FWD. This was an event for the service people, as they had never seen a FWD RX350. They told me it simplifies everything for them if they don't have to deal with two different systems.
Our family up there has 4WD and AWD and wouldn't have it any other way. Oh, and separate rims too -it helps the tires last longer if you're not breaking the bead a couple of times a year.
|
soniccar
|
|
|
Make sure you post a pic.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Thread Page - [1] |
| |
|
![[home]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/home.gif){kind=small}
![[rumors and news]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/rumors.gif){kind=small}
![[model release matrix]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/newmodelreleasematrix.gif){kind=small}
![[dealer network]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/dealernet.gif){kind=small}
![[desktop calendar]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/calendar.gif){kind=small}
![[exhaust notes]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/exhaust.gif){kind=small}
![[tov forums]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/forums.gif){kind=small}
![[links]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/links.gif){kind=small}
![[search]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/search.gif){kind=small}
![[sponsors]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/sponsors.gif){kind=small}
![[garage]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/garage.gif){kind=small}
![[login]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/login.gif){kind=small}
