- #126 of 189
-
Re: 15.9 mpg on my new RDX 1st tank [woodyww]
by c_hunter
-
Apr 12, 2007 (2:50 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: woodyww (Apr 12, 2007 10:50 am)
I have never gotten less than 21mpg and as high as 25mpg with my RDX. The engine is totally adequate and well matched to the vehicle in my opinion. I would not have minded a V6 and may have preferred it, but have no major complaints about the turbo-4. It is quite good.
|
- #127 of 189
-
Re: 15.9 mpg on my new RDX 1st tank [c_hunter]
by stathis
-
Apr 14, 2007 (3:53 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: c_hunter (Apr 12, 2007 2:50 pm)
I think the main reason for the low MPG is the weight of the RDX. At 3,950 lbs that's a lot of weight to move. The RDX is made mainly of steel; as soon as you lift the small hood you realize how heavy it is!
In comparison, my BMW 540 (V8) had a lot of aluminum parts, which made it 1,000 lbs lighter.
I don't think the AWD is a major factor. Think of the Murano analogy: the AWD is only 1 MPG lower than the FWD. They weigh 3,950 and 3,800 lbs respectively. Hence, 18 MPG and 19 MPG.
I was getting 17.5 MPG with my BMW; the RDX gives me around the same.
The V-6 sounds good, but all the V6 SUVs in this range have poor acceleration: Lexus RX, Murano, Highlander, are much slower.
Hence, I am happy with the current RDX engine performance and handling.
|
- #128 of 189
-
Acura RDX Real World MPG
by 1bythesea
-
Apr 14, 2007 (9:09 pm)
-
|
I've had my RDX for one month with 900 miles of mixed driving. The daily commute consists of 70% hwy/30% city, 17 miles one way with an average of 22.5 mpg. So far I'm very happy.
I do think those of you who are getting the 13 mpg average do have something going on causing it. Perhaps the reason Acura is not doing anything is because the engine may still be within normal operating specs to them. However, if I were getting that low of mileage I would be highly upset also. Hopefully, Acura/Honda will be able to come out with a fix.
|
- #129 of 189
-
Re: Acura RDX Real World MPG [1bythesea]
by stathis
-
May 02, 2007 (9:03 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: 1bythesea (Apr 14, 2007 9:09 pm)
Keep in mind that the mpg given by the on-board computer might not be accurate. Mine overstates mpg by around 1 mpg. So always do the math yourselves, by zeroing out every time you fill up.
|
- #130 of 189
-
Re: Acura RDX Real World MPG [stathis]
by 1bythesea
-
May 06, 2007 (5:47 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: stathis (May 02, 2007 9:03 pm)
You may be correct as other RDX owners on other sites have stated as either the on-board computer was dead-on or 1 mpg lower than actual. Manully checking is good advice.
|
- #131 of 189
-
Re: Acura RDX Real World MPG
by blufz1
-
May 06, 2007 (9:45 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: 1bythesea (May 06, 2007 5:47 am)
The basic problem is that you have a 2.4 engine trying to lug around 4,000 lbs. There's no replacement for displacement! Would be more economical w/a larger engine. It's a loser at the box office,too.
|
- #132 of 189
-
Re: Acura RDX Real World MPG [blufz1]
by c_hunter
-
May 07, 2007 (6:53 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: blufz1 (May 06, 2007 9:45 am)
You're forgetting that a turbo increases the effective displacement of the engine though. It may have the bores of a 2.4L but it's got the mass flow rate of a much larger displacement (and the torque/HP numbers to back it up).
|
- #133 of 189
-
Re: Acura RDX Real World MPG [c_hunter]
by blufz1
-
May 07, 2007 (7:55 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: c_hunter (May 07, 2007 6:53 am)
Didn't forget. I just don't think the engineering paper design transfers to the road well in this application.
|
- #134 of 189
-
Re: Acura RDX Real World MPG [blufz1]
by johnny98
-
May 07, 2007 (8:28 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: blufz1 (May 07, 2007 7:55 am)
There is a huge difference in 0-60mph times between the turbo RDX and 4-cylinder CRV.
|
- #135 of 189
-
Re: Acura RDX Real World MPG [johnny98]
by blufz1
-
May 07, 2007 (1:56 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: johnny98 (May 07, 2007 8:28 am)
Neither car is fast to me,so that's a non issue for me and most people. They sold 17,379 CRVs last month and 2151 RDXs. I rest my case.
|