Less turbo lag I couldn't answer since I didn't drive it... but when in Motor Trends own test the CX-7 did better from 0-30, I find the comment about lag interesting. Either way doesn't matter, because honestly, I think it's a non-issue once you're used to either car.
Seats being comfortable are subjective. You found them more comfortable, Motor Trend was undecided about that.
Acura is the nav system that offers live traffic reporting and this is one area I think Mazda COULD have included (even if they made it an additional option). I do have to give props to Acura on this one -- but like you said, the Mazda unit is pretty nice too. I've read that Mazda has one of the biggest screens, but I couldn't track down accurate info on Acura. In one place is said it was 8" (which I'm sure is wrong) and in another it said 6.5". Mazda's is 7".
Interior is subjective, and I found the two very similar honestly. On the Acura with the nav system, I didn't like the screen placement in relation to the vents and controls. I do like that a lot of the systems are also controled with voice commands (with the tech package) - like climate control.
As for storage -- this is one of those areas where every car I looked at I had to play with the storage. I liked the little covered utility box in the doors of the acura... it was unique compared to what everyone else has (at least what I looked at). BUT I LOVE love LOVE the additional cup/water bottle holders in the Mazda doors, which the Acura lacks. When you're a mom picking up food and drinks at the drive-through to bring home, having 3 easily-accessible cup holders (without moving) is VERY handy.
That's why a lot of this stuff becomes subjective, or at least individual to the driver. As an example, Bluetooth is awesome and I use it to transfer things on my cellphone all the time, but I HATE talking on my cellphone (LOL). Hands-free bluetooth is something I'd probably use a handful of times, if that. But someone who does a lot of business on a cellphone would benefit from it a great deal. I wouldn't pay the difference to get that feature alone.
One area I constantly DO complain about with the CX-7 and where I feel Mazda really dropped the ball was their lack of iPod support... ESPECIALLY on the "Tech Package" -- iPod integration should have been a standard part of it, with song display and controls on the screen and controls on the steering wheel. I am holding out hope that the one they are developing for the nav system will be 10 times better than the one available now for cars without, but I don't know how realistic that is
Hughes412 said:
Now I have not drivin any of these, but I will say this. I think the RDX does turn heads. I saw one for the first time the other day and it was clean as hell. I like the CX7 also but it seems to have really bad mpg. At least that's what I got form this forum. I was looking at getting one but the one I want would be around 30k. While that isn't too bad, it's to much for a mazda IMO. Acura is and has been a luxury car for a long time. Is it worth the money? I don't know, but if I'm looking a spending 30k on a SUV that only get 17-20 mpg I think I'm gona go the Tahoe way. More power more room more towing and my friends Denali (?) get 23 hwy 18 city. And IMO looks better then both.
Funny, because looking at the RDX forums and there was a lot of griping about MPG over there too. I think break-in is key with turbos, more-so than with non-turbos... and how you drive it will impact MPG more-so as well. As for aesthetics, well again, it's so subjective. The RDX just looks like everything else to me. But I was talking more about the Acura NAME. It doesn't equate to BMW, Infiniti, Porsche, Mercedes -- but some Acura owners seem to think it does. You like the Tahoe and that's a personal opinion... for me, way too big. But I doubt you go out and get a Tahoe because all the neighbors will be impressed.
