Off Topic New Vehicle Time

:
RDX Aspec Adv.
Where were all these videos and deeper analysis of the C&D testing methods when you were continually talking down on the RDX in other threads? Lol.

There are a few other websites that report a .3-.4 second difference in 0-60 in favour of the 2.5T CX-5.

In the end it doesn't really matter what websites say, or even what other people say. If you're happy behind the wheel of whatever car you're driving at the time, specs don't matter. Hope your RDX is the one!
I now have owned both, and timed both. The RDX is broken in, per Acura, and so I ran it, filmed the run, and looked at the times. From the time it began moving forward unti it broke 60 was 6.45 seconds. Throwing out the 1ft rollout, that is 6.15. The cx5, conversely, took 6.7 seconds to reach 60mph, and removing the 1ft rollout takes us to 6.4. Here are the videos. When viewed in slow motion, the rdx begins moving at 0.3 seconds, as does the cx5. They reach 60 at 6.75, and 7.0 seconds, respectively, as best I can tell from the cx5s speedometer. It is digital so viewing angle shouldnt affect its readout. The cx5 was running 93 and the rdx, 91 octane. Both were tested at a near identical temperature as you can see, but the cx5 sis have a hair more fuel in its tank, fwiw.


Neat thing, both vehicles moving at 0.3 seconds video time. You can see that at 1,2,3,4,5 seconds video time, they are very near each other, but then go to 6 seconds and it's clear the RDX is pulling at an indicated 55mph while the CX5 is doing 53mph. By 7 seconds video time, the RDX has already reached 60 and the video ended (at 6.76), while the CX5 is just a hair from 60.

Also interesting is that in the first second (0.7 seconds of motion), both vehicles are at 5mph, irregardless the CX5's torque advantage.

Based on this comparison, the vehicles are evenly matched up to around 50-55mph, where the RDX will walk away from the CX5 turbo. In the corners, I found absolutely no comparison. The RDX would slaughter the CX5.
 
Last edited:

Kedis82ZE8

'12 GX 460,'07 G35x / '15 CX-5 AWD GT w/Tech Pkg
Contributor
I guess I will just keep up on the maintenance on the old '07 G35 (V36 w/VQ35HR (the non oil burner)... never personally timed but in the day 0-60 5.3 sec & 1/4 mile around 100.

Nothing impressive with MPG as average is like 23 but it doesn't leak, weep, or seep any oil and always at top of dipstick on 5K mile oil changes.
 
:
RDX Aspec Adv.
I guess I will just keep up on the maintenance on the old '07 G35 (V36 w/VQ35HR (the non oil burner)... never personally timed but in the day 0-60 5.3 sec & 1/4 mile around 100.

Nothing impressive with MPG as average is like 23 but it doesn't leak, weep, or seep any oil and always at top of dipstick on 5K mile oil changes.
I heavily considered a loaded 2017 qx50.
 
:
Ottawa, Ontario
:
17 Mazda 6 GT
I guess I will just keep up on the maintenance on the old '07 G35 (V36 w/VQ35HR (the non oil burner)... never personally timed but in the day 0-60 5.3 sec & 1/4 mile around 100.
Slightly off topic, but that Nissan VQ35 is a great engine. You can find it all across the Nissan/Infiniti lineup. It came out in 2001.
My 2002 Pathfinder, which I retired last year, had that engine, and it was as strong after 19 years as the day it was built. No oil leaks and no burning, ever. Man, I miss that truck.
 
:
Mazda CX-9 Signature
Slightly off topic, but that Nissan VQ35 is a great engine. You can find it all across the Nissan/Infiniti lineup. It came out in 2001.
My 2002 Pathfinder, which I retired last year, had that engine, and it was as strong after 19 years as the day it was built. No oil leaks and no burning, ever. Man, I miss that truck.
My vq35hr made me a milkshake :(
 

Kedis82ZE8

'12 GX 460,'07 G35x / '15 CX-5 AWD GT w/Tech Pkg
Contributor
My vq35hr made me a milkshake :(

head gasket issue? Not really heard many of those in HR.. it was only used 2007-2008 on V36 platform and in some later Infiniti applications.

350z for 2007-2008.. HR is like 80% different than the DE
 
:
Ottawa, Ontario
:
17 Mazda 6 GT
head gasket issue? Not really heard many of those in HR.. it was only used 2007-2008 on V36 platform and in some later Infiniti applications.

350z for 2007-2008.. HR is like 80% different than the DE
Ya, the HR is a different engine really. Like you said, only 20% of the parts are common. The HR is higher revving, higher compression and more horsepower, whereas the DE is more of a workhorse. The DE is the better choice for longevity.
In my Nissan experience, I have not come across any head gasket issues, either personally or on the Nissan forums.
 
:
RDX Aspec Adv.
Ya, the HR is a different engine really. Like you said, only 20% of the parts are common. The HR is higher revving, higher compression and more horsepower, whereas the DE is more of a workhorse. The DE is the better choice for longevity.
In my Nissan experience, I have not come across any head gasket issues, either personally or on the Nissan forums.
The issue is gallery gaskets for the VQ series.
 

Kedis82ZE8

'12 GX 460,'07 G35x / '15 CX-5 AWD GT w/Tech Pkg
Contributor
I installed a 3rd party oil pressure sensor to watch for that issue. I'd probably have car fixed... average cost is around $1500 and it is still worth $9-$10k
 
:
RDX Aspec Adv.
I got the PPF on and new tires and window tint. Still loving it and very pleased with my decision to go with the RDX thus far. The 5.1 surround sound from flacc files is amazing, especially on songs that really leverage it like a lot of Pink Floyd's stuff ("Money", and the helicopter intro in Another Brick in The Wall" are just unreal). As far as the acceleration data, I have no CLUE what was up with magazine times for this car. It's way faster than "rated" by my testing as well as online reviewers with actual equipment (they manage 5.7-6.1 or so). That said, I think the main things that stand out about the driving characteristics are the SH-AWD and suspension. They truly are, inarguably, a cut above what Mazda is doing at present. The rest of it, you can argue and quibble and "I prefer..." about. Also...body panel gaps. They suck, to be blunt. Mazda tends to NAIL this aspect.

275707651_1334406547059158_8264225645119565549_n.jpg
 

GTEyes

2022 CX5 Signature - Machine Grey
:
NS, Canada
I got the PPF on and new tires and window tint. Still loving it and very pleased with my decision to go with the RDX thus far. The 5.1 surround sound from flacc files is amazing, especially on songs that really leverage it like a lot of Pink Floyd's stuff ("Money", and the helicopter intro in Another Brick in The Wall" are just unreal). As far as the acceleration data, I have no CLUE what was up with magazine times for this car. It's way faster than "rated" by my testing as well as online reviewers with actual equipment (they manage 5.7-6.1 or so). That said, I think the main things that stand out about the driving characteristics are the SH-AWD and suspension. They truly are, inarguably, a cut above what Mazda is doing at present. The rest of it, you can argue and quibble and "I prefer..." about. Also...body panel gaps. They suck, to be blunt. Mazda tends to NAIL this aspect.
View attachment 308653
Looks good.
 
:
RDX Aspec Adv.
Screenshot_20220409-075717_dragy.jpg

and best 0-60, the one above was actually about 0.2 slower, but I didn't do a full quarter on this one.
Screenshot_20220409-073444_dragy.jpg


These times are not torque braked, but rather, just giving it the beans in sport mode with traction control off.

The acceleration is a hair better than my CX5, I remain confident, as my draggy times are literally identical to my YouTube frame-by-frame times (6.14 vs. 6.15...), so I am confident in saying the CX5 times are accurate, as well. It just doesn't quite hang with it. That said, the main benefit is the amazing AWD system Acura put in t his thing, along with the 5-Link suspension. It's an animal in the twisties, for an SUV/CUV. You can actually feel the rear outer tire "bend" you around the corner under WOT. Much better than the slip/grip of the CX5. That, plus the interior and the quietness overall, make it worth the $15K premium, IMO. The wireless AA/ACP and seats are the other thing.

mpg has levelled off at around 24-24.5mpg, vs the 27mpg my CX5 achieved, so slight hit, there. I blame the AWD system.
 
Last edited:
:
2010 CX-9 GT
This is further evidence that Subaru was right to cancel the STi when a 6.5s 0-60 vehicle hangs with it. Back in the day They were mid 4 second cars with a decent launch and still sub 6 with a junk start.
 
:
RDX Aspec Adv.
This is further evidence that Subaru was right to cancel the STi when a 6.5s 0-60 vehicle hangs with it. Back in the day They were mid 4 second cars with a decent launch and still sub 6 with a junk start.
Wrx STi stock is super laggy. Those impressive 0-60's result from hella clutch drops.
 
:
RDX Aspec Adv.
Do you trade the RDX yet?

"I am trading it in on an EV6 GT Line."

Got the ev6 on order. I love the RDX, but at $5-600/mo in fuel...its AMG or ///M money per month, which makes no sense cost vs benefit. Make no mistakez the cx5 turbo would be the same story. Im averaging a bit over 24mpg in the rdx. Same commute in the cx5 was 27.0. Both always got 91 octane or greater.
 
:
2019 CX-5 Signature
Got the ev6 on order. I love the RDX, but at $5-600/mo in fuel...its AMG or ///M money per month, which makes no sense cost vs benefit. Make no mistakez the cx5 turbo would be the same story. Im averaging a bit over 24mpg in the rdx. Same commute in the cx5 was 27.0. Both always got 91 octane or greater.
I hope you're not disappointed with its AWD system, like you were with the Rav4. Are you going to wait and test its capabilities first?