Road Test: 2013 Acura RDX

The Acura RDX has been refined and re-engineered for 2013. MotorWeek host John Davis has the full road test review.

[@nwjgoodguy]

I have this car, 2013 RDX tech with 50k, not one single problem. My friend just bought an RX and after sitting in my Rdx, she felt it was more solid. Good job acura!

[@tighttony386]

How’s it holding up? I just bought a 2013 RDX tech today in 2021 lol so far so great!

[@tomle2553]

Bought my 2013 in 2017. Almost due for the 105K service. It's been a great reliable car. 0 issues. Just make sure if you have shift judder there is a TSB for it. Software update and transmission fluid change. I've only had to replace the front shocks since it was leaking a bit. Still haven't even had to change the brakes yet believe it or not in 6+ years I've owned it. Then again it was probably changed prior since I bought it as a CPO from Acura.

[@Dillon1791]

Its crazy how scared the BMW and Audi buyers get when Acura comes out with a better product.

[@SL_barn]

...Also I will say: There is nothing quite like a Honda/Acura V6. Oh wow are they sweet! Especially the 3.7 in the TL and ZDX/MDX.

[@TheCireMC]

I wish luxury brands in general would give you more luxury...for example you don't have to buy 7 packages to make the car "luxury" that should have been included as standard...

[@davesevren3781]

I have one the sport mode is automatic until you hit the paddle shifters then its full manual until you shift to another gear

[@khylie555]

Nice crv.

[@Autofanatic28]

to ones opinion. believe it or not, there are still many buyers that do like the current corporate front end.

[@netman88]

IMO, it's a small entry level to the MDX. SH-AWD is great for the RDX but it's gone. This is no more than a beef up CR-V with a V6.

[@techdude6693]

You can't compare an engine that's turbocharged from the factory then say remove the turbos and compare it to a naturally aspirated motor. Turbo motors are tuned differently and have different responsiveness. BMW I6's can hold their own. Look at the older 330i which was putting over 260 hp from a 3.0 non-turbo, or the old M3 which had 340 from a 3.2. And honestly, most of the time they tend to fail is from the owners being neglectful.. PS.. This is from someone who has a 2013 RDX and 535i

[@blacuraRL]

I like the V6, and bet it will be more dependable than the old turbo 4 in the long run. Not a fan of the exterior styling though. Although most Acuras are styled blandly to age well over time, the front end on this one is too understated in a corolla-esque way.

[@hondaftw1234]

It's 6,000 dollars more, and even more if you option it with the 3.2 V6. It's definitely not 6,000 dollars better.

[@2000hondaciviccoupe]

85ZingoGTR, those twin turbo BMW engines are nice until you need to fix them. Without the turbos they don't hold their own compared to the acura v6, imagine acura twin turbo v6!

[@SL_barn]

It is NOT a similar price. The Q5 is quite poorly equipped at that price point - you need to option it up to make it even LOOK its price.

[@blackseries99]

just in looks, not in equipments.

[@davidhalifax]

For similar price, the Audi Q5 is more appealing even though it's hasn't been updated in a while.

[@leonakita]

DEAL KILLER>> Don't buy this till you sit in the passenger seat. With very little adjustment, you are forced to stare at the dashboard cowl and feel as if you're driving down the road sitting in a bucket! You cannot get upgraded seats to match the driver and unfortunately this cheapo move by Acura killed the deal. It really is that bad! You simply cannot raise the passenger seat. Shame on you Acura for missing such a crucial element.

[@Acc0rd79]

Typical Honda/Acura, gone bland and boring. The front end has got to go, hasnt Acura figured it out yet, people HATE that new ugly grill. Even the new Honda grills suck. YUCK. Kinda boring in really.

[@ikrammahbola3607]

4444444 ♥