Acura to debut new MDX at NYIAS(updated pg.10)
#16
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
Originally Posted by Och
I agree with you, I too used to be a fan of Honda's high output V-tec engines, and feel that they been slacking for way too long, and haven't introduced any significant new tech since late 90ies. It's not that I have anything against FI, no, but Honda has never been associated with FI, it was always pushing high revving NA engines that made more hp/l than most other manufacturers, but now they are being surpassed left and right.
#17
Originally Posted by GS69
For whatever reason, people have long badgered Honda/Acura for more torque; this gets 240hp & 260 ft-lbs of torque. If they want to compete (not that they are doing bad) they are going to have to follow some trends every now & again - like a V8 otherwise they may have problems like the current RL.
And it is NOT Honda. It is 33k-40k Acura SUV. We are not talking about 25k Honda at all.
#18
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
Originally Posted by spwolf
yeah, but it is turbo aided torque. Which means limited power range and limited torque range. This is fine in smaller car, but not in SUV, with more weight and worse Cd.
And it is NOT Honda. It is 33k-40k Acura SUV. We are not talking about 25k Honda at all.
And it is NOT Honda. It is 33k-40k Acura SUV. We are not talking about 25k Honda at all.
Last edited by 4TehNguyen; 03-28-06 at 06:47 AM.
#19
Speaks French in Russian
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by GS69
I am sure that it will look nothing like this pic but just thought that I would share.
As for the RDX: last I heard they were pricing it in the mid-30s which is awfully close to the current MDX's price (perhaps the MDX price will go up w/ the new model?) If true, w/ a price that high I forsee sales similar to that of the Ridgeline: not bombing exactly but not quite anything to get excited over either.
Last edited by magneto112; 03-28-06 at 08:16 AM.
#20
Pole Position
Originally Posted by UDel
What is wrong with FI? I don't understand how some people can get so bent out of shape that Honda made and is offering the choice of one FI powerplant. FI is not that common either, the masses are generally using NA 4 and 6 cylinders. Why is a NA v-6 so technological and a FI 4 cylinder is not. A NA v-6 is succumbing to the masses not a FI engine. The first thing many enthusiasts did when they had the money was put a turbo on their Honda civics, preludes, integras, S2000, NSX, because they wanted the large power gains of FI. Honda is loosing some enthusiasts to the turbo awd wrxs and evos because they are what many enthusiasts have always wanted. What is wrong with Honda/Acura giving enthusiasts what many wanted which was FI engines as well as powerful high reving NA engines. I would rather have more variety in engine choices then just NA 4 or 6 cylinders. So putting a v-6 in the RDX like what is in most of their lineup as well as others would be some sort of superior technological achievement then this new turbo engine that can also go in the TSX and a sports coupe which is what many people are asking for? Would some of these people rather the older Supra, 300ZX, RX-7, just be NA 6 cylinders? Do most prefer the NA 350Z over the last twin turbo 300zx, I prefer the old Z car to the new one. Is a Porsche 911 turbo, GT2, 959, Ferrari F40, GTO, Buggati Veyron, EB110, Skylines, Supras, succumbing to the masses and not leaders in technology, performance, or what people really want or wanted in high end sports cars.
Turbo engines can offer more power, torque, better fuel economy, cleaner emissions then larger high reving engines putting out the same power. Honda can still make highly efficient high performance NA engines as well as having the choice of a few FI engines. I am glad Honda/Acura is offering FI engines as well as NA engines in their lineup.
Turbo engines can offer more power, torque, better fuel economy, cleaner emissions then larger high reving engines putting out the same power. Honda can still make highly efficient high performance NA engines as well as having the choice of a few FI engines. I am glad Honda/Acura is offering FI engines as well as NA engines in their lineup.
#21
Pole Position
Originally Posted by 4TehNguyen
hello have you seen the K series engines? The best 4 cylinders in the world. K24 block + K20 head + bolt ons = 230 whp 160-170 wtrq
#22
Pole Position
Originally Posted by 4TehNguyen
variable geometry turbo eliminates turbo lag above 2000 rpm, its going to drive like an N/A, but with the power of a turbo, theres esentially no lag. Some of you people are severly underestimating the capabilities of a variable geometry turbo. Turbo lag was the main problem with turbos and its basically gone now. If someone were to drive you you probably couldnt tell its a turbo since the boost is always on and doesnt have to build up
#23
Lexus Fanatic
Originally Posted by ST430
turbo lag has been well taken care of since the old days of smaller ball bearing, higher efficiency turbos. but honestly, you're going to tell me you'd pay $30-$35k for a honda 4 cylinder (even if it has a turbo) over a $25k-30k rav 4 with a v6 that has more hp and torque? wake up and realize that their engineering only shoehorned in the turbo as a stopgap solution for not having an adequate v6. think about it, you have some of the best I4 engineers in the world at Honda (including sportsbikes). Why add a turbo that prohibitvely costs more, requires more maintenance (in the long run), when you could of engineered a better engine from the ground up? this sort of mentality will always hold acura back as a tier 2 luxury brand , regardless of its technology (see Acura RL).
I like Hondas high tech powerful high reving engines too but I don't see anything wrong with them trying and offering a turbo engine in one or a few of their cars. If this engine is used as a option in the next TSX and a TSX sized coupe I think it will be a big hit and address the problem of the TSX needing some more power. If Honda chose to make all their vehicles FI and not focus on high output NA engines anymore then I would be dissapointed but that is not the case. Maybe Honda should just do away with hybrid engine technology since it is not what they were known for in the past but that would be limiting themselves. Honda can still make and inovate new technologies for high performance NA engines yet offer a few FI engines to satisfy many enthusiasts as well as address complaints that their cars don't have enough low down torque which has never bothered me. If Acura turbocharges the RL to give it 350-360hp before the next new model to address the lack of a 300+hp engine I don't think many people will be complaining. I am sure Honda/Acura is not abandoning its high performance NA engine technology, they are just offering more and different powertrains for different applications.
#24
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
Originally Posted by ST430
turbo lag has been well taken care of since the old days of smaller ball bearing, higher efficiency turbos. but honestly, you're going to tell me you'd pay $30-$35k for a honda 4 cylinder (even if it has a turbo) over a $25k-30k rav 4 with a v6 that has more hp and torque? wake up and realize that their engineering only shoehorned in the turbo as a stopgap solution for not having an adequate v6. think about it, you have some of the best I4 engineers in the world at Honda (including sportsbikes). Why add a turbo that prohibitvely costs more, requires more maintenance (in the long run), when you could of engineered a better engine from the ground up? this sort of mentality will always hold acura back as a tier 2 luxury brand , regardless of its technology (see Acura RL).
maintainence b/t a N/A and a well tuned turbo engine is debateable, an N/A engine can be made crappy and die before a well tuned F/I engine does. Who is anyone to say Honda's philopsophy and principles is no turbos and N/A only thats only what your mind perceives. They turboed F1 machines they have turbo vehicles back in japan. By getting rid of turbo lag the car will drive like a N/A car because there is no lag, boost pressure is always there no matter the rpm.
BMW suddenly turboes the 3 series despite a many years of it being N/A but I dont see anyone complaining about that. This engine is for sure going into the RSX and/or TSX, good for acura, TSX will finally have some power to go with its phenominal handling. Turbo with honda/acura reliability? Sign me up
Last edited by 4TehNguyen; 03-28-06 at 01:31 PM.
#25
Guest
Posts: n/a
I don't think you guys get it. Its still a I-4. TOYOTA has a damn V-6 Rav-4. This is supposed to be the LUXURY segment.
Engine=HEART of the car. So TOYOTA engine> Acura engine
Now does that sound right to you as a luxury car owner?
THe RD-X would make a GREAT top line CR-V. Not a luxury truck. The engine is ALL WRONG.
Name ONE OTHER SUV with a turbo engine outside the Cayenne Turbo and that is simply the most powerful SUV you can buy and WITHOUT turbo's it has a V-8 making 340hp.
Their stubborness will please the Honda faithful but puzzle the rest. DOn't ya'll think if a turbo I-4 was the best way to go, EVERYONE ELSE would have done it by now?
Nope, it goes to show Acura's stubborness, which Honda fans call uniqueness and why no one takes Acura seriously.
I don't understand why they turbo a SUV that makes almost as much power as their sports car S2000 with more torque. I also don't understand why they turbo a SUV but will the TSX with lethargic power.
Will it sell? Of course, like the TSX, it will be a cheap, luxury badged car with a very nice interior. And I am sure Car and Driver will give it some incredible butt loving like every Honda out.
Engine=HEART of the car. So TOYOTA engine> Acura engine
Now does that sound right to you as a luxury car owner?
THe RD-X would make a GREAT top line CR-V. Not a luxury truck. The engine is ALL WRONG.
Name ONE OTHER SUV with a turbo engine outside the Cayenne Turbo and that is simply the most powerful SUV you can buy and WITHOUT turbo's it has a V-8 making 340hp.
Their stubborness will please the Honda faithful but puzzle the rest. DOn't ya'll think if a turbo I-4 was the best way to go, EVERYONE ELSE would have done it by now?
Nope, it goes to show Acura's stubborness, which Honda fans call uniqueness and why no one takes Acura seriously.
I don't understand why they turbo a SUV that makes almost as much power as their sports car S2000 with more torque. I also don't understand why they turbo a SUV but will the TSX with lethargic power.
Will it sell? Of course, like the TSX, it will be a cheap, luxury badged car with a very nice interior. And I am sure Car and Driver will give it some incredible butt loving like every Honda out.
#26
Acura or Saab
Is it confirmed that the 2.3L Turbo engine is a Honda engine in the RDX, or is this a 'trade' engine that they got from another manufacturer in exchange? Honda supplies a detuned MDX engine to the Saturn Vue Redline. Where did Honda come up with a turbo charged 2.3L turbo engine? Is it perhaps the Saab 2.3L Turbo, since Saab is owned by GM, which is Saturn.
So, if the swap is in place, then we're going to expect RDX owners to buy an Acura with a Saab engine. Pretty much like the Honda Passport and Acura SLX... sucker vehicles...
I have a '92 Teg GS-R and I can't imagine driving that thing if it were a turbo. I have 203K on it and nothing has broken on it. I can't imagine what would have broken by now had it been turbo charged...
So, if the swap is in place, then we're going to expect RDX owners to buy an Acura with a Saab engine. Pretty much like the Honda Passport and Acura SLX... sucker vehicles...
I have a '92 Teg GS-R and I can't imagine driving that thing if it were a turbo. I have 203K on it and nothing has broken on it. I can't imagine what would have broken by now had it been turbo charged...
#27
Lexus Test Driver
iTrader: (1)
Originally Posted by ST430
you're going to tell me you'd pay $30-$35k for a honda 4 cylinder (even if it has a turbo) over a $25k-30k rav 4 with a v6 that has more hp and torque? wake up and realize that their engineering only shoehorned in the turbo as a stopgap solution for not having an adequate v6.
#28
Lexus Champion
iTrader: (3)
Originally Posted by mhc0725
Is it confirmed that the 2.3L Turbo engine is a Honda engine in the RDX, or is this a 'trade' engine that they got from another manufacturer in exchange? Honda supplies a detuned MDX engine to the Saturn Vue Redline. Where did Honda come up with a turbo charged 2.3L turbo engine? Is it perhaps the Saab 2.3L Turbo, since Saab is owned by GM, which is Saturn.
So, if the swap is in place, then we're going to expect RDX owners to buy an Acura with a Saab engine. Pretty much like the Honda Passport and Acura SLX... sucker vehicles...
I have a '92 Teg GS-R and I can't imagine driving that thing if it were a turbo. I have 203K on it and nothing has broken on it. I can't imagine what would have broken by now had it been turbo charged...
So, if the swap is in place, then we're going to expect RDX owners to buy an Acura with a Saab engine. Pretty much like the Honda Passport and Acura SLX... sucker vehicles...
I have a '92 Teg GS-R and I can't imagine driving that thing if it were a turbo. I have 203K on it and nothing has broken on it. I can't imagine what would have broken by now had it been turbo charged...
#29
HP is HP and Torque is Torque. Does it really matter whether it comes from an I4, I6, V6, V8, V12, hybrid, turbo, supercharged, diesel, corn oil, hydrogen or even cow dungs?
I really don't see what the big deal is. All these negativities are just the same as saying your car put out 350hp but it's still a push rod.. so what? HP is HP.... and with OEM turbos.... uuuhhh... mod heaven..
I really don't see what the big deal is. All these negativities are just the same as saying your car put out 350hp but it's still a push rod.. so what? HP is HP.... and with OEM turbos.... uuuhhh... mod heaven..