The G Man

The new MDX should really be compare to the X5 or the FX, not the RX or GX.

LexFather

Oh, I agree with you and I hope my post didn't make it seem that I think the RX is that much faster. They are comparable with acceleration.
Concerning the GS 350 and 430, the newer technology of the GS 350 (direct injection/dual vvti) trumps the V-8. Gladly a GS 460 is coming.

Kan-O-Z

Yes this is true but you have to remember that in an SUV or a bigger vehicle, low RPM torque is much more important and useful than peak horsepower at high rpm. Low end torque is need to get a massive vehicle 4000+ lbs moving. It's needed when carrying lots of people. Its needed when hauling things. Manufacturers sometimes tune an engine to accomplish this. The sacrifice is that you gain low rpm torque but lose ultimate high rpm horsepower.

A corvette engine puts out just as much horsepower as a semi truck engine...but there is no way you can stick a corvette engine in a semi truck and actually haul something. Then engine would most likely fail in just a few short minutes.

Once again please study this example:
Lexus LS 460 - 4.6L V8 - 380hp
Upcoming Lexus IS-F - 5.0L V8 - 450 hp
Upcoming Lexus LX570 - 5.7L V8 - 380hp

Ask yourself why didn't Lexus use the 4.6L engine or better yet the 5.0L engine in the new upcoming LX? Did they purposely want to waste money to develop a new engine that put out less horsepower? NO!

Please remember that engines are not about peak horsepower (especially when it comes to an SUV). There is no way they could put a Honda S2000 4 cylinder engine into a Honda Odyssey minivan. Both engines put out 240hp but the little 4 cyclinder would really really struggle to get a minivan going and it would constantly need to be revved very high for normal cruising type driving which would deteriorate the engine...not to mention the fuel economy on the 4 cylinder would be worse than on the 3.5L V6.

Another question for you. What are you going to say when they do bump the RL to 3.7L and it puts out 330hp? Will the MDX be low tech then? Will Acura be purposefully be underpowering the MDX when it could have 330hp? You can bet this will happen shortly.

The G Man

Horsepower looks great on paper, but there is no replacement for torque.

TunedRX300

As I posted before (twice in this thread), engine peak power is an over simplistic metric. That part we are in agreement. However, I am quite confused why you kept coming back to use that as the sole measurement.

An automaker's design and product tatics is not about how to use a future engine into current and past products, it is about how to use the proper engine in its current portoflio into a certain platform.

Acura picks the most powful V6 into the new MDX, Lexus pick the tuned-down 2gr-fe when 2gr-fse is avaliable. The message is clear, Lexus never wants to put the best V6 engine into the RX350 because most of RX's current customers don't care.

Check out wwest's post on this thread, I agree with his comment
http://us.lexusownersclub.com/forums...howtopic=37395

Had Lexus done that with RX350, I will also be lining up to buy the new RX.

Kan-O-Z

I don't think any manufacturer is trying to make their SUVs perform as good as or on par with their cars. Every manufacturer has a car that will completely outperform their best SUV...that goes for Porshe as well. Once again I will state, an SUV is a big beast and the laws of physics are against it. It's just cannot compete with a decent car if the same type of technology is put into the car.

Porsche Cayenne is a no good SUV in my opinion. Let me explain why.
We went and test drove a Cayenne S V8 while when we were shopping around for an SUV. The Porsche was simply good an nothing! Lets see when I buy an SUV, I want comfort, I want luggage and storage space, I want room for passengers. The Cayenne did none of these things. I sat in the back seat during the test drive and my knees were bumping into the driver seat! Passenger space and storage was less than a decent sedan! The ride was awful. I could hear everything, feel every bump. The vehicle is big, heavy and expensive and small on the inside. A Toyota Avalon would blow it away in everything including performance, comfort, luggage space and it's fuel economy is nearly double that of a Cayenne which is 14 mpg! Then there is the price of the Porsche which was close to double of the RX (nearly $80,000) with options. Amenities sucked, nav sucked, no gadgetry, nothing.

It's basically an SUV for a 911 driver who was 'forced' into buying an SUV. It does nothing well for an SUV except for 0-60. I don't call 0-60 innovative. Ford and Dodge make pickup trucks that have 500+ hp V10 engines. Do you call that innovative as well?

Porsche missed the mark with the Cayenne. It may be a good selling SUV for Porsche but it's not good when compared to other SUVs. Now here is a car people would buy solely for status or maybe 0-60 bragging rights.

Kan-O-Z

The G Man

There is a post in one of the MDX forum complaining about new MDX instrument panel. This guys counted 46 buttons and three multi-function ***** on the center stack alone on the new MDX with Sports and Entertainment Packages. The steering wheel face houses 10 additional buttons and switches.
Now that is high tech, or a high tech headache for some people. You will need a co-pilot to drive this baby.

Roxpert

I like buttons and gadgets, The_G_Man, so maybe that was the main allure to me of the MDX. Their market research must have found that many men to whom they are targeting the vehicle feel the same way.

As far as I am concerned, the MDX beats the RX hands-down on the stuff inside the cockpit (seating, gadgets, etc.), while the RX wins with the rest of the vehicle, old style or not.

sdbrandon

Not sure this makes sense. However, I understand what you are saying.

The problem is weight and horsepower.

A BMW 650 coupe weighs approx. 3700lbs It has a 360HP V8.

A BMW X5 with the same V8 weighs 5300lbs.

So even though they have the same engine, the SUV is well over 2-1/2 tons. It would need a 500HP engine to even come close.

My3rdRX

LOL ~ all this theoretic discussion can NEVER compare to the serious fun that I'm having with my MDX ~ something that I couldn't have with my previous RXs (not even the 04 Performance). But I'm having a BLAST tooting my MDX around town and on the highway!

lbc99

This might clarify the early posts about the EPA mileage on the 2008 RX 350.

Note that it specifies that "These estimates reflect new EPA methods beginning with 2008 models."

Yang1815

iTrader: (1)

Why are we comparing a brand new design against something that's at the end of its generation anyway?

Wait til the new RX comes out and compare that with the MDX...

TunedRX300

Thanks for capture this picture for 2008 RX350, this confirms Lexus official published EPA mileage for RX350, which = Acura official # for MDX.

Indeed, 2008 model is year EPA requires the start of the new fuel standard and the label, not the 2007 model. Both Lexus and Acura were still under the old system in 2007.

Question to Kan-O-Z when you made the following statement, did you compare fuel standard implemented on 2008 RX350 with 2007 MDX?

Kan-O-Z

I have a 2007 window sticker I've been meaning to scan. It says 19/24 and that's for the AWD. Here is a link from Edmuds that reflects the same thing:
http://www.edmunds.com/used/2007/lex...407/specs.html

CK6Speed

iTrader: (1)

It's a never ending cycle. When the new RX comes out probably as a 2009 model, the MDX will be approaching middle age and maybe just getting a mid cycle refresh like the 2007 RX350 just got. Then the Acura camp will be saying why are we comparing a brand new design against a generation that will be nearing its end soon