I returned my 8 and I'm looking into a new car to get (currently borrowing a car from my family). I'm considering getting an Acura TL. It's a frickin' sweet car for the money. In fact, I can get it for as much as I got my 8 for. It's a much better "value" though the 8 is still a much more fun car.

The TL would come fully loaded. 250+ HP, nice interior, very quiet inside, bluetooth, crazy nice navigation system, voice commands for a lot of stuff (like controlling fan speed, radio channels, etc). Oh and it gets 21/29 mpg...

Acuras are really nice. But they're not really sporty (minus the NSX).

 

I just went to look at a CX-7 for my wife (and me) in comparison to the upcoming CR-V. I loved it! I work at UPS so I qualify for S-Plan pricing which puts the sport model at the same base price as the new base CR-V. Value- wise, it's a no brainer. You get more in the Mazda. I love the sports car design and feel, I didn't drive it, but am sure I would love it. But here is my big caveat. The turbo engine. 9.5:1 compression, 15.6psi boost? This is a production car numbers? Sounds more like teenager ricer numbers. Isn't that a lot? I really doubt that the engine in the CX-7 will last well over 100,000 miles trouble free(like a modern engine should). I really wish there was a slightly cheaper non-turbo model. I loved the exterior, interior, standard 18" wheels and tires. It has everything I want. But why can't they ust have put a V-6 in it? I am less afraid of the Renesis than of this motor. Think of every high strug turbo car ever released. Do you EVER see them on the road more than a few years. I see none. I welcome INFORMED contrary opinions. I love the CX-7, but 15.6 psi? Did I read it wrong?

 

its not high strung for this motor or turbo.

 

I am sure that you know more about this than I do (no sarcasm intended at all), but can you elaborate a little bit on this? I only know a little bit and always figured that higher pressures=higher heat=higher wear. Would a light footed driver like myself have better luck with a car like this? 2.3 liters making almost 250hp seems like a lot. That's over 100hp/liter. My mazda 626 2.0L makes only 125hp.

 

i test drove the cx-7 on friday. It drives like a car, not a suv. Very little body roll. It has some get up and go, but you don't hear or feel the turbo. Not bad for 4,000 lbs and 3 people during the drive.

My coworker is buying it next week, fully loaded.

Meanwhile I'm considering one for my wife. Base unit is msrp of 24k. So you can get it for 22k. Wait till they are putting out the 2008 and get an even better deal...

Great bang for the buck. The minivan they had on the showrom looked unappealing and cheap.

 

As much as I tried to sway her, the Wife likes the RDX better in terms of looks primarily. We drove one the other day, and it is a nice ride. She is leaning toward the RDX now. Oh well, it's her car and she could like a lot worse cars than an Acura.

 

cx7 blew my socks off when i first saw it. the mdx is everywhere.

maybe i just like the ones that arent seen much.
(as well as most people on this forum)

 

I think you misread it. It's an RDX, not MDX. The RDX is the brand new Acura. I haven't seen a single one on the road yet.

 

I have driven the CX 7 three times and what a vehicle. I am going to buy one once my RX 8 gets sold. It has excellent power, brakes are superb and the handling is unbelievably good...minimal body roll if at all. The GT leather is really nice and I thought they did a nice job with the interior. The cargo is decent and the price for this fun t o drive 244 turbo CUV is excellent....you get a lot for your money! It's more fun than my auto. RX 8!!! I am not sure about the RDX exterior...maybe it will grow on me. I am sure it's nice but it looks much smaller for some reason and it's just out of my price range. If you are in the market...drive one...you will love it! I just hope the issues are minor as it is a first year engine...per Mazda. Well, they said it's a modified version of the Mazdaspeed3 and 6 engines. Zoom,Zoom!

 

Simple. The motor is designed and built to handle the power it outputs and endure the pains of being a daily driver.

 

the cloth interior doesn't even look like cloth..

 

The new issue of Motor Trend tests the RDX, RAV4 and CX-7. The final placement is in that order with the RDX coming number one.

 

Meanwhile, back at the ranch...

 

Yeah probably, but I've heard this about every turbo car, yet is is rare to ever see one with an original engine past 100K miles. From even the better Japanese brands.

 

Like any car follow the maintenance and you will be fine. The turbo is more likely to go than the motor. Unless you had someone turn the boost up and then blew the engine. Owners boosting while engine is cold, shutting down without letting it cool, cause the turbo to break down. I can't tell you how many old school turbo bricks I see running around with well over 100k in miles.

Again, built and designed properly a na, sc or tc engine will last with proper maintenance.

 

Yea I was surprised too. But I was even more surprised by the numbers that Toyota put out. Anyone looking at the CX-7 should atleast test drive the Toyo Rav4 as well. Plus altho I love 4 banger Turbos I'd rather have a good V6 or I6

 

I really want the CX 7....great price, a blast to drive and nice interior... and I am nervous now beacuse it's a first year vehicle and I have never had a turbo......just a rotary engine and enough issues with that already.....am I getting myself into just as much trouble???

 

Not anymore than you will have of any other NA engine.

 

I'd rather have a non-Turbo engine as well, esp. in a SUV.

 

I wish there was a cheaper version with no turbo, I think it would sell well. Another reason I like the CX-7 is that I qualify for S-plan pricing that gives it to me for about 22K for the base model with no options or destination charge. And the other new models are hard to get a deal on. The new CR-V will be impossible to get discounted from the 22K base price, and Toyota dealers are just plain jerks across the board and they rape you on the options. The CX-7 is more exciting than both of those.

 

I don't really consider this new breed (CX7 / RDX) to be SUV. They are more like jacked up sport wagons.

 

quick question,
why does RDX weigh 3900+ pounds when its based on CRV which is probably not very heavy weight? its understandable for cx-7 cuz its based on the 6, and we all know how much MPS6 weigh with all wheel drive. I really had high hopes for RDX being a SUV rocket...

 

Probably all the junk that they tacked on to make it a luxury Acura crossover.

 

24k is msrp, 22k is dealer invoice. There are some dealers who're selling the base model for $20,999. If S-plan only gets you dealer invoice, it's not even worth bothering with.

 

That's good to know, I would not have expected that much on a new model. I won't have a hope of a discount on the new CR-V early next year. Why is that? Is there a decent CX-7 forum?