http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...t_drive_review

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13746_7-10368075-48.html

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...est/index.html

This thing might catch on. :-)

 

Remember how I told you that I think the TL's trunk/tail crease is going to take the car world by storm? I think the ZDX is going to have a similar industry-wide ripple effect.

 

I think the ZDX is potentially a great hit. Potentially. Marketing direction and the US economy will be a problem.

I can also see that the high-price ZDX might drive sales of the TSX and TL, too. The way that they've integrated the parrot beak/can opener shield onto the nose of the ZDX has the effect of making the TL look a little better.

The ZDX hit the market at a higher premium than I was anticipating. It's looking like the top of the line, now, instead of the RL, and it even looks like money that might've been spent on the RL replacement went into the ZDX instead.

 

I think they may as well just toss the RL into the parts bin of history. You?

 

ugly *** grill, otherwise it looks alright

 

All that in a 4500lb car built on a platform allegedly shared with a 7 passenger SUV! Now that's engineering.


What surprised me about this car when it first showed up was not that it was pretty ugly looking - that's about par for the course with Acura...but that it looked so cheap, as well. It does look a little less cheap in real colours that can be seen in the second article.

It only took one generation for BMW to stop making horrible looking cars...maybe Honda can pull the same thing off as well.

 

Well. I don't think cars like this are supposed to be the ultimate statement of practicality.

In its price segment, which places it in some configurations well ahead of the RL/Legend, it will probably compete well, perhaps even replacing the Legend.

But what do I know.

In a review of the Honda Crosstour, I saw one reviewer saying that he felt the Crosstour would appeal to "an empty nester with a wolfhound" (or something to that effect).

Maybe there's a similar demographic for the ZDX?

Or maybe the back seats are for in-laws. I mean, you wouldn't want them getting all that comfortable, eh?

 

We just got our 1st 2......
Ehhh.....only 300hp?!?! WEAK!!!
Wheels are teh failz.....but thats to be expected from Acura.
Better power to weight than the X6.....Im not sure what Acuras intentions were with this.
Limited production and sales like the RL I suppose.

 

Not sure how much more HP you think you can coax out of the ol'e J Motor w/out compromising its legendary reliability.

As far as wheels...I know what you mean. The best looking Acura wheels I have ever seen are the 18" wheels that came on my TL SH-AWD. Pretty good looking, widely spaced five spokes.

 

Given how well it performs...do you really think it needs more?

Oh, right. Honda could have put their imaginary V8 in there to make you happy.

 

Not even looking for GOBS more power, but they need to raise the bar.
They came out with a ~300hp 3.7L how many years after Infiniti?
They have proven in the past what they can do with engines....They squeezed ~260hp/3.2L
Maybe something like 320-330hp from their 3.7L just to drop some mouths a little?! IDK. Acura has been making some mistakes lately......and I have to live with it.
I just feel like the ZDX should be more exciting since its basically a 2 seat SUV for $50k that nobody over 6' tall can drive comfortably. We'll see how it drives.....Going to drive it shortly.

V8? hahahaha!! When monkeys fly out of my butt.

 

Maybe. We'll see how it goes. SH-AWD makes it a lot easier to put all of that power to the ground, and that means both straight line acceleration and curves.

The J Motor automatics with SH-AWD will put 70% of the power to the rear wheels when you're accelerating in a straight line, and the vectoring keeps you from feeling torque steer.

I dunno. You might find yourself having enough fun not to feel you really need another 20 HP. :-)

But what do I know.

 

It'd be nice if Honda made a DOHC V6. They're about due again.

 

exactly why do they need this again?

 

Who cares? If you want an Infiniti, go buy one. Is a 10% deficit in horsepower really worth all the pissing and moaning I see on this site about Honda losing its way and losing ground to all the other manufacturers?

No one talks **** on the BMW 335i, even though it uses twin turbos to achieve the stock power output of a ZDX or TL. All this anti-Honda whining is ****ing stupid.

 

It's not imaginary, Rosstopher. It's real, but expensive to put into production at this juncture, considering the economy and sales of both Honda and Acura vehicles in that economy.

There are still important decisions to make, too, like whether the future at the top of the line belongs to a ZDX/TL type vehicle or the rear-bias SH-AWD platform.

It's expensive and illogical making those decisions in 2010 or 2011, I think.

 

Well, I know that...I'm merely expressing frustration at the groupthink on Honda-Tech that Honda is somehow losing some theoretical battle because they don't have a V8 for the TL/RL/Ridgeline/Pilot/MDX/ZDX/etc.

The power ratings are so close, and we know that Honda consistently under-rates their cars and that companies like Nissan over-rate their own...and that Honda/Acura cars now put the power to the ground more efficiently than almost anything out there. But still, they are "falling behind" for lack of a V8 motor...it's stupid.

 

Now that you mention it, I recall that the Jaguar V8 is rated at 300 HP, five less than the Acura 3.7 V6.

 

So is the Mustang GT's V8.

Now I'm waiting for someone to come in and tell us that the Taurus SHO is a superior product to the TL/ZDX because it has 365hp.

 

slap a blower on the TL/ZDX problem solved

 

LOL... I'm not sure the rear LSD is supposed to handle another 100 HP.

 

Only at Honda could the term "sports coupe" equate to a four-door truck

I don't see much of a point in a DOHC V6. Adding a second cam to each head takes up a lot more space, which makes packaging and repairs much more difficult in a transverse FWD-based vehicle.

The only real benefit to having two cams per bank - at least in a street engine - is the ability to vary cam phasing, and the minimal result of that is not worth the added bulk, weight, cost, and complexity IMHO. I'm a big fan of SOHC heads for non-inline engines.

 

I agree that a twincam head on a V6 is probably overly complicating things, especially considering the huge advances in computer management that allow us to get previously unobtainable amounts of power out of relatively small displacements.

But...is the J Motor reaching the end of its life expectancy?

How much bigger can we go after the 3.7? How much more power can we expect out of a V6 design that has been around so long?

If they're starting from ground zero, anything's fair game, eh? :-)

Who knows what they've got up their sleeves.

 

It does seem to be able to get about the same gas mileage out of more power and with more weight...that can be a selling point. Not being fugly as well. I'm sure it has driving dynamics that pale in the face of the oh-so-mighty Honda. I'd hope so anyway, because these days it's hard to say Honda products are very special based on their stats on paper.

Well, DOHC cam phasing would be cool, like on the 2011 V6 Rustang, I'm sure there are other, older examples of that being used.

 

Well. I don't think cars like this are supposed to be the ultimate statement of practicality.