The 2016 Acura RDX boasts a 279-hp, 3.5-liter V-6. Considering the 2015 Honda CR-V is powered by a 185-hp, 2.4-liter I-4, the difference is—of course—immediately noticeable. I appreciate the sound the engine makes at wide-open throttle, not to mention the Acura’s Motor Trend-tested 6.2-second 0-60 time. For an all-wheel-drive luxury SUV starting in the mid- to high-$30,000 range, that’s decently quick even before considering the 8.5-second time of our long-term all-wheel-drive CR-V.
2016 RDX comes standard with LED headlights, which can make a big difference in nighttime forward visibility. The feature (or HIDs) is an extra cost on many of the RDX’s competitors and isn’t available at all on the U.S.-spec CR-V, which offers projector-beam halogens on the top Touring trim. HID and LED headlights are the type of upgrade you might pass off as unnecessary until you’ve experienced them for yourself, after which point the luxury might cause you to second guess from behind the wheel whether halogen-equipped vehicles have their lights on at all.
Would the 2016 Acura RDX or the 2016 Honda CR-V be a better fit? After spending months driving the Motor Trend long-term 2015 CR-V, I recently drove the refreshed 2016 RDX, a two-row crossover that’s built on the same platform as the SUV of the Year-winning Honda (read the review HERE). They’re not officially direct competitors—the RDX battles with premium options such as the Lexus NX, BMW X1, and Lincoln MKC—but in the real world, those who want a Honda or Acura may just find the CR-V and RDX as the finalists in a search for a new crossover. The two vehicles share a few features and a similarly useful interior, but there are plenty of differences, too.
If the idea of driving a car without a premium badge on the front grille doesn’t instantly turn you off, here are five reasons to choose the CR-V. And if taking the step up to the Acura causes only a slight pause, we’ve got five ways to justify the RDX over the less expensive CR-V.
