Acura MDX SUV Forums banner
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,952 Posts
Which engine?

3.5L?
Or 3.0L?

The 3.5L is a J35Y5 — Direct injected SOHC with variable timing only on the intake.

The 2nd gen MDX used a J37A1. Same basic design as the other J-series engines, but larger displacement and PGM-FI.

I don’t know as much about the 3.0L. I know it uses PGM-FI instead of direct injection.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,521 Posts
Looks like Honda dug out one of those old engines used for Accord for the sports hybrid's 3.0. I cannot believe how lazy Honda becomes. Port injection + 10.5 compression ratio ... No need to read further.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,521 Posts
If Honda is willing to give MDX 3.5 DOHC, Direction + Port Injection and 10-speed Auto, it is an instant buy in my book. Otherwise, not sure. Wake up Honda. SOHC is just not good enough.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,894 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
If Honda is willing to give MDX 3.5 DOHC, Direction + Port Injection and 10-speed Auto, it is an instant buy in my book. Otherwise, not sure. Wake up Honda. SOHC is just not good enough.


So the latest MDX model is just a facelift with belts and whistles. As engine performance wise it’s not much difference from 20007-2013 model?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
218 Posts
Would rather have old proven technology than an unproven turd like the J37 with its siliconized aluminum cylinder liners. Honda heralded these as the best thing since sliced bread then unceremoniously dropped them after a couple years of dismal performance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,952 Posts
If Honda is willing to give MDX 3.5 DOHC, Direction + Port Injection and 10-speed Auto, it is an instant buy in my book. Otherwise, not sure. Wake up Honda. SOHC is just not good enough.
Actually, SOHC has proven itself "good enough". The MDX is competitive with horsepower, torque, and fuel economy; and I'll take proven reliability over cutting-edge, any day.

I suppose you're one of those people who chastise the Gen-5 SBC for sticking with a single cam and pushrods, while praising the Ford EcoBoost with its complexity and cost... Ignoring the fact that the SBC is proven, inexpensive, reliable, makes good power, and gets good fuel economy. So what does the Ford get you except more doubt/risk/cost?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,699 Posts
Acura engine SOHC choices are good enough to compete with likes of Toyota, Nissan, and Honda. Acura has become a sporty Honda trim level compared to its own brand. Sharing engines and bumping the Acura requirements to 91 octane, only a 10 hp increase, adding $5000-$10,000 to the price, slightly longer warranty, and just having different styling is one of my complaints. There was a noticeable difference between my 11 MDX Adv compared to 11 Pilot Elite. Not so much with 18 Pilot and 18 MDX.

At least we get the 2.0T+sh-awd in the 19 RDX compared to the 1.5T in the 19 CR-V awd. Acura will need to use the 2.0T and 3.0T (or 3.0TT), sh-awd, and have the option of hybrid power to make Acura standout above Honda in hp, TQ, handling, and mpgs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,521 Posts
So the latest MDX model is just a facelift with belts and whistles. As engine performance wise it’s not much difference from 20007-2013 model?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Saying ‘no difference’ is being nice. The engine from that hybrid MDX is an antique, minus collection value.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,521 Posts
Would rather have old proven technology than an unproven turd like the J37 with its siliconized aluminum cylinder liners. Honda heralded these as the best thing since sliced bread then unceremoniously dropped them after a couple years of dismal performance.


To be fair to J37, those used in 07-09 MDX are pretty good. Only the J37 in 10+ are turds


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,521 Posts
Acura engine SOHC choices are good enough to compete with likes of Toyota, Nissan, and Honda. Acura has become a sporty Honda trim level compared to its own brand. Sharing engines and bumping the Acura requirements to 91 octane, only a 10 hp increase, adding $5000-$10,000 to the price, slightly longer warranty, and just having different styling is one of my complaints. There was a noticeable difference between my 11 MDX Adv compared to 11 Pilot Elite. Not so much with 18 Pilot and 18 MDX.



At least we get the 2.0T+sh-awd in the 19 RDX compared to the 1.5T in the 19 CR-V awd. Acura will need to use the 2.0T and 3.0T (or 3.0TT), sh-awd, and have the option of hybrid power to make Acura standout above Honda in hp, TQ, handling, and mpgs.


That is correct. People buying more and more SUV’s while Honda is selling fewer and fewer MDX. There’s something wrong with Acura and Honda.

I also think new RDX is a step in the right direction. But I am more of a natural aspiration guy. Just want to see a proper NA engine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,699 Posts
That is correct. People buying more and more SUV’s while Honda is selling fewer and fewer MDX. There’s something wrong with Acura and Honda.

I also think new RDX is a step in the right direction. But I am more of a natural aspiration guy. Just want to see a proper NA engine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think we are at the beginning of the end of NA engines. You might be limited to the current or previous gen of Acura vehicles if you still want V-6 NA power :frown2:

At least the current Gen NA 3.5L RDX or MDX will be reliable enough for +10 years if everything turns turbo pretty soon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
278 Posts
I was wondering what the AWD is like with the hybrid and found someone tested this on YouTube:

Hybrid MDX .
Standard MDX

I guess it's for performance only, strange that Acura uses a name like SH-SH-AWD makes you think it's superior AWD system... strange
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,521 Posts
I think we are at the beginning of the end of NA engines. You might be limited to the current or previous gen of Acura vehicles if you still want V-6 NA power :frown2:

At least the current Gen NA 3.5L RDX or MDX will be reliable enough for +10 years if everything turns turbo pretty soon.
NA engine might be at the end for Honda, but for Toyota NA engine will last, esp. with hybrid setup. In fact, seeing Camry completely dominates Accord in recent sales data, I kinda feel that A LOT of drivers still prefer NA engines when they have a choice.

The current gen. RDX might last a long time, but the Achilles heel of the current MDX is their junky transmission. In fact, current MDX is using a transmission for lower trim Odyssey! My feeling is that people who still buy MDX either have no clue or they just don't care.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,952 Posts
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Would rather have old proven technology than an unproven turd like the J37 with its siliconized aluminum cylinder liners. Honda heralded these as the best thing since sliced bread then unceremoniously dropped them after a couple years of dismal performance.
from this site:
https://www.zeroto60times.com/vehicle-make/acura-0-60-mph-times/


2008: 7.4sec (SH-AWD)
2014 6.2 (SH-AWD)
2017 5.9 (SH-AWD)

I would hardly call this a Turd...

It shows same or better performance numbers than an acclaimed hot, hard-to get, SI....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,521 Posts
from this site:
https://www.zeroto60times.com/vehicle-make/acura-0-60-mph-times/


2008: 7.4sec (SH-AWD)
2014 6.2 (SH-AWD)
2017 5.9 (SH-AWD)

I would hardly call this a Turd...

It shows same or better performance numbers than an acclaimed hot, hard-to get, SI....
The word "turd" was for J37 on 10-13 MDX due to excessive oil consumption. It was not intended for J35.

Relative to J35 on 3rd gen MDX, J37 actually has higher horse power. But Acura claims that J35 has higher torque curve. So performance wise, it is roughly a tie.

2014 MDX is faster than 2008 because it is lighter by more than 250 lbs. Also it has one extra low gear for fast acceleration. 2017 MDX is faster than 2014 because it has 9 vs. 6 gears. So acceleration-wise, engine is not the sole determinant.

Since V6 engines are hard to be equipped with a single turbo and it is hard to stuck a turbo between firewall and rear exhaust manifold, I actually do not expect Acura/Honda ever to install turbo V6 in transverse engine cars. That is why DOHC seems to be the main drawback. With a SOHC setup, Acura engines miss a lot. No Atkinson cycle, no in-cylinder EGR, low red line ... It is still good enough to hang on, maybe to eternity since ICE in general are suffering. But there is nothing to be excited about. The 3.6 V6 in a Camaro can generated 336 HP. The 3.5 in MDX is only good for 290 HP? How sad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,952 Posts
Since V6 engines are hard to be equipped with a single turbo and it is hard to stuck a turbo between firewall and rear exhaust manifold, I actually do not expect Acura/Honda ever to install turbo V6 in transverse engine cars.
I can't take anything you say, seriously. Clearly you haven't kept up on this issue. Acura has already committed to bringing turbocharged V6 models within the next couple years (and I'm sure they're staying with a transverse layout).

https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/acura-type-s-badge-returns-brings-turbo-v6-detroit-auto-show/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,699 Posts
Acura will probably follow M/B and BMW and make "hot Vs turbos" in single or twin turbo designs. You just reverse the intake and exhaust locations for faster spool time and space savings. Acura can still stick with its SOHC V-6 design with VTEC or i-VTEC. Acura could have the one of the most reliable mass produced single/twin turbo engine on the market that can go +200,000 miles with just routine M.I.D. maintenance and decent mpgs.
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top