Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Older Acura TLs



  • After three years..

    A 4-year-old '04 with 45K miles... or

    A 3-year-old '05 with 45K miles...

    I'm not sure that the mileage thing will make a big difference, one way or another..

    The '04s are a good deal right now, but the less time you own the car, the more the difference in model year hurts you on resale..

    If you keep it 6-7 years, then that low, low price you got on the '04 is just money in your pocket..

    For many people, they need the lower price on the '04, just to afford the car, so there isn't a lot of choice.

    just my $.02


    Moderator - Prices Paid, Lease Questions, SUVs

  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,622
    I actually did a comparison of used car prices a few years ago. I think I used an explorer but I compared 2 consecutive model years with the same mileage which would simulate one person buying an end of model year vehicle and one buying a brand new model year vehicle and then driving them exactly the same way for 3 years. After 3 years there was only about a $300 difference between them. So if you got a bigger discount on the leftover 04 you could actually come out ahead.

    Now I haven't done this comparison lately and it may not work on different vehicles but it's easy enough to check on any website that does used car values.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,622
    Ok, I just did the same comparison on a 2001/2002 TL in good condition with 45K miles (without Nav). The difference in Trade-in value was right at $1000. The wholesale difference would be a bit less.

    Bottom line is you're not worse off taking an 04 if it's at least $1k cheaper than the 05 and if it's more than $1K cheaper you may actually be ahead.

    I'm sure if you kept it more than 3 years the difference is much less.
  • That is a good comparison.. I would pretty much always buy the new model, if I could get it for only $1K more.

    Moderator - Prices Paid, Lease Questions, SUVs

  • bodble2bodble2 Posts: 4,519
    One big intangible is that they may have worked most of the bugs out for the '05.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,622
    "One big intangible is that they may have worked most of the bugs out for the '05. "

    And they may have also introduced new ones......

    All I meant to suggest is that you don't automatically dismiss a leftover model if it has a discount. There are always other factors to consider.
  • highenderhighender Posts: 1,362
    Hi habitat.::

    just got back...

    yeah....I hear you....perhaps it's the extra horses that are making the mpg a little less than expected...

    but like you said, the other cars got similar or better mpg, even though they are older, with less new light components.

    Perhaps the engine needs to be running at 60 mph for peak efficiency ?
  • leonivleoniv Posts: 120
    Didn't know if your reply was directed at me or not so just thought I'd clarify. I drive a Maxima and always run premium. There have been several reports of problems down the road with Maximas when using regular so I play it safe. I agree with your comments above though. If you can afford the car, you should be able to afford the gas and everything else it requires.
  • highenderhighender Posts: 1,362
    I was on the powerchip site...and they offered an aftermarket chip for the cayenne for 91 octane, and one for 93 octane...

    the higher octane chip , which works if you can get a hold of 93 or higher octane gas, will give you more horsepower....

    if you use 87, the hp may decrease....but many newer vehicles have fuel systems and engines which can temporarily accomodate big differences in octane.

    FWIW, I used to work for a consulting group which tested gasoline, and we did octane numbers for both buyers and sellers....

    each batch of gas is different...and have diff octane numbers...and the lower quality batches must have toluene /benzene, etc added , to up the octane numbers.......

    on the highway gas mileage for TL, going about 70 to 75 mph, is 27 mpg...

    I guess if I go 60-65 mph, it may improve to 30 mpg.
  • Has anyone heard of the TL will get the new RL's SH-AWD system? SH-AWD sounds great, but I'm never going to pay the extra $15K do get the RL. Plus, I'd rather have the system with a manual tranny, which the RL doesn't have.
  • Not currently! Perhaps in a couple of years, along with traffic-update navigation.
  • igibanigiban Posts: 530
    In that case, I'd expect TL price to go up (no one thinks SH is free right?). Acura more than likely will leave TL as it is to render enough incentives for people to pay for RL.
  • They could offer it as a factory option, but it doesn't seem to be Acura's policy to offer many of these -- except Navigation!
  • bodble2bodble2 Posts: 4,519
    I just don't think Acura would want to steal the RL's thunder this early in the game. BTW, I got an invite today to preview the RL on October 13th.
  • kennyg5kennyg5 Posts: 360
    Does "preview" mean "test drive"? If so, make sure you report back :-)

    Over the weekend, I went to a shopping mall for an "auto show" (with only a dozen cars) run by one of the big dealers here -- Rallye -- that sells Acura, Lexus, MB and BMW. No 05 RL was available, and the salesman told me that the public won't see its debut until mid-Oct at the earliest.
  • Preview means you stand around the car with a bunch of sales guy offering you bagels and donuts.

    PS- They also echo the same thing over and over-

    "This car is an amazing product".
  • Onion bagels? with cream cheese? I'm in..

    Moderator - Prices Paid, Lease Questions, SUVs

  • bodble2bodble2 Posts: 4,519
    billyperks is right. I'm sure the RL preview is similar to the one I went to for the TL -- a wine and cheese party with one car sitting in the middle of the showroom covered until the big unveiling, and then everyone takes turn oohing and ahhing over it. But they will take reservations that night for testdrives at a later date. I'll do that for sure even though there is almost no chance the car will entice me enough to buy one at this time.
  • nkeennkeen Posts: 316
    I had my first experience with the Bridgestones in heavy rain today. I wasn't impressed -- the car was hydroplaning at 50 to 60 in conditions that would leave my old VW GTi on Continentals totally unfazed at 80. Perhaps it's tire width that's at play here. Anyway, I'd be interested to hear whether anyone has experience with Michelin Pilot A/S tires in the wet on the 2004 TL.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,622
    Not on the TL but I've had them on my Lincoln LS for about 30,000 miles (2 sets - long story). I can't make them hydroplane - I've tried. Once I did a panic stop from about 40 in the rain and the car just stopped dead within about 2 car lengths. The ABS didn't even activate. You will not find a better wet tire. The downside is they are expensive.
Sign In or Register to comment.