Howdy, Stranger!

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





Acura RL

1107108110112113235

Comments

  • I currently own a 2004 TL. The one thing I've noticed while owning this car is that people automatically pay respect to it when I tell them I drive a new TL. Now, the old TL never really got that respect because it was slightly vanilla. Finally, Acura comes out with what I've been waiting for them to do, a car that not only competes with the best, but leaves them in its dust. Now, the new RL was supposed to be the next big thing from Acura. I've been checking websites for close to 3 years now, hoping to get a glimpse of it. After seeing it, I wished Acura would take another 3 years and figure out that they are a building a premier luxury car, not something that we would see at a Mercury dealership. Although I am a huge huge fan of Acura I'm so disappointed in their work on the RL. I finally felt that people were starting to respect the Acura name, the TSX and the TL and even the MDX have set a pretty solid standard, I just wished the RL could follow. Why does it seem that every other luxury car company (perhaps besides BMW) seems to be on the right page. As we speak, Lexus is coming out w/ two new LS class cars, one to compete w/ the S-Class Mercedes, and one to compete with the E-Class and alike. With this car, I was atleast hoping to take out the new M from Infinite, but by the looks of it, the new RL will fall short on the attractive meter. If Acura is lost, tell them to enter some chatrooms and here the public's opinion. If people could see through a car's sheet metal into the inside, Acura would be at the tops, but fortunately LOOKS DO MATTER. Maybe one day, Acura will realize that the more respect they earn as a company, the more their cars will sell. The TL has finally earned that respect, when will the RL?
  • There is a distinct difference in the driving dynamics between my '96 RL and the '02 Accord EX leather V-6. Despite the heavier weight and a mere 10-hp advantage, the RL seems smoother and more powerful in the lower RPM range than the Accord, as well as giving a better ride. The Accord does have its advantages, though: a fold-down rear seat back, an in-dash 6-CD changer, and better gas mileage.

    I've always considered the Legend/RL to be a glorified Accord - a little roomier and more plush. But, the Accord has always been a great standard to other manufacturers to emulate.
  • Reviews from Temple of VTEC ont he new RL on a race course and on the streets have said amazingly positive things about the SH AWD system. Definitely check it out.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    In the Japanese market, the Legend will get all the frills that its lesser cousins (Accord and Inspire) do. This would include intelligent cruise control, lane-keep assist, Nightvision, CMS/E-pretensioner etc.

    For the American market, either those frills would add to the cost, or Honda doesn’t think American buyers want it until the MMC (model refresh) couple of years down the road. ;-)

    But then, we’re probably talking excesses. The new RL already has a load of them but in a non-traditional way.
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    "Varmint, mass of wheel will not play a role in affecting the overall gearing (hence thrust or the max speed in each gear). It will, however, contribute towards drag/rolling resistance and weight of the vehicle, besides handling."

    Yeah, I know mass isn't a factor in the gearing. But as a component in resistance, I thought it might degrade thrust much like the weight of the vehicle does in your equation.

    Silly factoid for the day...

    Using that formula a CR-V LX (5 speed manual) with AWD will pull .61 g's in first gear. Which is about the same thrust as the TL quoted earlier.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    Weight of the wheel gets included in the total weight of the vehicle, so it becomes a part of it when computing thrust.

    Yep. You're right about the CR-V. Honda was very aggressive with the first gear ratio in the CR-V.
  • ksomanksoman Posts: 590
    When I saw the RL at the NY Auto show, the car was in a lighter champaigne/silverish color... and it really did not enamour me.

    After seeing the pictures, I think it looks completely stunning from front and back (not profile) in DARK colors.

    I think it looks completely ugly in light colors, front, back or profile.

    wow, damn....

    ksso
  • >Acura would be at the tops, but fortunately LOOKS DO MATTER. Maybe one day, Acura will realize that the more respect they earn as a company, the more their cars will sell. The TL has finally earned that respect, when will the RL?<

    Chiggy:

    Thank you for an outstanding post. You have succinctly captured the essence of what is for me at least the continuing dissapointment in the moribund RL legacy. Looks do indeed matter, and when someone steps up and pays 50 Large for a luxury sedan the car should look the part. It's appearance should evidence one or more of these attributes: speed, muscle, grace, elegance, luxury, class, stature -- and be pleasing to the eye. The kind of car that you look back and admire as you park it for the night, or the one you are proud to get in after the parking attendant brings round your car outside the restaurant.

    It continues to amaze and astound me how Acura could get it so wrong AGAIN. Their design staff should be FIRED. While the Lexus LS430, the S-class and E class Mercedes, and the Audi A6 look like luxury cars, Acura's offering is a glorified Accord. Even the Infiniti G35 looks like a car with some passion in the exterior design.

    It simply boggles the mind how Acura keeps churning out mediocre styling for the RL, notwithstanding the terrific looking styling of the 2004 TL.

    I will wait to see the car in person, but as I have said many times on this forum - ad nauseum - Acura's wretched styling prompts me to wait and see what both Lexus and Infiniti offer in a similar price range.

    -- Sorry if I have gored anyone's ox, but after all this is a forum which fields multiple viewpoints and tastes --
  • >I think it looks completely ugly in light colors, front, back or profile<

    LOL! It's funny how different tastes can be. I had exactly the opposite reaction!
  • ksomanksoman Posts: 590
    Well, I realize we all are different. If you think a lexus LS is good looking, you are already on the far end of the solar system in my opinion ;)

    Just a warning note, if you haven't seen the M in real life, something I noted you seem to be drooling about, from my impression at the NY Auto show, the M & RL both have similar sqat-sitting frog stance & look, just different details. I generally don't like nissan looks, 99% times, except the 350Z... and I think the M looks better in person than the RL, but then again it was a relative comparison of auto-show cars, both in UGLY lighter colors.

    It tickles me that everybody keeps talking yards and yards and yards about how they are such a distinct individual & unique & then they all go out and plunk 20, 30, 40, 50 & more K's on really silly silvers and white's & grey heaps of metal... colors that everybody has!

    ksso
  • talon95talon95 Posts: 1,110
    "I will wait to see the car in person, but as I have said many times on this forum - ad nauseum - Acura's wretched styling prompts me to wait and see what both Lexus and Infiniti offer in a similar price range."

    Well, we already know what Infiniti has in mind for this price range, and I know from previous posts that you consider the upcoming M45 to fit your perception of what a luxury car should be. Like you, I'll wait until I see it, but from the pictures, "wretched" doesn't do justice to my reaction to the M45. Tasteless, tacky and lavishly fitted with hideous, overwrought styling flourishes inside and out.

    "Its appearance should evidence one or more of these attributes: speed, muscle, grace, elegance, luxury, class, stature -- and be pleasing to the eye."

    Well, to my eye, the M45 fails miserably on all of these fronts. Give me the understated elegance of the RL any day.

    As for the other cars you listed, Audi has just placed a major blight on the formerly attractive A6... the "gaping maw bottom-feeder" grille. Looks like they decided to subscribe to the Infiniti approach of "styling excesses for the sake of styling excesses". All I can say is "ugh".

    And I've just been looking at spy photos of the upcoming S-Class redesign. Its front and rear styling is so similar to that of the new RL that it could have come out of the same design studio. So either Acura isn't as far out in left field styling-wise with the RL as you claim, or Mercedes has just taken a giant step into the same left field. Personally, I think the former is the case.
  • l943973l943973 Posts: 197
    I'm not too happy about the new design either. As with most Acuras, I'm guessing you have to see the car in person to appreciate it.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    Infiniti's current styling works only in the G35 Coupe. For some reason, the G35 looks tall, and the M35/45 concept appears bloated at the front. On the contrary, the RL's fascia has a tight, crisp, sporty and hunkered down look which I like. Here is a picture of the M from NissanNews.

    I have a feeling that over time, RL's styling will grow on people, while M's will fade. We shall, of course. ;-)
  • Though there maybe criticisms of the new M class, I would first like to make a quick comparison to the cars that are currently around.
    S-Class = gorgeous

    LS=has a solid shape to it, not the sexiest car, but still looks like a luxury car

    E-Class= gorgeoous again, they did a great job at making this car sleak

    BMW 7 & 5 Series=exotic, for those who want to be different, this is the choice

    A8 & A6= look sleak, I've never thought audis to be really exotic, but rather they have a clean look to them that makes them nice. The new grill is pushing them towards the "sexy" end.

    RL= It is neither sexy nor luxury like. The current RL has that Lexus LS luxury look to it. It just looks like they worked so hard on the inside that they got tired and forgot about that outside. By looking at the car, you can't even say who to compare it to.

    Another note, even if the new S-Class misses on the looks side, or the new LS misses, or even the new M, all of these car companies have at least another car to back it up. the S-Class has the new CLS and the E-Class. The LS has the GS to back it up. The M will have a new Q to lead the way. We only HAD one shot, and we BLEW IT. So, that's why this design is such a problem, there is no Acura above it to compensate for it, to say, oh well they built this one bland, but then they went really exotic on this one. For now, Acura will have to ride on the TL's coat tails.
  • The car that the RL reminds me most: the last generation CL. The same C pillar, the same nose. Glad Honda's still in love with CL looks, because no one else is. I'm surprised because RL & TSX were moving away from that generic CL look!

    chiggy, Infiniti might drop the Q, making M its top of the line. The stated reason might be such a large car doesn't have the performance it wants to project as a brand. The real reason probably is it doesn't want to develop a new platform for very limited volume.
  • Think the pictures of the new rl look very good. But as many have written, no one will be able to tell for sure until they see it "live" and sit inside. Personally, I love dark colors for looks, like my pal Ksso, but love light colors for upkeep and hot climes. favorite car color is midnight blue with a saddle interior. favorite to own is a light metallic gold/beige with saddle -- never looks too dirty!

    Based on the amazing analysis done by robertsmx, am a bit disappointed in the revs level for top-end in the new rl. too me, the ideal would be tracking around 2200 at 80 mph for combined low fuel usage, quiet engine compartment but not so low that it takes much time to cycle to higher revs for acceleration in top gear. perhaps the rl should have been equipped with a 6th speed?
  • > Well, I realize we all are different. If you think a lexus LS is good looking, you are already on the far end of the solar system in my opinion ;) <

    Not to split hairs but my point about the LS 430 was simply that it looked the part of a luxury car. I would be the first to agree that the front end of that car desperately needs a new look, and always has. As far as it's profile and tail, I can live with it; though it surely does not stimuate the senses.

    Replying to other fellow's observations -- as for the Infiniti M class, my comments were meant to address the new 2006 M, not the existing model, which I agree has a front end reminescent of a large mouth bass. And speaking of large mouths, yes, I concur that some of the new Audi's coming down the pike have a front end only a mother whale could love.

    This short and squat trend in styling as Ksso adroitly recognized, as well as the bizzaro front ends on some of the newest cars, is a direction that I personally don't like. BMW's 745i was an early case in point -- and that stretched Dodge that's half-car and half-station wagon makes one wonder what the design stylists are smoking these days.

    To me it's kind of sad that it seems that some of us will be picking cars not because the styling thrills us, but rather, it comes down to the car that's least offensive to the eye.

    But as comedian Dennis Miller likes to say, I could be wrong.

    ;-) Cheers!
  • >the RL's fascia has a tight, crisp, sporty and hunkered down look which I like. Here is a picture of the M from NissanNews. I have a feeling that over time, RL's styling will grow on people, while M's will fade. We shall, of course. ;-) <

    Indeed tastes do differ. I think that the front end of the 2005 RL is its weakest trait -- it's cross-eyed.

    As for the M, yeah, straight on, the front end ain't great, but it's no worse than the RL IMO, and the rest of the styling -- profile and tail -- do work for me.
     
    Sure will be nice when these cars hit the showroom floor so we can all have a good look up close. Of course, this thread will see its demise shortly thereafter.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    Indeed tastes do differ. I think that the front end of the 2005 RL is its weakest trait -- it's cross-eyed.
    Well, having read your posts over couple of months, I&#146;m not surprised at your assessment. But RL looks smarter to me, and its headlamps flows into the grill. It is athletic, while M is laid back with eyes that suggests cluelessness. ;-)
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    For my part, I think the front end of the RL looks like the Aurora. That's not a bad thing, but it's not an aggressive look, either. The back end looks like a more athletic version of the XG350, which is to say "interesting" without being stylish. The overall impact is a look that will weather well, but isn't going to set the world on fire.

    As for the M35... I'm sticking with my angry amoeba analogy.
  • shotgunshotgun Posts: 184
    Hey, to each their own...but to me the 06' Infiniti looks like a pleasingly "plump" woman, the Lexus L430 gives the appearance of a "matronly" old woman, tha Audi A6 does indeed resemble a large mouth bass. Frankly I'm biased when it comes to the RL - I was initially disappointed but the more I look at it the more the styling pieces fall in place and to me - it looks like a smiling mako shark - especially with that sharkfin radio antenna on the roof!
  • shotgunshotgun Posts: 184
    Hahahahaha...although I tend to cringe when you rail and rant about the new 05' RL, your statement "...I think that the front end of the 2005 RL is its weakest trait -- it's cross-eyed." is about the funniest thing I've yet about the RL.
  • ksomanksoman Posts: 590
    my comment was not about the current M, but the 06 M displayed at the Auto show in NYC.

    As i've said consistently, given I dislike lighter color, and that both the RL and the NEW 06 M concept at the auto show were in light colors, i liked the M better, but purely based on pictures (and only the darker colored RL considered here), the RL looks better to me.

    I am not ashamed to say I love the old 5&7 BMW's and I ALSO love the new 5&7 BMWs...

    my taste is twisted.;)

    ksso
  • jjacurajjacura Posts: 808
    I am biased about the Acura products as well and was waiting a long time for the new TL but when it was revealed last Oct..... felt we got short changed with the new design. Now comes the 2005 RL ....I am delighted! They got it right!!
  • shotgunshotgun Posts: 184
    Indeed, now that we have some official factory stats on the RL I'm anxious to hear what Mark's impressions are - Where are you Mark?
  • "To each his own" is exactly right! I have no interest in Lexus, Infiniti, etc. BMW's I-drive is a deal-killer, IMHO.

    Now, my '96 RL is going to the dealership on Tuesday (9/07) for a minor recall issue. I'm sure I'll hear from management about the '05 and me being "the first."
  • Prophet:

    I, too, have a '96 RL and received no recall notice. What is the reason for the recall?
    Please elaborate.Ironically, I have an apointment at the dealer on 9/7 as well....both my ABS and TCS lights persist in remaining on. Do you have any idea what causes this condition and is it a complex fix?
    Thanks.
Sign In or Register to comment.