Howdy, Stranger!

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





Acura RL

1240241243245246352

Comments

  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    If I had to rank european brands based on cookie cutter styling, MB would rank on top. The only thing that really stands out in a typical Benz is the grill. Audi, would fit at the other end of the spectrum. If I were to pick a car solely based on exterior styling, Audi/VW could be it.

    BMW has tried hard to move away from relatively docile styling but fell face first with the 7-series and to a lesser extent with the 5-series, enough to claim that 3-series will try not to follow its larger siblings.

    Acura has managed to establish a theme with TSX and TL duo, but RL strays away from it. A reason could be that it is supposed to be a flagship and that can also mean a less aggressive style for understated looks. I notice creases and kinks reduce as you move away from cheaper offerings to the higher end of the spectrum.

    The RL, IMO, received an evolutionary style from its own past, with subtle elements taken from other Acuras (of the mid-90s) like the shoulder line that wraps into the tail lamp (think 1996-1998 TL). Otherwise, a more angular/curvy/athletic 1996-2004 RL would look like the 2005 RL.

    Here are two Acuras that have very similar front ends. Take a look at them and see if you notice a difference:
    TSX
    TL

    Hint: Check out the windshield wipers.

    Things like these don’t necessarily stand out, but minor details like these differentiate more expensive cars from others. This is true, inside and out and it often requires a better than normal analysis of styling. I would say, you feel the extra things that cost you a premium, you don’t necessarily see them.

    As for your comment on Lexus ES330, I can agree that it looks like a Camry (shares the profile completely but with different tail lamps and fascia), but LS430 has the “generic” understated look deserving of a luxury sedan. Simplicity is perhaps the key to doing it well. Use Audi as an example that tends to avoid excessive curves and creases, everything is very subtle and flows together.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    I’m not sure where you’re getting your numbers from but current RL has the largest interior dimensions if you compare it to current 5-series, E-class and A6. A lot of people are talking (only) about rear seat space (which is still measured at 44 cu ft, BTW), but forget completely about the space front seat gets. Acura’s measurements on spec sheet are biased towards front seat measurements. You get the most rear seat legroom in RL (if you care to move the front seat a little).

    And comparing 3-series to RL makes absolutely no sense to me. If you do, you’re making 5-series a redundancy in BMW lineup. As far as the current 3-series goes, it is a sub-compact right now, and increase in interior dimension could make it a compact sedan similar to Acura TSX.
  • cove148cove148 Posts: 117
    Rob,

    Why it should be compared to the Lexus LS430?

    In the states, if you don't need nav, and if you shop it, you can buy a new 2005 LS430 for less than an RL. Why shouldn't the top lexus be compared, when Acura prices the RL in that market?
  • Get real some of you visitors here. Comparing a rinky dink little 3 series to the most advanced car in the mid-luxury class of today. What a joke, lets compare the S2000 to the SL500 while were at it also.

    The E class is dull driving, boring safe car design and not even a sport sedan in the RL's league. Their heavy use of unreliable, inferior to Japan electronics is one big reason why the E class, C class and S class are all on the "poor quality" problem lists as the latest C.R. survey indicates. The once strong german makes are in big trouble quality wise today, the domestic makers all have better quality then them.

    Those who remember the awesome last Legend coupe ad campaign "It's not for everyone. Nor was it meant to be." That's what the RL is.
  • tayl0rdtayl0rd Posts: 1,938
    robertsmx, I beg you to please go and actually sit in the backseat of the E-class and the A6 with the front seats positioned as you would have them when you're driving. You keep talking about the "numbers," but the numbers just don't "add up" when you actually sit in the cars the RL's backseat is being compared to. Regardless of what the numbers say, the RL's backseat doesn't feel as spacious or comfortable as the others; and it doesn't look it either.

    We all know you can move the front seats forward to provide more rearseat room, but who wants to be sitting on top of the steering wheel?? Did you go from driving a compact car to the RL? That's about the only way I can see someone calling it [the RL's backseat] spacious.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    E-Class had a tight rear seat when I compared it to the old RL. The new RL is better than the old RL. I have to see the new A6 in person, but from the looks of it, I wouldn’t call it having an edge over the RL. That should happen sometime soon. I’m more keen on front seat space and overall feel of the car though, from steering feedback to bolstering on the seats. That’s where I spend 100% of my time in my car.

    As for spec sheets being misleading, we have been through it during our trunk space debate. So, I'm more than aware of the differences. And I'm used to midsize sedan (on the larger side of the spectrum), so RL is large enough for me. But I can see an issue with someone who might be moving from a full size sedan that RL is not.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    I mentioned a possibility couple of days ago that Acura RL would make it to C&D 10-Best this year, and apparently, it did! TSX and RL represent Acura in the list that I've seen.
  • disaacdisaac Posts: 15
    Given that the 2005 LS430 with the least expensive "required" option package comes in at about 58K as per the lexus website, I think your assertion is simply not true unless your Acura dealer in question is fleecing you for several thousand dollars and your Lexus dealer is giving you a huge deal.
  • igibanigiban Posts: 530
    What's wrong with Accord or Camry? Because they look so bad, or really because they are not exclusive enough? What if there's no Honda or Toyota at all, would those Acura or Lexus cars still be too common? What if MB sells economy A and B classes here like they do in Germany, and since they all look alike, would the E320 still look that good/special?

    I actually think most German luxy cars do have a edge in look department but all three major Japanese lux. lines are catching up. But if looking like Honda or Toyota is a major issue for you, then that's no easy way out other then just going with MB/BMW. See MB and BMW don't have their Honda and Toyota's counterparts to dim your prestige factor, and Acura and Lexus can't really break away from Honda and Toyota.
  • Tony,

    I hate to disagree with you, but one of the Korean car companies now makes a car with headlights that look just like the MB E320. And in my opinion you can't tell the difference between the E320 and the C series from a short distance. This is something that all the car companies seem to share right now.

    Lynnminny
  • I just passed by Tustin Acura (Orange county, CA) and saw about 12 RL's sitting on the lot! I believe they had 3 Carbon Gray, 2 White, 2 Black, 2 Blue, 2 Celestial Silver, and 1 Lakeshore Silver. I guess the car is not exactly selling as hot cakes as the dealers want us to think. Perhaps there's a deal there waiting to be made ;-)
  • bodble2bodble2 Posts: 4,519
    "but all three major Japanese lux. lines are catching up."

    I'm not sure I would agree with that. Honda is still very conservative. Aside from the TL, and S2000, I think the rest of the models are rather forgettable, styling-wise. Nissan tries to be cutting-edge, if you're the "glass half full" type. But I know people who think most Nissans are ugly. Toyota, I think, is just totally clueless when it comes to styling. They don't have any particular corporate theme. Their models are either deathly boring, or just awkward-looking. I can't think of one Toyota model that can sell on styling alone. I think most sell inspite of the styling. I think their best work is the Echo hatchback, especially in 5-door, with the boy-racer RS package.

    For sure, there is nothing from Japan that can touch German models such as the SL, SLK, X5, M3, Heidi Klum, in terms of looks!
  • prophet2prophet2 Posts: 372
    They possess that undefinable "quality" called CACHET, which their loyalists are apparently willing to pay thousands of extra dollars for. The essence of which, in their minds, Acura, Infiniti, and Lexus can never capture.

    During my callow youth, I was also caught up with this, having owned a Porsche 914, 911E, and BMW 320i, in succession. For awhile, I could have bought my future brother-in-law's 260Z, which I declined because it was a two-seater. I sold it for him while he was away at medical school. I finally grew up in my late 30s after expending thousands for repairs and enduring the indignity of my Beemer spending 5-1/2 months in the body shop because of the "unavailability of crash parts" and haughty dealer attitudes.

    Acura arrived on the scene in 1986 - I wised-up and traded the 320i for the Legend sedan, followed a year later with an Integra LS 4-door and a Legend L coupe to replace the '86 Legend sedan. The Integra was later traded for a second-generation '91 Legend LS sedan.

    My current '96 RL is running fine at almost 103K miles. Its ride far outclasses the current Accord EX, so I don't get the claims that the RL is just an uograded Accord at twice the price.

    So, if you need the "three-point star," "kidney grille," or "four interlocking rings," my best wishes to you in attaining the satisfaction and happiness you're seeking.
  • jrock65jrock65 Posts: 1,371
    Well, I guess car styling is just one of those areas that's purely subjective (unless it's something really egregious like the Aztec :0). My wife feels that all BMWs (old and new) are the ugliest things on earth.

    Personally, I don't really have a "German" or "Japanese" preference in looks. I like both the S class and FX, although the styling philosophy is very different.
  • bodble2bodble2 Posts: 4,519
    You are absolutely right, my friend, about styling being subjective. Aside from a few no-brainers at either extreme -- ie. SL being on the positive end, and Aztec on the negative end -- everything in the middle is subject to endless debates.

    BTW, I can't believe your wife does not see the beauty in the M3, or the previous M5!
  • >>so I don't get the claims that the RL is just an upgraded Accord at twice the price.

    I agree totally. My best friend has a 2004 Accord. I rode in it several times before I bought my new RL. I didn't think too much about it, but definitely ranked it below my 1999 RL. Then, two weeks ago, I rode with him for about 2 hours and really compared it to my 2005 RL. Even though his car is nice, there is absolutely no comparison to the RL. The materials are far cheaper looking and feeling, it doesn't ride as nice, and it's not nearly as quiet. I haven't driven it, but I can't imagine it comes close to comparing with the RL. Sure, he paid about 1/2 of what I paid, but I definitely feel I got better value.
  • jrock65jrock65 Posts: 1,371
    It's pretty rare to hear anyone say that they got better value on a luxury car than an Accord, no matter how nice the luxury car.
  • Hi Gang,
    got my RL in mid October, first one delivered in Idaho. After the battery died 10 days later, i was most unhappy. Honda USA called 3 times to make me feel better. Seems that there is a deal with General Motors and the RL has delco batteries, one short trip to Interstate and I have one that works just fine.

    Off to southern California, just short of 1000 miles one way. Results: top speed is well over 140 MPH, seats are almost as good as my 740, no backaches. This is not a Lexus, you can feel the road, quiet except in the wind. Winds of 50 MPH and the RL stayed put right where I aimed it. The SHAWD did 2x the posted speed on the curves and the sensation is just like a ZR-1 I had 12 years ago. 0 to 60 is not a strength. Just over 24 miles per gallon and we did not baby it.

    Overall impressions: if you are over 6 feet tall, look somewhere else. Great road car, just about as good as a BMW, but I expect far fewer visits to the mechanic. Will never own another car without Satellite radio, fantastic sound system. The blue foot lights are gorgeous. Mine is silver, so with snow and mud up to the windows it looked ok. If I had to do it over again, I would get dark blue or black, I have seen both and it is a completely different car.

    cheers, will report back after 4 months in the ice and snow
  • igibanigiban Posts: 530
    If you compare Japanese luxy cars now and those from some 15 years back, they are much better now. About the only thing they could sell was reliability and MPG. MB/BMW/Audi have been in this business class for much longer and already established their 'scheme'. Japanese ones seem to still search for that scheme but it's improving. New TL and RL are much better than last generation's, and RX and FX look better than ML actually.
  • >>so I don't get the claims that the RL is just an upgraded Accord at twice the price.

    I agree totally. My best friend has a 2004 Accord. I rode in it several times before I bought my new RL. I didn't think too much about it, but definitely ranked it below my 1999 RL. Then, two weeks ago, I rode with him for about 2 hours and really compared it to my 2005 RL. Even though his car is nice, there is absolutely no comparison to the RL. The materials are far cheaper looking and feeling, it doesn't ride as nice, and it's not nearly as quiet. I haven't driven it, but I can't imagine it comes close to comparing with the RL. Sure, he paid about 1/2 of what I paid, but I definitely feel I got better value.
Sign In or Register to comment.