Howdy, Stranger!

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

Acura RL



  • jwilson1jwilson1 Posts: 956
    The RL is still a Legend outside of America.

  • diploiddiploid Posts: 2,286
    hunter - Do you own an RL? I don't, and I think I would be insulting many of the actual RL owners who frequent this forum by telling them how decontented and overpriced their cars are.
  • I almost bought an RL when I purchased my TL in 2000. I am not telling the owners how decontented their car is - they know that themselves...I am telling Honda to put its house in order. I am a Honda fan and would not want their products to be looked down upon, in the marketplace.

  • l943973l943973 Posts: 197
    As an RL owner, I have no regrets on getting the RL over a TL. I occasionally drive his 2000 TL and would still get the RL even now.

    Some things I don't like about the TL.

    - seats too narrow/headrest doesn't tilt
    - driver side door arm rests are uncomfortable
    - center armrest is too low. Can't put your arm there.
    - rear seating feels cramped (not enough knee room)
    - windshield is too steeply raked. Generates glare sometimes (similar to my NSX)
    - no power tilt away steering
    - throttle response is only good a higher rpms
    (3000+). I like to keep rpms below 3000.
    - looks are subjective, but I love the looks of the RL and don't really like the TL styling that much.
    - stereo has too much treble and not enough bass
    (The RL stereo system is excellent). I had to turn the treble down to 1/4.

    Things that I like the TL over the RL
    - steering is more responsive
    - as quiet as the RL even with stock Michelins
    - had umbrella holders in the armrest
    - climate control is excellent

    thats about it.

    If you just look at content, its hard to justify an RL over an TL. The RL ride is much better the TL. My dad is thinking about trading in his 2000 TL (Ruby Red-15k miles) for an RL.

    The RL is an awesome car. I love it.
  • Response to fredvh's question: I Would like some real-world opinions on comparisons of the RL, TL, and ES300. In many articles they say the TL is the better bargain. Do you owners agree? I believe that you can get a new non Type-S for around 27,500.

    6 weeks ago I turned in my leased '99 RL and bought a '03 TL-S (for $30k, with spoiler). While I really liked the RL, it wasn't "fun". Great interior, liked the exterior styling, but it felt slow, engine was noisy, downshifts were often abrupt, etc. Drove the TL-S and found the interior very nice (not equal to RL, but sufficiently luxurious). Liked the styling, but the biggest improvement was the power and refinement of the engine/tranny. Silky smooth and MUCH more fun. The five speed Sportstick is fun too. The engine is much more quiet, the downshifts are seamless. Interior is slightly smaller, but close.

    Considered the ES300 - the interior has to be the richest in this class. But the performance was about the same as the RL, and that was my biggest frustration. Also, there was $6-8k difference in price.
  • I am considering buying a used RL '96 with 96000 miles. Any comment on reliability or expected mileage out of a well care RL will be greatly appreciated.
  • mike734mike734 Posts: 128
    Never buy the first year of any model car. Especially a Honda
  • lenscaplenscap Posts: 854
    I owned a first year 1988 Honda Prelude that I bought new. I got it the first month they went on sale, and everything about the car was a new design including the engine. I got rid of it eight years later with almost 100,000 miles and never had anything go wrong, ever.

    My family also had the original 1990 Lexus LS 400, bought three months after the cars came out. As with the Honda, it was flawless.

    Perhaps I was just lucky, I don't know.
  • mike734mike734 Posts: 128
    Yes you were lucky. Actually, you were probably the norm. However, It has been my experience that the new models experience more problems than the next models. Of course that only means that maybe 3 in a 100 have a problem instead of 1 in a 100. Anyway, Honda often make quite a few changes in the second and third years after a major change. I think the best year to buy is the last year of a model line. That is the year they come out with the SE models. They are a good value.
  • purchased a 98 Rl today, although I was planning on getting a 00/01 cl or tl (I test drove them both, but just didnt feel comfortable in them). Then I took the rl out for a spin... whooooooo niiiiiiiice. the comfort is outstanding. its like night and day compared to the cl/tl. even for a freakin' 98!

    Got a pretty good deal on it at a dealers auto auction. (having hookups is great)

    anyhow, just thought i share my joy of owning an rl.
  • goralgoral Posts: 138
    ...with 112K miles and it's running strong. Yes, there were couple problems along the way (window regulators, AC compressor, alternator, couple sensors, etc..), but we can easily live with those. We only want to get another 112K out of it... :)
  • Re: "I am considering buying a used RL '96 with 96000 miles. Any comment on reliability or expected mileage out of a well care RL will be greatly appreciated".

    I purchased a '96 RL Premium in September with 65,000 miles. I love the car. It's in great condition. I've already had two rear window regulators replaced under warranty. It could happen to any car. The car runs great. Has a great Bose sound system and chicks dig it.

  • jmw4jmw4 Posts: 67
    Although car opinions are highly subjective, I have owned each of the above; the 99 TL, an 01 ES300(old style) and currently a 2000 RL. I had the tL for 3 years and enjoyed it very much for it's combination of good ride yet decent handling. The ES which I traded the TL in for was not enjoyable. It drove too much like a Camry, was not particularly fast, and did not handle that well. Most of all, the seat bottoms were too short, which I understand is a common complaint on the ES. The new model ES seats are also a tad short. The RL is an excellent ride, with a heavier feel, yet decent handling, decent speed and quiet on the highway. I recently drove a friend's new accord and although nice, it in my view does not compare to the ride of the RL.
  • satiresatire Posts: 71
    Had a '97 CL. Then a '99 TL. Both first year new models. Neither a problem. Granted each new year brings a host of goodies. But if you wait until "next year" to ensure you'll get more, then you'll never buy a new car.

    '99 TL-
    Speaking of which I drove my old TL again recently and after having my 2002 RL now for 5 months I'm amazed at the difference. While I still think Honda needs to get their act together on options and extras, the RL is much smoother than the TL. Rides better. Feels more substantial. Personally I think the 2002 RL handles as well as the TL if not better. "Smooth" is the only word to describe it. You can find more speed elsewhere. You can find more sport elsewhere. But if you want comfort and a smooth ride, then the RL is just fine thank you very much. However, I still hate the two pushes on the button to close the moonroof.

  • Having owned two Legends, ('89 LS '94 GS). I can't wait for the introduction of the '04 RL (possibly Legend). I was the Sales Manager of an Acura store until just before the RL came out. Those '91 - '95 Legends were absolutely outstanding. I still own the '94 GS and with 230HP mated to superb handling, I hate to give it up, even at 120,000 miles. It's the best vehicle I have ever owned. It's been a problem free vehicle always serviced at the dealer. I could never warm up to the current RL with less power and a soft ride compared to the '94.

    I still have some contacts at Acura and here's what I was told by a factory rep about three months ago. The "03" will have minimum changes (which it does as outlined earlier in this section) and the NEW '04 will be an "early introduction" in the spring of '03. Dealers will receive very few '03 models of the RL as the factory tools up for the new model. Acura was ready to introduce a new model as an '03 but after further market research and firing of the RL Division Head in Japan, it was back to the drawing board to make some changes. Acura has always touted performance and luxury and that's what we customers want and expect from them. My contact could not be specific about content of the new car but I personally can't wait for the April/May '03 timeframe to find out what they have come up with. The rep did say to expect close to $50K for an MSRP. If it has what I think it will have, I'll say a fond farewell to the best car I've ever had. (If they still built it, I'd buy another '94 or '95 right now.)
  • jwilson1jwilson1 Posts: 956
    What you're saying concurs with what was published in a couple of mags a month or two ago. They had a little more (reliable???) detail, suggesting it may be a hybrid with -- as I recall -- about 200 hp internal combustion and 160 electric. You might do a search back in the posts here.

  • diploiddiploid Posts: 2,286
    As much as we want, we're stuck with the RL name. Perhaps when Acura decides to revert back to names for their cars (instead of alpha-numerics) we'll see it again.
  • I sure hope the new '04 RL is not JUST a hybrid. It's way too late now but my advice to the manufacturer would be to look at what they did with the Civic. They provided the hybrid for those who wanted it but retained the gas models for the rest of the more performance oriented customers. So why not do the same for the RL? Go ahead, make the hybrid if the market warrants it, but retain the luxury/performance model as well. And why not also provide a "S-type" high performance model for those of us who yearn for it. I personally find it embarrassing that the TL S-type has forty more ponies than the current RL. Just take a look at the E class Mercedes sedans. Up to 305 hp in the E500 and they're selling like hotcakes. So c'mon Acura. You have a lot of very loyal customers out there and a bunch more who jumped to Lexus, Mercedes, and Infiniti just waiting for you to deliver the goods. Anybody else agree??
  • jwilson1jwilson1 Posts: 956
    The point's moot. Honda has no desire to compete in a contest it can't win. It has not V8, and has scratched all notion of a V8 project. The Honda technology may progress -- that is where they excel, as you know -- but they will do something to carve a new luxury niche and they'll have to define performance in their own terms. Its styling may be derivative -- as it is now of the LS 400 and Benz -- and invite comparison but when you scratch the surface there will have to be something different, as it is now with the V6 that some feel is disappointing. Note that when I say different, I don't say better, only different and offering real value. This is why the hybrid and maybe awd offer possibility for Honda; these things are not available at this p ricing or in a true luxury car. Mercedes offers awd of course, with Audi, but only on a traditional platform. Honda may do something different.

    Like you, I'd prefer a power model ... but I think they're looking for another road. The performance road is too expensive for R&D and uncertain cometitiveness in the marketplace.

  • diploiddiploid Posts: 2,286
    Yeah. Just look at the new Infiniti Q45- an expensive V-8, RWD sedan that very few are buying (the RL actually sells better). That's Honda's worst nightmare.
Sign In or Register to comment.