Howdy, Stranger!

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





Acura RL

16162646667235

Comments

  • cericceric Posts: 1,093
    Lap time requires more than straight line performance, for which I think M5 would win easily with 500hp V-10 (estimated at 4.2-4.5sec (close to E55)). RL must beat M5 at turns/curves. It is probably their goal, but not fact. The fact is that RL is beating GT-R in lap times consistently (according to the article). Beating GT-R alone is quite an achievement for a luxury sports sedan. Can't wait for a test-drive.
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    This is true, though the stock R-34 GTR isnt really any better than an NSX, and so if the RL can beat an NSX...that makes Acura's $90,000 car look worse than it already does.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    I wish the article had an indication of lap times, so we could compare it to that from an NSX (which happens to be one of the fastest cars around the Nurburgring, even with “only” 290 HP.

    Best Motoring had a video of five cars (M3, M5, Accord Euro-R, Legacy, and another car I don’t remember) running a few laps on a track. M5 finished fourth behind the Accord, while the M3 won it. M5 weighs in at 4000 lb (compare to 3000 lb. Accord, 3400 lb. M3). I wonder what it would weigh with the V10.

    Besides 300 HP, and the highly praised AWD system in the RL, I really like the rumor that the new version weighs only 3750 lb. with the AWD (the current RL is about 100 lb. heavier, with “only” 225 HP and FWD). That would put a weight to power ratio of 12.5. By comparison, the weight to power ratio of…
    S2000: 11.8
    NSX: 10.9
    TL: 13.1
    RSX Type-S: 13.8

    BTW, based on the article in Best Motoring, the 3.5 liter V6 is rated at: 300 HP @ 6200 rpm, 260 lb.-ft @ 5000 rpm. This combination should propel this luxury sedan with its automatic transmission from 0 to 60 in 6.2 seconds. And if Acura throws in manual transmission (unlikely), 5.5s or better may be possible!
  • cericceric Posts: 1,093
    My '98 540iA with 282hp and 3850lb can reach 60mph in 5.9sec (best result from C&D years ago. Official number from BMW is 6.2sec). Manual version gets there in 5.5sec (offcial 5.7sec).
    The new RL with 300hp and 3750lb should get there in less than 5.8sec or better. That is my hope, anyway. I would be disappointed if it only does 0-60 in 6.2sec. That is close to G35 number with 260hp.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    G35 (non-AWD) is (almost 400 lb.) lighter and smaller car than RL. It is more in TL's league in that regard. M35 would be a better comparison with RL, in both, performance and market orientation.

    0-60 in 6.2s for a luxury sedan would be quite good, probably on par with likes of Mercedes E430 and Lexus LS430. And thats shaving off almost 2 seconds from the current RL.

    C&D tested the new 325 HP BMW 545i (with 6 speed manual) and obtained a 0-60 run of 5.5s. Automatic should be be at least half a second or more slower than the manual, and that would make it comparable to the RL too.
  • jrock65jrock65 Posts: 1,371
    I expect both the RL and M35 to perform in the low 6 second range, much like the TL and G35. That's still a full second faster than the 530i (auto) and the E320. But I keep hearing that MB and BMW are poised to increase displacement to 3.5L. It should get interesting.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    Edmunds got 7.2s from BMW 530i (with 6-speed manual).
  • cericceric Posts: 1,093
    My '98 540iA with 282hp and 3850lb can reach 60mph in 5.9sec (best result from C&D years ago. Official number from BMW is 6.2sec). Manual version gets there in 5.5sec (offcial 5.7sec).
    The new RL with 300hp and 3750lb should get there in less than 5.8sec or better. That is my hope, anyway. I would be disappointed if it only does 0-60 in 6.2sec. That is close to G35 number with 260hp.
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    BMW is going to have a hard time justifying $40K for its piddly 184hp at this point.
  • bartalk2bartalk2 Posts: 326
    of the 3,5,and 7 may fall after the intro of the RL, M45, GS, and STS. BMW's mystique seems to be faltering.
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    I'm not so sure about that. VW is in trouble, but BMW's sales have been strong in the past few years. They still have their "ultimate driving machine" reputation, though the new 645i drives like a computer simulation of a car. None of the reactions I've seen so far to "active steering" have been positive, and the iDrive is still garbage. I still dont understand why the germans feel that a screen either surrounded by a million buttons or an akward mousing device that requires a PhD in computer science to use is better than a simple touch screen. The LS handles 90% of its functions through the screen, and yet I can program a radio station preset in maybe 2 seconds. I dont even have to read the manual.
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    I may be wrong, but intuition tells me that the new RL won't achieve the kind of performance some here are hoping for in the acceleration department.

    The RL will have 8% less horsepower, but over 27% less torque than the 545i. Not to mention that BMW uses bigger horses to measure with - as evidenced by the BMW 330i with 225 hp beating almost everything from Japan up to and including 270 hp 3.5 liter challengers.

    The RL has essentially the same power to weight ratios as the new TL. I would expect reasonable performance, but not class leading acceleration.

    P.S. Lexusguy, I agree that the 184 hp 525i seems a bit underpowered, but its still respectable with a manual transmission. However, ther is nothing, repeat nothing, that I have driven from Lexus that comes within three rungs of a 525i sport on the handling ladder. At last count, I've driven the GS430, SC430, GS300, LS430 and former SC400. You could put 500 hp in a GS500 and I'd take the 525i on a winding country road anyday. "Fun to drive" is not all about stop light dragging in my book. I don't own a BMW, I just think they deserve credit where it's due. And Lexus quality is class leading; it's just that they are incredibly boring to drive.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    I may be wrong, but intuition tells me that the new RL won't achieve the kind of performance some here are hoping for in the acceleration department.

    I will quote weight to power ratio (again).
    Acura TL: 13.1 lb/HP (Low 6 seconds with automatic transmission)
    Acura RL: 12.5 lb/HP (Low 6 seconds with automatic transmission – logical guess?)

    This assumes the rumored, 3750 lb. curb weight for the RL. And TL is already class leading in terms of acceleration, and compares well with the other class leader, G35. Offerings from Audi, BMW, Lexus and Mercedes are slower at the moment.

    I would expect RL to be as quick (with better launch characteristics, thanks to AWD) as TL, as long as it doesn’t weigh 3950 lb. or more. TL's best time to 60 is 6.2s with automatic transmission.

    Not to mention that BMW uses bigger horses to measure with - as evidenced by the BMW 330i with 225 hp beating almost everything from Japan up to and including 270 hp 3.5 liter challengers.

    Let us look at some comparable numbers. Acura TL is about the same size (and weighs as much) as BMW 530i. Both, about 3500 lb. BMW 530i has 225 HP, and with 6-speed manual, Edmunds obtained a 0-60 run in 7.2s. Bigger horses? May be, but they appear tired. That said, with 15.6 lb for each horse, I would have expected a high 6-second run for the 530i (C&D got it done in 6.7s which sounds about right, so I would say, normal horses). And that’s about 0.8s slower than the same for Acura TL with 6-speed manual putting down 270 HP from its 3.2 liter V6.
  • cericceric Posts: 1,093
    And, let us not forget that FWD comes with 0.2 sec disadvantage in acceleration from 0-60 due to initial loss of traction in hard acceleration (all else being equal). Same or better weight/power ratio between TL to RL, I would expect RL to do better than TL in 0-60. Not to mention handling that comes with AWD. I own 540iA for 6 years. Without LSD, hard cornering is not smooth. BMW simply has very efficient power-train. Horsepower does not equal 0-60. Honda isn't bad in this department either.

    No one is saying RL can beat 545 in 0-60 here. At least not that I have read. Lap times are more than hard acceleration. Cornering plays a big part in doing it. Sure, I know M5 (even old one) can do better than all, but for $70K-$80 and more... That is in a different class entirely, cost-wise.
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    I'm not really sure what your point is. The 545i is not really competition for the RL. It will cost at least $10,000 more. Its got a 4.5L V8 that makes 325hp. It had better be able to out accellerate the RL if BMW actually wants to sell any cars.

    Yes the 330i is quick. Its also much smaller than the 270hp TL, or the 260hp G35. Like robert said, those cars are 5 series size, not 3 series. If the IS300 5-speed had a bit more horses (which it will get very soon)it could beat the 330i. Speaking of which I assume you have not driven the IS, as it is just as fun to drive, if not more so, than a 5 series, and when I say that I mean the old 540, as I cant stand the new car.
  • bartalk2bartalk2 Posts: 326
    Again, I wouldn't be surprised to see sales of the 5 series, especially, wither after the intro of the new Japanese sports sedans. I have not read a good word about the i drive, and most people vastly prefer the old 5 series to the new. The Japanese are narrowing, if not closing, the performance/handling gap with the BMW and at prices far below comparably equipped BMWs. At the very least, I expect BMW prices to soften considerably in the next year (both 3 and 5 series), and we'll suddenly find BMW dealers willing to deal instead of, as previously, doing you a favor by selling you a BMW at sticker.
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    The 330i does have a slight weight advantage over the TL and G35, but they have far more hp. Interesting.

    G35
    Base model 3,336 lbs
    Leather model 3,369 lbs
    Leather 6MT model 3,398 lbs

    BMW 330i (manual/auto)
    3285 (3362) lbs

    TL
    Automatic: 3575 lb (without Navigation System)
    Manual: 3482 lb (without Navigation System)

    M
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    BMW dealers are already dealin', they started this back in the second half of 2002 when the 7-Series' novelty starting wearing off. The 5-Series will most likely go through the same thing. A deal on 3-Series has been possible for a while now too. It is only certain models they give you hard time over.

    M
  • bartalk2bartalk2 Posts: 326
    There's dealin' and then there's dealin'. Overall, BMWs have probably been sold closer to sticker than almost any other make (my guess).
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    Nooot quite. If you want a brand new Acura TL with Navigation, or a fully optioned RX330, nobody is going to cut you a break. Suppy and demand, and those cars are in very high demand. The Prius actually sells for OVER the sticker. According to C&D, the domestics (obviously) are the ones slashing prices by as much as $4000. The germans are offering $1500-2000, and the Japanese are very stingy, with Honda averaging as little as $800.
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    Regarding the comparisons with the Skyline GT-R: One source has it that the RL bested the GT-R. Another source apparently described the lap time comparisons as something along the lines of "hanging with" the GT-R. My interpretation was that the RL was able to make a good showing, but did not best the GT-R. With two sources in conflict, I'm not placing any bets.

    There was also some discussion about the RL on the track not even being a real RL. Rather it was an Inspire with the RL's drivetrain and a heavy disguise. If that's true, who knows if it carried the same weight penalty or rubber as the production RL.

    Rumors about handling are very positive, but perhaps too positive. In addition to the comparison with the GT-R, there was rumor floating around that the RL would pull 1.0 g on the skidpad. Yeah, well... We'll see about that. Skepticism aside, I think we can safely assume it will be competitive with the others on a twisty road.

    IMHO, the new RL will be competition as a tweener. It'll be priced in comparison with the six cylinder vehicles of the class. It's edge in horsepower may make it an alternative to some of the 8s. Assuming that the handling and luxury content are on par with the class, this RL could do for Acura what the Legend did so many years ago.
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    No matter what, it will be at least 10x better than the current RL, which wouldnt have a prayer against a GT-R
  • 43255574325557 Posts: 1
    Since most of you seem to be far more knowledgeable than I could ever hope to be regarding these vehicles, which of the two cars would you prefer and why? I have narrowed my choices down to one of these two and I am very open to the opinions of those who know more than me.

    Thoughts???
  • proeproe Posts: 157
    For me, I am waiting for 2006 Corvette, 2006 BMW 4 series including M4, and of course 2006 Acura RL. I think I will get RL though.
    If you are going to get a Audi, get S4 or RS6, both have much better handling than M3 and M5, and you will be happy for a long time as long as the cars do not break down, then it is a "expensive repair nightmare."
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    If it were me, it would be hands down RL. I really dont like both the exterior and the interior styling of the new A6. In the past, Audi cars could at least be counted on as having much higher quality materials and a more warm and inviting cabin than either or the two major rivals. The new A6 seems to take several steps backwards from the old one. While I would never think about actually buying the previous A6 for reliability reasons, it was certainly a pleasure to sit in.

    I think the '05 A6 looks actually WORSE inside than the new 5 series, which it has clearly liberally borrowed from in terms of layout and design, and I dont think their MMI is all that much better than iDrive. The new A6 also gets its lumpy looking steering wheel directly from the A8, which is clearly not designed for agressive driving with its fat center and tiny spokes and rim.

    As if that werent enough already, there are no indications that Audi has improved quality at all in the last few years, there actually seems to be more problems cropping up for the new A4 than the old one. They seem to have taken care of the hundreds of thousands of cars with ignition coil failures, but the fact that they simply ignored an entire shipment of faulty rusted and warped brake rotors and put them on A6s anyway doesnt not inspire much confindence in me to buy an Audi.

    Finally, I expect the A6 with its hefty mechnanical AWD system to outweigh the RL by several hundred pounds, and when you factor in Audi's much weaker V6 (DFI or not), I think the RL will take the A6 to school when it comes to handling. Unlike BMW's, Audi cars do not perform better than their HP numbers would suggest. The A4 with the 220hp 3.0L feels like it barely has even that, as the engine strains to make 7.5 second 0-60 runs.

    The S4 is a great driver, but its a tiny car, closer in size to the TSX than the RL. The RS6 is also a great driver, but good luck getting one under $80,000, and there wont even be one for the '05 model year. If I was going to drop that kind of cash on a sport sedan, it would be an E55. At least the E will retain its value.

    Ultimately, I think the new A6 will find itself seriously outclassed by the Acura.
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    most of the time, 3rd party warranties are Powertrain stuff, so my guess is things like the Nav system and similar items (stereo, etc) are probably not covered. An inexpensive bumper to bumper extended warranty is a rare item.
  • ksomanksoman Posts: 590
    not to mention, in its class, the E is probably the most passion evoking car... ooo what looks! But sadly, its really tiny inside, even an accord or camry looks more spatious inside. I dropped the E from my S-type replacement list largely because its not too spacious and comfortable inside
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    If you are looking for prestige, lots of luxury gizmos, and bold styling... go for the A6.

    The RL will offer refined, but not bold styling. Features will include the essentials, but probably not every option under the sun. I expect that fit and finish may be about the same (Acura has recently stepped up to the plate with their interiors).

    Performance will depend on how hard you like to drive your cars. Right now, I'd give the edge to the RL, but that remains to be proven. Both cars will probably have first year bugs, but, over the long haul, I expect the RL will stand up better.
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    Sorry, but I'm going to have to disagree with you there. Luxury car resale depends largely on prestige, and the 4-ring badge clearly doesnt bring much to the table, considering Audi resale is as bad as Jaguar or Volvo. If you ask the regular person on the street, Im sure anyone could tell you what Mercedes-Benz or BMW is, and most of them would know Lexus, but Audi? I'm no so sure about that. I dont think the styling of the new A6 is that bold either. The back is mostly evolutionary, and the front just gets the giant A8 grill that I think is a step backwards in terms of looks from the old car.

    And as for feature content or "gizmos" its Acura hands down. SH-AWD, voice activated, touch screen navigation, a specially designed, 5.1 channel audio system with DVD-Audio capability, BlueTooth connectivity, the list goes on and on, and the Audi offers none of it. And what it does offer will all be on multi-thousand dollar "premium" packages, where as the Acura will come with it all.
Sign In or Register to comment.