Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
as for the ES 330, bite me, pinch me, lynch me or stone me, but what's with that styling?? the last time another company made a bulbous, misformed, flying saucer like craft, they got hammered to death to a point where the said car dropped from being one of the three top sellers to being in the bottom 3 sellers (yes, you won the prize to guess, the taurus). the ES330 would have been hamered the same way if they would not have been lucky enough to have the lexus name when lexus is considered the most well built cars around.
If people purely bought something for excitement and looks, es330 and camry would die faster than the blink of an eye.
my 2 cents canadian$
ksso
The fact that the engine computer attempts to reduce the pre ignition does not, as far as I can tell, save money -- quite the contrary.
Of course the engine that says "I am happy to run on regular" may not benefit from Premium either -- there are built in limits. If a car desgined to run on 87 or higher octane is fed 94 octane, there is probably not enough spark advance capable that would permit (or require) full "appreciation" for the extra octane. In that case, the money beyond -- perhaps 89 octane -- would be wasted. On the other hand, I know of no HARM that would happen if you used premo gas in a car that will run on regular -- other than the possible overpayment of some 10 or 20 cents per gallon -- and if you used 80 gallons a month, well you can figure out that although 10 cents too much is a waste (in the example discussed) it is hardly a life changing sum of money. Even at a nominal overpayment of 20 cents a gallon the absolute dollars wasted are small -- not unimportant, but just not big!
Its 220+HP engine may not be a rocket but it's not a slow poke either. At mid 30K this car is a good value. For 40K plus I can see where it just wouldn't make sense at this time.
Try an '04 demo with <5K miles... you get all of the warranty benefits, the new car smell, and a VERY nice price. Just look it over inside and out and test drive it well to make sure it has not been abused.
Later this year I might look at a used '04 if the '05 doesn't knock my socks off. From the pictures I've seen the 05 just seems "nice" (and smaller) -- perhaps not worth the price premium it will command for the first year.
We'll consider a gently used or program car with <5,000 mi. But a quick check of autotrader.com shows at least 60 new RL's within a hundred miles. And she'd prefer it to be brand new. I'm definitely shooting for at least $3,500 under invoice. Just wondering how much lower is possible. I'm beginning to think quite a bit lower....
If she needs a 10 year car, how about a CPO Lexus LS? There is no car on earth that will outlast that. The RL wont even come close. My '96 Lasted me 156,470 miles on the trade, and was trouble free all the way. CPO Lexus cars are covered to 100,000 total vehicle miles. You could get an '00 LS400 in the low 30s, and an '01 LS430 for just under 40, that would blow away any RL in EVERY feature, and be covered by the CPO warranty for roughly the same duration as a new Acura.
ksso
I like this resizing effort, and performance focus, from Acura. This might help Honda in markets (especially Europe) where a more compact package is more desirable, and that may be a goal.
So, the Acura sedan trio will have lengths (width would be in 70-72 inch range for all) of...
183 inch: TSX (Compact)
188 inch: TL (Midsize - Lower side)
193 inch: RL (Midsize - Upper side)
This leaves enough room for a full size luxury sedan above RL! May be, thats another plan at AHM!
yesterday i drove past 3 TL's on the NJTP... I was staring at them because that shape sure has grown on me and they were staring at me because i was driving my wife's 3 with the top down in 65 degree, cloudy weather.
So I guess compared to a non ACE car there has to be a different styling to accomodate for the different skeleton. We can agree that although the new RL is not heart shattering it is nice looking.
My take: Good looks alone do not carry you for too long (just as for ourselves I guess). So I'll prefer keep an ACE up my sleeve! lol
Steve
Lets start by defining an Octane. Octane indicates the lenght (in number of carbon atoms) of an aliphatic chain (a string of beads in which the beads are carbon atoms with hydrogen atoms linked to each of them.
Do not get scared you are familiar with aliphatic compounds even though you may not recognize so. The butane gas cartridge you use(d) for your camping. Propane is another one. Propane is infact a 3 Carbon chain, butane is a 4 carbon chain, ethane (for which we all have prefernce of the alchool form, ethanol) is 2 and methane is 1.
OK now that we have the basic chemistry what do you have in a 87 octane and what do you have in a 91 octane gasoline.
The same stuff! Surprised? Let me explain.
The Octane numbers you read at the pump only tells you that for 100 parts of fuels 87 (or 91 id you are getting premium rather than normal) are.........
(sorry I have to finish the post later in an hour or so)
So now back to the 87 vs. 91 issue. Any modern vehicle, unless otherwise stated by the manufaturers, is built to give optimum performance and adding a 4% of 8 Carbon atom lenght alyphatic chains (i.e. 91 octanes) is not going to give you any benefit whatsoever.
I believe a lot of people supposes that higher octanes equal cleaner gasoline... not so.
The same is true for 91 vs. 94. The gain of 3% is irrelevant, if the manufacturer asks for premiummake sure is the one that saves you money because you are not keeping the engine cleaner, you are not getting more miles etc. These benefits are achieved by other means. To give you an extreme example, 'lighter fuels' such as those in use in Formula 1 racing do give you more mileage (dont ask me what they cost! an absurdity), and cleaner gasoline is not measured by octanes but other processing steps. Ultimately the higher price for higher octanes is dependent not on intrinsic qualities but simply reflect 'lower yelds' from startin row material, so you need to pick up the tab!
Final advice, run on the gasoline that your manufacturer suggest and identify the distribution brand that provide good quality at reasonable price!
Bye...for now
What's a "CPO"? _____________ previously owned?
As Chevron is not manufactured east of Kentucky, the automakers have tanker trucks haul the gas back to Detroit for use in their new cars.
Yet its clear the old RL still has its fans, such as Heywood's sister-in-law.
Heywood, I'm not knocking the '04 RL, but it is the last model year of an old design, and there are a lot of new cars that have come out since then.
I think Lexusman is giving you great advice and you should really consider the cars he is suggesting. It's an expensive purchase, and your sis-in-law will be living with the results for 10 years, why not be absolutely certain it's the car you want?
CPO means "Certified Pre-Owned". I think CPO is a good idea for German cars, which are typically quite pricey and relatively unreliable compared to Japanese cars.
Lexux, OTOH, is a pretty reliable vehicle and if you can find one used with good service records, I don't think you need to go the CPO route with Lexus. Also, most Lexus drivers typically don't drive their cars hard, which is what ruins a car, so your chances of getting a good reliable used Lexus are pretty good.
The new RL shares one of the best platforms around, so that ain't going to be a big deal either. V8 or not doesn't have to be an issue either since a hybrid possibility is more likely. 350 HP/350 lb.-ft or so, and AWD, in a full size package is doable.
But before that happens, we may see a hybrid RL, and then, the future of "sedans" (as opposed to light trucks) in a lineup may also dictate things.
about the retooling to create different sized cars, i doubt. i have a masters in robotics and i can tell you, we have come a long way in the last 15 years, today's productions lines are so flexible, if they wanted, they could turn out 5 completely different cars on the same line, at the same time, right one after the other, having said that, it may not make the most economic sense to do it, but from a re-tooling point of view, its far too easy... and honda has been one of the companies on the forefront of these flexible production lines, if not the pioneer.
if i don't write again for a few, have a super and safe holiday weekend.
ksso
shorter chain hydrocarbons have lower molecular weight and hence are more likely to be in gaseous or liquid state and hence require less energy to transform chemically. higher molecular weight hydrocarbons require more energy to ignite and combust, meaning, they don't pre-fire.... you said as much.
now i differ on the result. i am not saying 91 is cleaner than 87, all i'm saying is, the engine has more predictable (relatively) firing and hence the engine has less "knocking". the word knocking really must come from the ages when even a slight amount of trouble with the "petrol" would cause the engine to physically "knock around"... anyway, intrisically, if you look at the force vectors of a knock, they are random and dissipate in different directions than the classic line of piston movement in a cylinder that causes more or less cyclical movement on the stroke... anyway, so in my interpretation, less knock leads to a more balanced engine performance that leads to the ECU calculating things differently leading to good mileage and/or better power.
having said all of this, i still go back and agree with your final note that we must identify a gasoline we like and stick with it, because that offers a far higher degree of predictability than buying 91 at 15 different gas stations with different brands.
When I used to live in AZ, I'd mostly buy chevron with techron. i'm still hunting around for a good gas station in central jersey, though in my pre-AZ life, I used to hang my car's thirst mostly at one particular mobile station just off of route 287 exit 2... things change, now the only good thing about that particular station is the donuts... hehe
i think i've strayed far enough from the RL topic, but then again, i've atleast mentioned the RL word twice in this post...
ksso
My service manager, obviously NOT at your understanding level (somewhat to a lot below, I'll wager) says, fundamentally, what I said in a previous post: "the engine computer 'senses' the higher octane and advances the spark thereby improving the power [sic]." Of course the limit of advance is relatively small, but, if it is virtually insignificant, why bother putting power (torque) and accelerative claims in print for 91 and 93 octane (German car, BTW)?
Uh, please answer in English -- I too, am NOT at your level of understanding, fur shure!
realtive to the last few posts: You are all correct. I guess my points were standard setting, but details outlined are true.
Now that said, the argument of 91 vs. 87 in term of combustion 'predictability' is real but not any longer relevant (the issue of 'battere in testa' a.k.a. knocking) has been solved since early '90 or so by deplyoment of new engine materials/engineering.
As to the manual recommendation, I had mentioned indeed (or may be I forgot doing it!!) that there are a few manufacturers producing enginess that have 'adaptive capabilities' to detect octane composition and vary the engine prefromance accordingly. Typically in automotive press the most cited example is some of Ford engines.
Going back to the RL and all powerplants from Honda I am not aware of the existance of such capability so I would stick with my earlier advice!
CU!!
Case 1: 87 octane fuel, which means 87 out of 100 good molecules and 13 below quality molecules. (this is vague, not homogenous behavirour, but bear with me) now, lets say at time 0, your engine piston started compression and 43 milliseconds later, the 13 below quality molecules fired, and then then at 52 milliseconds, the rest of the 87 molecules fired. what did you get? two distinct explosions inside the cylinder chamber, the first 13 molecules created a mini-blast that upset the cylinder compression and then the 87 other molecules fires 9 millsecs later to create the bigger explosion that really pushes the piston out to power your engine.
Case 2: 91 octane fuel... here you got 9 poorer quality molecules and 91 good. lets say at 43 millsec the 9 fired and at 52 millsec, the rest of the 91 exploded/combusted. so the initial misfire/knock is smaller, 9 instead of 13 molecules and the subsequent explosion is bigger, with 91 molecules instead of 87. obviously you are going to get more power out of 91 molecules burning instead of 87, given all the other things remain same.
Now of course, this is all dynamically happening and the spark is not necessarily happening at 43 ms or 52 ms. in an old style distributor engine, how the point was set decides exactly when in time the spark is fed. the spark itself lasts several milliseconds. in a new engine the ECU decides when to spark and the spark "start time" can be varied... the spark length is still several milliseconds long and i am not sure how much that lengh is managed by the ECU but it could be and i would not be suprised. The point of moving the start time of the spark is really to "supress" the misfiring. This is how it works. Lets say at 42 ms, your poor quality molecues fire and you know that because you designed the engine. now suppose you delayed the spart from happening till say 50 ms. then what you are essentially doing is preventing a knock from happening or reducing the knock delta to 2 ms from the original 9 ms. the knock is still there, but its smaller. please note that a knock can never be eliminated. this is because not every molecule of gas is going to explode at the same time. it always happens as a series of chains. one or more molecules of gas will explode, create energy and provide that energy to other molecules to explode. and on and on. never ever will the entire contents of the cylinder combust at the same instant. this chain behavior is where most of the recent advances in HP are coming from. traditionally, no engine ever completely burns all the fuel dumped into the cylinder. as the percentage of unburnt fuel reduces, power for engine goes up. just for demonstration, the 95 EX V6 accord pumped something like 190 hp from 3000 cc engine, the latest EX V6 pumps 240 hp from approximately the same size of engine (viz. 3000 cc)... when manufacturers are pushing to increase power from the same engine using all the variable cam and this and that, they are essentially running after trying to burn those last few unburnt fuel molecules... that's where all the gizmos and technology comes in. question is, its also making cars heavier and with the law of diminishing returns at some point, you just won't get any more benefit anymore.
i also like steve's mention of the ford engine. i was just thinking... if you have a really fast smart sensor/computer on the engine, you can continously monitor the quality of fuel that is actually reaching the engine instantaneously and vary your firing timing to compensate almost instantaneously... that would also give you quite a fun zip on the engine.... just a thought.
i hope this helps.
ksso
I do see the relevance of the shear dimensioning (car size, engine specs etc.). Yet, I am more interested in pushing the discussion on what this car represent in the overall strategy of the company behind it. In previous posts (or reading I was doing elsewhere) I got the impression that this is another step along the way to restate a whole phylosophy concerned with prioritizing on what we already now are the HONDA/Acura fundamental principle (performance, craftamanship, safety, fuel consumption economy etc). To make a long story short my impression is the the RL will not stay as the flagship vehicle for long!
My bet is that the Rl will succeed to eat market share against the lux midsize antagonists (see the 7 comparo of jag, e series, 5 series, c300 etc. elsewhere in the auto press). After that and deploying the dual note extra 100 HP on hybrid platform ( the SOHC vs. DOHC in previous posts could also apply here) we will see the true "Legend".
Well OK may be I am just day-dreaming but then........
In the US, the whole car market is driven by 3 factors in my opinion:
1. Relatively low taxes on car sales, compared to rest of the world, so cars based purely on per capita income are cheaper in the US than most other places, maybe not all, but most
2. Inexpensive gasoline compared to the rest of the world
3. our increasing personal girths, myself included.. hehehe
I doubt 1. above will change in the forseeable future... though what may happen is tax incentives on hybrids, still not a given.
2. above, well its increasingly out of control of the largest buyer's bullying power, largely because as china buys more and becomes another huge hog after the same limited resource, our bully power is receding and it will erode to a point where we just can't ask for good gas prices. so $50 gas fillups per week are going to become standard
3. above... the atkins diet worked on me for a while, but ahem...
but overall all this means, in my opinion that the flagship 7/S/LS sized market is going to be relatively calm or flat if not decline. we have too many players already in that market, so acura may be smart to save money and stay out of it, despite the fact that TL & RL were sized lower and leaves space to speculate on a larger car.
ksso
So I'll tirelessly preach use the lower octane your car manufacturer suggests and just make sure is the cleanest one!
One last note of the opening sentence. Sorry if my english fails at times (if the reference was in that direction). As foreing born and user of Italian as mother language I am letter blind for 5 out of 26 alphabet letters (j, k, w, x and y do not exixst in the italian alphabet) so I am severely prone to mix ups (grammar structure and punctuation being other sore points)!
btw I wish everyone a very happy holiday weekend!
I totally agree with your analysis (and unfortunately I know about increasing girths myself).
In fact, although I hope we will see a new flagship by Acura I believe it will be a few years down the line. Mostly to assess those market dynamics you hit spot on!
Have a great Memorial weekend!
Exactly right. It appears to me as a handsome car, but who would pay that kind of money for a VW badged car? That's Mercedes or BMW money we are talking about. Then too, the Germans and VW are not known for building trouble free cars.
>I think it is more likely to see a larger car with a Honda badge on it, perhaps as a competitor to the Avalon? first<
I think that's a great idea. You ought to write Honda and tell them just that. A man with your creative ideas and automotive marketing savvy could help them a lot. Seriously. But, I get the impresssion that Honda Motors is not looking for those kind of people. Nissan yes, Honda no.
Mike
If the torque numbers come in over 270 - you will have an absolute "monster" on your hands - this car will be a classic!!!
Wester wrote:
Kick-[non-permissible content removed] ad! The new 05' RL will have auto magazines in an absolute frenzy - They will describe, with an unheard of number of superlatives - that this, the 05' RL, is what defines the absolute in motoring style, grace, sophistication, performance and value! This car, ladies and gentlemen, has lines that will endure...and will simply blow everything, in it's class - straight to hell...
If the torque numbers come in over 270 - you will have an absolute "monster" on your hands - this car will be a classic!!!
----------------------------
Acura Type S'in replied:
By my calculations: with 300hp and a Max Torque rpm range of around 5800.......... that puts the 05' RL torque at 271ft/lbs of torque..........So put a BIG CHECK MARK on that!! The RL will probably do 60 around 5.5 seconds........ We all know how it's suppose to handle......... I can't wait to see how that Tranny handles quarter miles and how much gas mileage the V6 gets!!!!!
Mike
Last time I checked, the "Big 3" automakers in Detroit were GM, Ford, and Chrysler. I hadn't heard that Toyota had moved to the Motor City.
;-)
"Out west, the smart money is on Chevron gasoline with Techron. Apparently the gas is so clean burning and has such a good detergent package that all of the big 3 automakers use Chevron gasoline exclusively when performing EPA mileage tests for their new car models.
As Chevron is not manufactured east of Kentucky, the automakers have tanker trucks haul the gas back to Detroit for use in their new cars."
Will it make sense to wait until November or December to 1) get a better price and 2) wait for models that have some of the preliminary bugs worked out -- or will that take a new model year to happen?
As a former manufacturer, my experience dictates that early production line product is more likely to have defects than products manufactured later.
In addition to assembly line improvements, customer feedback provides for additional insights into inherent defects.
To be honest, price does not matter that much to me as long as it is below $50K (as I was promised - "well below $50K"), the limit I set for it.
I guess you and I would be among the first to post "real ownership" experience with RL on edmunds.com when it arrives. Can't wait.
There would be 1st year issues, no doubt. However, my excitement overtakes patience in this case. I am willing to go through it in order to enjoy the SH-AWD first-hand, and all the electronics goodies (bluetooth, XM-RealTraffic, etc.) that come with it. Given Acura's reputation on reliability, I don't think it would be bad.