Acura TL 2006+

frisconick · June 2005

According to Consumer Reports and Car and Driver, the TL is faster than Most BMWs and faster than the V8 300 hp Mustang. The only BMWs that are faster are the M class, and they cost thousands more than the TL. This car is seriously quick and has more horse power than is legally needed. :shades:

merc1 · June 2005

The TL faster than the Mustang GT? Not by anything I've ever seen. The new 330i is just as fast with much less power from the tests I've seen so far. Consumer reports is the last place I'd look for performance testing.

M

tawneycat · June 2005

06 TL will get some new colors
06 TL will get VCM
06 TL will have revised front and rear styling
06 TL will have 8 way pass seat and lowering passenger rear view mirror
06 TL will have No Bridgestone tires
06 TL will have lighted turn signals like TSX

All guesses, remember the 2001 to 2002 change. It was significant and the 2001 buyers were left holding an old car. I hope the 05 to 06 change is not that noticable!!

irnmdn · June 2005

TL is great value around $35 loaded. I suspect Acura management was smoking pot when they priced RL $15k more for just adding AWD,30HP and some gizmos.
$40-$42k is what RL should be listed for.

bhelsdon · June 2005

Dalls223 makes me look like a grandma. I am a 28 year old man that loves to drive fast and I think the car has plenty of HP. IMO the Current TL is the perfect blend of luxury and sport. If horsepower is all your interested in then go buy a Mustang GT or a pontiac GTO and save a few thousand dollars. I personally think that 6 seconds to 60 and 30mpg in the same car is an awsome accomplishment.

laurasdada · June 2005

Gotta agree, bheldson. What is the hang-up with 270 vs 298 hp? The TL is a VERY quick car. From what I've read as quick as G35 and BMW 330. I guess you and I don't drag race every Sunday at Raceway Park! Gee, the Hemi C has 340hp! I guess the TL should leapfrog that to 400hp (and 12mpg)...

You can buy more HP elsewhere, but I bought "the whole package" that the TL represents including power, luxury and hopefully reliability.

bodble2 · June 2005

It'd be OK by me if Acura doesn't add another 1 hp to the TL for the rest of its life cycle. I'd rather them spend the R & D dollars on refining the car wherever it's needed.

dalls223 · June 2005

No, you are absolutely right bhelsdon. Good point on the well roundedness of the TL. It mixes all of the elements better than any other car on earth, or so it has been said. In baseball they refer to such a player as a "five tool player." (if they hit for high average, have power with the bat, play defense well, possess running speed, and have a strong throwing arm) When I tell people that my 02 TL-S gets 30 MPG highway, I see their jaws hit the ground. It comes as a surprise to most that a car could have very high levels of sport, luxury, economy, and resale value. Hence a "four tool car." Of course the fourth tool comes because of the generous blend of the previous three.

However, I am a greedy SOB. I don't want to make you feel like a grandma bhelsdon, but I always want more of everything, especially power. Maybe that is the youth talking though. I am 26 years old myself. However, I would like to see the luxury and the economy improve as well. I don't want a Mustang GT or a Pontiac GTO, because they are deficient in the areas of luxury and economy, even though they have better performance. I don't want to trade off two tools for the improvement in one tool, the engine. The TL may not be deficient in any one area, but it can still be improved.

One of the ways that Acura can achieve better performance, while still enhancing fuel economy, is to take a hybrid approach to things. We will start to see more of this technology coming in the next five years or so for all vehicles. Lexus has already started moving very aggressively in this area. The new Lexus RX400h that is already on the market is using hybrid technology, as well as the new GS450h coming in spring of 2007, and the 2007 redesigned LS, called the LS600h.

Get the performance numbers up as well as the fuel economy. Sounds like a good strategy to me. If we put a few more bells and whistles in the TL then that's icing on the "top sport sedan under $40K" cake. Even though, if Acura decided to go the route of hybrid for the TL, then the price would probably near, and possibly exceed $40K. I wonder when we will see this for the TL. They just gave the Accord a hybrid enhanced model. How far will it spread, and what will this mean for the future of not just Acura vehicles, but all vehicles?

dalls223 · June 2005

MORE POWER! MORE POWER! MORE POWER! I am sounding like Tim "the toolman" Taylor. No seriously, I too would like to see more technology inside of the TL, and the RL for that matter. There is so much out there, with the DVD players in virtually every imaginable place. Ventilated seats are starting to become more and more popular. MP3's are everywhere too. I wouldn't even mind if they used better quality leather, like Alcantara, or Montana leather, that is so rich and soft. Rear view cameras are another advancement that is probably going to take the place of rear parktronic eventually. Just some ideas. I am sure that I am forgetting a few.

As a final note, we should be proud of what Acura has done in the creativity department. Four such FIRST TIME applications in any car: DVD Audio Player with Surround Sound, Bluetooth technology, Sun Sensors for climate control, and last but not least the Realtime Traffic Data. Pretty cool stuff. Now get the other stuff. There I go being greedy again. :P

dalls223 · June 2005

You just mentioned a fifth tool that I forgot to mention, reliability. Honda and Toyota are the kings of the world in this regard. You take it for granted when you drive a TL. That is why I forgot to mention it. Problems. What are those? Oh shoot. Don't want to jinx myself.

400hp TL. Now that would be just ridiculous. Maybe with the introduction of a hybrid engine it could happen, and get 20-25MPG. Yeah, and be the most street illegal thing you have ever seen.

dalls223 · June 2005

Well this all goes back to my post a few days ago. They made the new RL too short. Actually, when I bought my 2002 TL-S, I was amazed at how little extra legroom there was in the 2002 RL when I sat in one in the showroom. Because of its closeness in size (a mere 4" difference in body length) Acura has either once again set the RL up to fail, or is planning on restricting the enhancements to the TL as to preserve the value of the RL. Someone made a comment the other day about the styling flaws of the RL, when they said that consumers think that it looks too much like an Accord. Well maybe that is because it is barely larger than an Accord.

Here is the one drawback about AWD being optional for the 2006 TL. Just with the addition of the AWD system, that will add weight, and therefore decrease performance. Of course you would have a car that could zip through the turns, but the off the line acceleration wouldn't be the same. So the hp/torque numbers must be adjusted upward too offset the added weight. It might scare away some enthusiasts if you told them that their car wasn't going to be as ferocious as its predecessor. BMW and Mercedes offer the AWD for their smaller models and notice the same 0.5 second or greater drop in their 0-60 runs. The only difference with them is that they offer RWD, which is way better against torque steer than FWD. BMW and Mercedes use their AWD models as a way of holding the road 365 days a year. With Acura being very basic in its offerings (i.e.-2005 RL SH-AWD only) it may only offer SH-AWD for the TL, with no option for FWD. I have not been convinced otherwise.

So the AWD being more for the enthusiast is not as big of a deal because RWD offers handling that is considered in some ways as better than AWD, especially on dry roads. That is where Acura has to look at the big picture and not offer a slower AWD version of it's current TL. It needs the AWD to be more composed on the turns, but it doesn't need a performance slip as a result of it. In a way AWD is to Acura, as RWD is to Mercedes. It would be their sportiest offering. Also 10hp, like before with the 2004 redesign, will not make that much of a difference. The G35 sedan went from 260 to 298 horsepower, which is a gain of 38. Even 290 hp might be enough for the TL to pull off the SH-AWD magic, and gain a performance advantage over the 04-05 TL's. And they could do this without infuriating new or "to be" RL owners.

Hey merc1. If a 300C is an American pig type car, then what is that new SRT-8 300C considered? That is big time hogville.

irnmdn · June 2005

You just mentioned a fifth tool that I forgot to mention, reliability. Honda and Toyota are the kings of the world in this regard.
Well, both Toyota and Honda had problems with V-6 powertrains (engine sludge/transmission). There has been cases were transmissions were replaced multiple times for TL and odyssey. Never ever heard major problems with Nissan VQ powertrains though.

frisconick · June 2005

Consumer reports is the last place I'd look for performance testing.

Why would not consider Consumer Reports opinion? They have professional drivers and are more objective because they don't take advertisng dollars from auto makers. They did say the TL is not as "nimble" as the BMW, sounds like most every professional driver opinion I have heard.

merc1 · June 2005

Hey merc1. If a 300C is an American pig type car, then what is that new SRT-8 300C considered? That is big time hogville.

Well of course I don't consider the 300C or SRT-8 version a "pig" car. I think that Acura would think that about them because of their size and engines. Honda wouldn't be able to conceptualize such a vehicle I don't think.

M

merc1 · June 2005

Why would not consider Consumer Reports opinion? They have professional drivers and are more objective because they don't take advertisng dollars from auto makers. They did say the TL is not as "nimble" as the BMW, sounds like most every professional driver opinion I have heard.

There is nothing to be objective about getting performance numbers, because CR doesn't have a clue if they think a TL is faster than a Mustang GT.

M

dalls223 · June 2005

immdn:

I have a confession. My 02 TL-S had to have its transmission replaced, not because it was deemed faulty. It had a very unusual hesitation between gears in sport mode, so my dealership decided to take no chances and just replace the whole darn thing. Of course the whole thing was under warranty and I never had to pay a cent for it. It seems to not be a weakness anymore.

Hey. Speaking of weaknesses. Did you hear the news yesterday? The Nissan Maxima scored marginal on its crash test rating. :sick: Oh yeah, and the TL scored as one of the best. Read below. I will cover the important points only, for space sake. If you want to read the whole review the link is below.

Courtesy of:http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/print/CTVNews/1118060524209_78/?hub=SciTech&subhu- - - - - b=PrintStory

Associated Press

Updated: Mon. Jun. 6 2005 8:25 AM ET

WASHINGTON  The 2005 Nissan Maxima and Suzuki Verona received marginal ratings in crash tests released Sunday by the insurance industry. Researchers questioned how well the vehicles would protect occupants in side impact collisions...

The institute said nine midsize sedans have good ratings in side impact crashes. In addition to the Malibu and A4, they are the Saab 9-3, Acura TL, Lexus ES300/330, Volkswagen Jetta, Toyota Camry, Honda Accord and Mitsubishi Galant.

Most of the vehicles were tested earlier by the institute, which conducts the tests as the vehicles are redesigned.

In conclusion, I would rather pay an outrageous amount of money for a new transmission, rather than ending up crippled or worse in the event of a major collision.

dalls223 · June 2005

merc1,

"Well of course I don't consider the 300C or SRT-8 version a "pig" car. I think that Acura would think that about them because of their size and engines. Honda wouldn't be able to conceptualize such a vehicle I don't think."

TL hybrid baby.

tawneycat · June 2005

HP would do nothing for me. Mileage would go down. I get 30 mpg per tank in my 05--really. I drive a 60-65 mph commute of 24 mi one way flat and that is true average. In my 04 I got 32-33 on trips. yes when you flog it the mileage plummetts but nice to know you can get great economy....It is a game with me to maximize this. My wife would get 25 avg on same trip and we would arrive about the same time. How you drive makes a big difference. Wife does Stop and Go.
Consumer reports likes the TL for well roundedness. It is perfect blend of luxury and performance at reasonable price.
VCM is the only thing for now that would improve it. I am wary of VCM which my Odyssey has. The VCM models have lower gearing and run at higher rpms to compensate for 3 cylinder use. Bottom line, VCM is good for those who do a lot of expressway driving.

ljwalters1 · June 2005

Dalls, in a post under a different heading, you said "one drawback about AWD being optional for the 2006 TL [is that it] will add weight, and therefore decrease performance. . . off the line acceleration wouldn't be the same. So the hp/torque numbers must be adjusted upward too offset the added weight."

This isn't necessarily true. When you try to accelerate from a dead stop, a car's weight is thrown backwards, resulting in less friction or grip on the front tires. This is a problem for a FWD car, but not a RWD car. Therefore, you might save a little time on the initial start in an AWD TL. The extra weight might not be as big a performance issue until the car's weight shifts back to normal.

I imagine the extra weight would factor into mpg and maybe ordinary accelleration, but might be offset somewhat in the 0-60 fast-as-you-can accelleration.

bodble2 · June 2005

I think the TL can easily handle the addition of SH-AWD without any power boost. Would it affect performance and mpg? Yes, the laws of physics dictate that. But not to any significant degree. Afterall, we're not talking about a car with marginally adequate power to begin with. Now, they could offset any added weight with added efficiency and revised ratios from a 6-speed automatic. That would be nice. The Mazda 6 (which is one notch down from the TL) already has one.

kyfdx · June 2005

I agree... even with the extra weight, 0-60 times might go up... as you have the traction to put all of that power on the ground.. Especially with the manual transmission..

Of course, you realize that they probably wouldn't make the AWD with the stickshift...

Not that I think the current TL will ever get AWD.. It says right here that it won't happen..

regards,
kyfdx

dalls223 · June 2005

ljwalters:

When you try to accelerate from a dead stop, a car's weight is thrown backwards, resulting in less friction or grip on the front tires.

I don't know how weight shifting has would affect a car's acceleration, however it is all about traction. A car with AWD would not hesitate as much as a FWD car off the line but the difference is minimal when you look at the 200-300 pound difference between the two different types of drive wheels. I like to look at weight distribution when comparing FWD and RWD. When you take FWD cars and their 60/40 weight distribution then that should compensate the loss of friction that you are talking about on the front tires because it is heavier in the front of the car, therefore creating more downward force on the front wheels. Most RWD cars, like BMW especially, has a near 50/50 weight distribution. Given all of the power comes from the rear wheels, it is behind most of the weight already, which causes it not to hesitate off the line as much as a FWD car.

Listed below are a couple of stats from Audi's website, the ones that made AWD so popular with their quatro. Luckily it is a good comparison because Audi makes FWD and AWD models only; a direct comparison for what we are talking about. It shows that FWD is faster off the line than AWD, which is important when we are talking about SH-AWD for the 2006 TL and its probable performance. The numbers don't lie.

200 hp with Audi multitronic Continuously Variable Transmission (CVT) and FrontTrak® front-wheel drive

200 hp with 6-speed manual transmission and FrontTrak front-wheel drive

200 hp with 6-speed manual transmission and quattro® all-wheel drive

200 hp with 6-speed Tiptronic® and quattro all-wheel drive

0-60 mph in seconds: 7.1 (FrontTrak manual models), 7.3 (multitronic CVT with FrontTrak and 6-speed manual with quattro), 7.5 (6-speed Tiptronic with quattro)

This shows that FWD models for the new A4 2.0T have better acceleration numbers than the quatro AWD models. There is a 0.4 second difference between the FWD with manual transmission and the 6-speed with Tiptronic. This would be a little disappointing for someone such as myself because I would like the AWD traction, but would suffer a performance loss because: a) I don't know how to drive a stick, and b) even if I did I still live in one of the worst areas for a manual transmission, the Bay Area.

frisconick · June 2005

There is nothing to be objective about getting performance numbers, because CR doesn't have a clue if they think a TL is faster than a Mustang GT.

I apologize, CR did not test the Mustang GT, just the standard 300hp Mustang. Sorry for misunderstanding.

merc1 · June 2005

I apologize, CR did not test the Mustang GT, just the standard 300hp Mustang. Sorry for misunderstanding.

The 300hp Mustang is the Mustang GT. You mean they tested a base V6 Mustang I assume?

M

kyfdx · June 2005

Big difference with only 200HP....

No traction issues with only putting 200HP to the ground for Audi.. Ergo, the heavier Quattro is slower.. (although, I would rather have it for handling).

The Acura TL with 270HP has a lot of wheelspin on take-off.. Almost all of that would be negated with AWD, and you could really use all of that HP.. negating the weight penalty and more.. (In theory).

Or.... not.

frisconick · June 2005

I thought the GT was a 400 hp car, no I am wrong again. It just depends on who you trust, a an organization like Car and Driver that takes advertising, or Consumer Reports that does not.

frisconick · June 2005

Consumer Reports tested the V6, sorry, I must stop drinking :shades:

delmar1 · June 2005

I own a TSX and may just end up trading in my Infiniti I30 for a TL . That would be my fifth Acura. A few questions for the participants here.

1) What type of mileage (MPG) does the TL get in real life?
2) For those that did comparison shop to a TSX...give me some of your experiences...plus and minus
3) I have not looked closely enough. Does the rear seat have a 60/40 split?

Thanks! I might have a few more questions down the road.

bruizer · June 2005

Yeah, the V6 is only about 210 HP. The GT is 300 HP. You might be thinking of the '05 GTO - that's 400 HP.

merc1 · June 2005

It just depends on who you trust, a an organization like Car and Driver that takes advertising, or Consumer Reports that does not.

Well that kinda goes back to my first point. With that much confusion as to what was tested I'll stick with the guys who do it for a living and/or regular basis. Advertising has no bearing on just gathering performance data, only skill matters.

For them to test a V6 Mustang and say that the TL is faster is just plain silly, of course the TL would be.

Now whether or not a publication likes a car or not could depend on something like that, but I've never believed that for a min because if you look at the page in which all the advertisers are listed, lots of different makes advertise in the four main automags. That advertising stuff is a bunk excuse imo and see no evidence of it having any bearing on which cars a magazine likes. Some magazines worshiped Mercedes' never had more than a 1 page add from Mercedes, ditto for BMW.

M

kyfdx · June 2005

They test the cars with professional engineers whose only job is to test cars.. They have no commercial biases, though their commentary definitely has a social/political bias..

While you may not agree with their conclusions, their facts are beyond reproach... I would take their performance numbers over any from the so-called experts at the car magazines..

Reading the reviews is like reading any other magazine.. You have to take into account the editorial voice of the publication. But, their info is solid.

Don't use the paraphrasing found here in these boards as a substitute for what is actually published in CR. Do you really think that they wrote an article that stated that the TL was faster than a Mustang? Have you ever seen a TL and a Mustang tested together?

You'll get a lot better idea of how your car will behave in the real world from CR, than you will from C/D, Motortrend, R/T, etc.. I like reading those magazines, but how my car will take an off-camber, decreasing radius turn at Lime Rock isn't all that relevant to how I use the car (unfortunately).

CR must know something.. They said the E39 5-series was the best car they had ever tested.

regards,
kyfdx

bodble2 · June 2005

The back seat does not fold down at all.

ljwalters1 · June 2005

here's a quick comparison of the TSX & TL based on my reading about both, a test drive of the TSX and ownership of the TL for 3+ mos

The TL is just like a grown-up version of the TSX. Dimensions are bigger and it has better acceleration. I don't think it has any more luxury features than the TSX, except maybe a larger nav screen. The TSX has signal blinkers on the sideview mirrors, which is a nice safety feature that the TL does not have (maybe in '06?).

Frankly, if you're happy with the TSX and it's size and quickness satisfy you, I'd stick with it. If you want something inbetween the TSX and TL, look at the Honda Accord. It has 240 hp (I forget the torque) as opposed to the TLs 270, and it's dimensions are like the TL.

For me, I wanted more power than a TSX and I wanted a larger car. I would've had a tough choice btn the TL & Accord, except the Accord V6 can't be had with 4 doors and a manual transmission.

dalls223 · June 2005

ljwalters,

You're killing me. Why are you mentioning the TL and the Accord in the same breath? They are two totally different cars. And especially to do it between two Acuras. I have a sales background, and that is committing the biggest sales mistake of all, down-selling a customer. No disrespect to the V6 Accord because it is a solid car. They may both be made by Honda, but one is an Acura and one is a Honda. That is like mentioning a Mercedes in the same sentence as a Chrysler, or an Infiniti in the same sentence as a Nissan. They are different, even though I must say that I was pretty irritated when in 2003 the Accord had a navi with voice recognition, and a two-zone climate control, while the 2003 TL didn't. But when you drive it, you know the difference. I have ridden inside of V6 Accords and they just cannot compare. There is a $5-$10K difference for a reason. I would recommend a TSX over an Accord because you want to get people to fall in love with the Acura name so that in their future purchases they buy a TL, RL, or an MDX, which is of significant higher value to Honda because they would make more money.. .

In conclusion, there is no choice between the two. If you are pondering buying a car in the $25-30K range then what's another $5K? Go with the TL. I did, and I have been satisfied and then some for almost four years. Like I said in an earlier post, go with the car that is a five tool car, power, luxury, economy, resale value, and the one that was added by another post (reliability). The V6 Accord may be fairly generous in all five areas, but not as much as the TL. Besides, the TL is more fun to drive, and isn't that what it is all about anyway? Like ljwalters1 said, "...the Accord V6 can't be had with 4 doors and a manual transmission." Well not only that, but it cannot be had with a sport-shifter either. Huge difference.

dalls223 · June 2005

Well as far as MPG goes for my 02 TL-S, which is almost the same as the 04-05 TL's, I usually get about 16MPG in the city, but I live in San Francisco where the hills can drastically affect MPG. Not only that, but I drive fast sometimes. Too many slowpokes in the city. lol I have received as high as 18 MPG in the city when I am driving it methodically, and as high as 30-31 MPG on trips doing about 99% freeway driving. Factory numbers for my car are 19 MPG city/ 29 MPG highway. The 04-05 TL's have a factory MPG rating of 20 MPG city/ 29 MPG highway. A lot of it has to do with driving conditions and driving habits, but that is about as close of an approximation as I can give. I hope that helps.

merc1 · June 2005

I agree that there testing is more real world biased, but in reading it they only do what I'd normally do anyway when looking at a new car. Some of their roadtest read like the ultimate material for the clueless about cars. I can find out about seat comfort, ride comfort etc. and how features work on a test drive myself. They don't ever give anything that isn't impossible to see for myself, in most cases. Needless to say I find their roadtests useless.

CR is to me is for reliability data only, not their performance testing because a car can actually beat the snot of their pick at the track and yet it won't get recommended because of reliability. I'll never subscribe to such thinking.

I wouldn't ever take their performance numbers over a magazine like C&D or R&T. Now their overall conclusions about certain cars I do agree with, but pure test numbers, especially the performance ones I'll take the group that does it month in and month out.

Also the regular mags have better comparos which aren't all track based either, especially when it comes to sedans/suvs. I like to read more than just how cold the A/C is and what not.

You are correct about me checking to see what they said about the TL first though because when I read that about a TL and a Mustang I was like CR has no clue as to what they're talking about.

M

gdswede · June 2005

These would all be nice enhancements, and I would hope are things Acura are thinking of. Does their VCM system have an on/off switch so that it does not automatically kick in to 3-cyl mode if you don't want it to (I assume there is some "lag" to go from 3-cyl to 6-cyl when you really need it)? Having the SH-AWD as an OPTION would also be nice - hopefully that is on their list.

The TL styling has gotten better, but they should take it one more step - absolutely. The RL looks great - really nice design of the front/hood/lights (and rear) that the TL should borrow from. Having the TL (and TSX) distinguish itself as an Acura (i.e., RL) and not look so much like a Honda would be nice.

ljwalters1 · June 2005

" If you are pondering buying a car in the $25-30K range then what's another $5K? "

I can tell you're a salesman!

I'm a consumer, and I'm not really into paying for a premium name. I want a good car at a good price, si I'd advise anyone interested in an automatic TL to cross-shop the Accord and see for themselves if the extra $$$ is worht it. I'd advise all people looking at the Infinity G35 & M to check out the Nissan Altima and Maxima, to see if the Infiniti is worth the extra dough. I don't see as much similarities between Lexis and Toyota, but the same thing applies.

The TL & TSX are great vehicles, but depending on your preferences, the Accord is worht a look.

If all you car about is the nameplate, buy a used Ferrari. If you're into substance over style, see my initial post.

delmar1 · June 2005

I am about to close the deal on a TL to supplement the TSX which I bought 3 weeks ago. I am finding that they are 'similar' cars in the same family. Great engineering, fit, fun. Just going to view them as siblings.

Some things on the TSX which I wish for in the TL.
** 60/40 split rear seats. Really practical.
** Blinkers on the mirror

A few things in the G35 which I didn't care for:
** Inability to rotate the tires because two different sizes
** Smaller occupant capacity.
** Lower mileage (18mpg?)

Another reason to select a TL for me. Didn't want to be viewed as boring without imagination in buying two TSXs.

bodble2 · June 2005

I don't want to bash the RL 'cause it is a good car, but there is nothing about it's styling that I want the TL to "borrow" from. Again, not that the RL is ugly, or anything like that, but simply, in terms of styling, the TL does it better.

dalls223 · June 2005

ljwalters,

If all you car about is the nameplate, buy a used Ferrari. If you're into substance over style, see my initial post.

Well you just brought up a very good point that spurs me to mention my auto history.

First of all, I would never buy a used Ferrari, and for me at the current time, an affordable Ferrari could be no newer than about a 1994 or 1995, and even that would be pushing it. $40-50K for a car that's ten years old. Sounds like my first car, a nightmare on wheels.

This nightmare that I speak of is in clear violation of the fifth tool, reliability. :sick: When I first received my license in June of 1996 my first car was a 1973 Mercedes 450SE. My parents had no need for it since they had newer cars of their own, so they bestowed it to me. The car was fun to drive, when it wasn't :sick: . It took me all of not even a year before I knew the inevitable. I had to get a newer car, but I could not afford a name like Mercedes. It really played on my psyche because I had grown up in that car and I really liked bragging about how I drove a Mercedes. When you are 18 years old, those things matter to you. Well, in May of 1997 I traded my Mercedes in for a 1996 Mercury Sable LS. Little did I know how much happier I would be driving a "family car." $2,500 in repairs during the 9-10 months with the Mercedes was enough to convince me that nameplates come at a premium, and when you buy an older used car, be sure that you are aware of the potential baggage that comes with it.

bodble2 · June 2005

Just thought of 2 items of improvement they should make for 2006: a half-decent sunshade for the moonroof. The current one is just so cheapish. And it wouldn't stay open. You hit the brakes semi-hard and the thing closes by itself! :mad: The one on our Mini, a spring-loaded design, is so much more upscale, even though I don't like the mesh.

Secondly, how about a decent, durable key fob remote. I'm looking at mine now and the thing's got scratches, and discoloration all over it. Looks like it's 4 years old. It looks so worn out!

Maybe they should integrate it into the key head instead.

bodble2 · June 2005

That's interesting. When I was 18 Mercedes meant nothing for me. I thought of them as cars for old people. However, I would have killed for a new Firebird Trans Am or Camaro Z28! Of course, things are different now that I am one of the "old people".....

Actually, the funny thing is now I do see a lot of old guys driving Z28s and Trans Ams. Probably trying to fulfill, or hang onto, the dreams from their youth

dalls223 · June 2005

delmar1:

Just a quick question, but what is the big deal about having blinkers on the side mirrors? Acura thought that it would be cool when they put them on the TSX. I think it was Ford that started that with their SUV's and I personally don't give a darn if a car has them or not. They don't seem like they are any more helpful than just having blinkers on the side of the car right behind the front tires. When Mercedes started putting the mirror blinkers on all of their models, the curiosity stirred from all other luxury companies about will the new such and such have side mirror indicators? Who cares? Let Mercedes and Ford brag about their seemingly useless feature. I have a challenge for anyone in this group. Have any of you ever encountered a car that was equipped with the mirror blinkers that you would have been in an accident with if it did not have the mirror signal indicators? Just curious. Quite frankly I think that this is just automotive overkill, and I don't think that it is something that would make me lose sleep when deciding over two vehicles. I also don't care if the 2006 TL has them or not. Not a big deal IMO.

dalls223 · June 2005

What year is your TL? I am just guessing that you have one of the newer ones. My 02 TL-S has no issues with the sunshade for the moonroof staying open, no matter how hard you hit the brakes. Sounds like there are some minor quality issues with the newer TL. Good point regarding the fob. Oh my goodness. You can't even make out the symbols on my fob anymore. If the panic button wasn't red then I would probably set the alarm off all of the time (especially since the trunk release button is also indented). My fob is almost four years old and it looks like it is 10 years old. Don't want to bum you out, but it only gets worse over time. Major improvements needed in that department. I wholeheartedly agree. Hey, how about a push button start for the 06 TL? Lexus has that on their new GS.

bodble2 · June 2005

Mine's an '04. Yes, they changed the sunshade 'cause I had an '01 CL-S and the sunshade on that car was sturdier.

laurasdada · June 2005

Hi:

No issue with my '05 TLs sunshade but I do agree with the keyfob comment. Only had my TL for 5.5 months, 5100 miles (I gotta take a road trip!) and the fob is looking a bit weary...!

Other than that, occasional disappearing temp/memory settings and I do have a rattle when the sunroof is in the "vent" position, on the list for first service. Other than that, really enjoying my Abyss Blue, especially since I've put (so far!) three coats of Zaino on it!

frisconick · June 2005

I agree, in fact I think the RL looks just like an Accord. :surprise:

bodble2 · June 2005

Hmm... they must have tweaked the sunshade for '05. I'm goin' to ask my dealer if I can get the some treatment for mine.

I think one way to prolong the life of the fob may be to not attach any other key (other than the ignition key) to it. I think most of the wear and tear may be from other keys rattling around with the fob inside your pocket. But of course, who wants to hassle of dealing with 2 sets of keys!

frisconick · June 2005

Excellent advice, and I think the Accord is cheaper than the TSX. Don't know if this is true about the very nice looking 2-door Accord.

Acura TL 2006+

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles