Howdy, Stranger!

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

Acura TL 2006+



  • ljwalters1ljwalters1 Posts: 294
    The navi has the knob that functions with more sophistication than the TL. The RL has adaptive headlights. It has sun sensors for climate control

    You gave good insights, and I just want to pick out 2 little sentences from your post and pick on 'em a little. :P The RLs nav knob might be nicer, but I heard that the RL doesn't have a touch-scren like the TL. Is that true? If so, I think that's a big negative. Also, the TL has sun sensing cliamte control, too. It's used for the passenger side only. Is that the same as with the RL? I assume you don't need it for the driver, too, b/c if it was affecting both, you'd just adjust the main temp control.
  • frisconickfrisconick Posts: 1,275
    Thanks, I am new to Honda products, and practices. But the RL can't compete with Lexus, and if the sales numbers are as bad as I have heard, They must radically change the RL, just like they did with the TL, to compete.
  • dalls223dalls223 Posts: 41
    Well Acura sure had their chance last year. If the new RL is a flop, then they have themselves to blame. I still think that the new RL should be a few inches larger, and the styling sure hasn't impressed anyone in this forum. I keep hearing the comparison to the Accord. Ouch! It costs about twice as much and people are finding similarities. Honestly, I don't think that it looks like an Accord from the front or the back, because of the headlight and grill styling, but if you look at it from the side, it does start to look Honda-ish. Should be interesting what tweaks they make to the RL in 2007 or 2008, but by the sounds of everyone in the forum it sounds like the TL isn't the only car that should be retooled for 06'. Scary!

    Also, Acura won't discontinue the RL. There is still a market that it targets; mostly from the age of 45-65. Performance and styling aren't as important. Quality of ride and legroom are quite important though. I have sat in both the new TL and the new RL and there is an adequate difference in legroom between the two. This may be important to some. That is the $15,000 question.
  • dalls223dalls223 Posts: 41
    Response to sentence dissection #1:

    Thanks for bringing that up. I have a navi with my 2002 TL-S and I love the touch screen ability. I have sat in other vehicles with navi's and have always appreciated having the touch screen in my car, because I am used to it. However, don't the new TL's and RL's have voice activated navigation systems? Doesn't that eliminate the need for a touchscreen some if not most of the time? A couple of drawbacks on the touchscreen that I have noticed over the past three and a half years. 1) Cleaning off the fingerprints is annoying. My screen looks greasy almost all of the time, which is not very appealing. 2) I feel like putting my fist through the screen when I touch a "highlighted" letter or number and the thing does not register it until you touch it for about the fourth or fifth time. Thank goodness that doesn't happen all of the time. But then again it is all about what you are comfortable with, right? Personally, I think that I could get used to life without a touch screen. Maybe I wouldn't miss it at all after awhile. Who knows? My point is that the RL's navi is more intuitive than the TL's, which most people can operate once it is studied and learned.

    Response to sentence dissection #2:

    You are right about the TL offering the solar sensing, but with navigation models only, since it uses GPS info from the navi in order to detect where the sun is. Since the RL comes standard with the navigation system, then you don't need to worry about that option, and therefore it is an advantage over the TL. That is what I was getting at originally. Also, it functions virtually the same way in both cars.

    Not only that, but the RL has a sunshade and the TL doesn't.
  • glenfordglenford Posts: 138
    You might try this (long taught to computer users to keep fingerprints off screens when pointing)...

    Turn your hand over, and use your fingernail to select - it usually works, and leaves no print. Tim
  • bodble2bodble2 Posts: 4,519
    "...and use your fingernail to select - it usually works, and leaves no print"

    But would it leave scratches? :confuse:
  • glenfordglenford Posts: 138
    No scratches. You're not tapping with the nail facing forward, you're pressing with the nail side instead of the "print" side of the finger. Try it on your refrigerator (or your monitor) - one will leave a fingerprint, the other won't. No oil (to speak of) on your nail, so no marks. Tim
  • frisconickfrisconick Posts: 1,275
    Yes, from the side the RL looks like an Accord. I thought the interior of the TL was just as roomy as the RL. I am 6 foot even, and the TL has plenty of leg room for me. The RL needs a serious re-design or it will flop again next year.
  • armandarmand Posts: 178
    I think the RL is fine except for the price. It should be in the low 40's to make it more competitive. It certainly has value over the TL just not that much.
  • frisconickfrisconick Posts: 1,275
    Areed, but then it's too close in price to the TL. IMHO the RL is not worth $10,000 more than a TL. I have driven both cars and I think the TL is a far better value.
  • dalls223dalls223 Posts: 41
    I find it interesting reading all of the dialogue going back and forth between the TL and the RL. It is scary to think that there is so much controversy between these two cars in regards to value, even after a pretty major redesign for the RL. It is even scarier to consider that at one time the 2004 RL sold along side with the 2004 TL. Trying to say that the 2004 RL was $10,000 better than the 2004 TL would be absolutely absurd. However, the issues of the old RL (lack of current luxury technology and power under the hood) have been addressed. But it almost seems that they haven't been addressed enough by the consistent tone that I am seeing. It is not common in the least to see a model refresh after one year on the market, but the 2006 RL seems to be a good candidate due to the stirring rumors on the 2006 TL. I am an advocate of thinking that these are two different cars by which the RL places more of its emphasis on ride quality and luxury than does the TL. This might not justify the $15K difference between the two cars. That is up to the buyer. In a similar comparison, the Lexus LS430 is not as sporty or as fast as the GS430, but it is about $10K more because of the fit and finish of the vehicle. That is what RL customers are paying for. Now I haven't riden in the new TL or the new RL, but I can only expect there to be a noticeable difference in ride quality and finish between the two cars.

    However, if you look at the market, we seem to be migrating toward a quicker, sportier populace. Forget about the horsepower war going on between sedans and coupes across the board. We are all too aware of that. But look at all of the luxury crossover vehicles either in the market or coming into the market (i.e. Infiniti FX45, Cadillac SRX, the soon to be Mercedes R-Class, and the upcoming BMW V5). This shows that our society wants high performance in vehicles that were not originally designed to be high performance (the SUV). That is what is killing the new RL. The luxury sedan market has become so performance competitive over the past 3-5 years, that the RL's boost in engine pep wasn't enough in the mind of luxury sport sedan minded customers to swing demand in the RL's favor. When it comes down to it, you cannot ignore the inevitable. Society wants more power, and they are willing to sacrifice a little luxury to get it. How else to do explain all of the luxury sedans beefing up the size of the wheels? 3-5 years ago the average wheel size on a vehicle in this segment was 16-17 inches. Now almost all of them come standard with 18" wheels. Less ride quality, more cornering. The RL's only saving grace is the fact that it is totally different from its predecesor, and that it provides a good blend of performance with a superior ride to keep the traditional luxury car driver satisfied.
  • frisconickfrisconick Posts: 1,275
    You make some excellent points, but there is no way the fit and finish in the RL is superior to the TL. That is not to demean the RL, but it just says how good the TL is in quality. The ride of the TL is sportier, and the RL is softer, that is the only difference between the two cars, and it's not a $10,000 difference.
  • mitchfloridamitchflorida Posts: 419
    I think the Infiniti M and Lexus GS are killing the Acura RL. The RL is doing poorly for such a new model. It really has very little going for it, to be honest.

    And Acura doesn't have the status of a Lexus of MB E Class . .barely up to the Infiniti at this point.
  • frisconickfrisconick Posts: 1,275
    I agree 100%, the RL is really lacking.
  • fdcapt2fdcapt2 Posts: 122
    I would have sworn that this forum had something to do with the upcoming TL. Hence, the title, "2006 Acura TL". Who cares about the RL and how much it costs, what about some input on what the topic is supposed to be, the 2006 Acura TL. I really find it amusing how some people totally ignore the topic, and go ahead and give a long winded story about nothing at all to do with the 2006 TL. Give it a rest and stick with the subject. :confuse:
  • dalls223dalls223 Posts: 41
    Wow, then I am appalled that Acura would have the courage to sell the RL for so much, if what you say is true. In my evaluation of the last generation RL and TL, I would have to say without a doubt that the RL's fit and finish were superior to the TL's. This comes as a huge surprise to me that the new generation RL's and TL's are on the same footing in this all important, differentiating category. However I cannot personally say, because I have riden in neither. I would have to agree that there wasn't a $10K difference between the last generation TL and RL, and there seems to be no doubt that there is a $13-15K difference between the new generation TL and RL. I am shocked if this is really true.
  • dalls223dalls223 Posts: 41
    Come on fdcapt2. Give me a break. The status of the current RL and its future has a lot to do with this forum because we are trying to see what the 2006 TL can get away with in its refresh. From what I am hearing, Acura should just discontinue the RL because there doesn't seem to be any reason to buy one over a TL, especially with such a gaping price difference between the two cars.

    What else can we possibly mention on the 2006 TL, especially with there only being rumors at this point? Side view mirror turn indicators, SH-AWD, and a boost in horsepower; that is about all that is feasible to assume the 2006 TL will have in addition to the 05' offering. I am not ignoring the topic, I am outlying the issues. The truth is, if they improve the 2006 TL too much, then there might not be an RL to discuss anymore. We are all just passing the time while we wait for the truth on the 06' TL. There is some good discussion going on here, wouldn't you agree?

    Not only that, but at least we are talking about Acuras again. Last week when I was on vacation all anybody wanted to talk about was how much the Lexus LS costs. I could see you getting heated over that. But we are talking about the landscape that is Acura. Without looking at the big picture, it is hard to evaluate all of the parts of that picture, especially when determining that which will be the 2006 TL. It is something that Honda/Acura are looking at too, I hope. Don't make the 2006 TL too much of a good thing, or it will alienate the RL even more so.
  • frisconickfrisconick Posts: 1,275
    Outstanding post!!! I have driven both cars and, from behind the wheel, the TL holds it's own easily regarding comfort and features, for thousands less. It's easily as roomy for the front seat passengers, not bad in the back seat. 280 hp and AWD, and the RL is toast, in fact the RL toaste now, the RL is not selling.
  • chabanaischabanais Posts: 4
    The RL was not moving because at its class level a majority of people are interested in leasing, not buying, their RL. Acura did not have a cheap enough lease to compete with BMW and Mercedes which heavily subsidize their leases so people will choose them.
  • bodble2bodble2 Posts: 4,519
    I'm not sure that's true. In fact, I think older folks tend to buy vs. lease. Also, in my neck of the woods, Mercedes has got some pretty damn high lease rates.
This discussion has been closed.