Howdy, Stranger!

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





Where is Honda taking Acura?

1232426282936

Comments

  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    330HP, 280 lb-ft, SH-AWD or RWD, 0-60 in 5.0 seconds, push-button start and fully loaded MSRP at $40K then I am trading in my IS350.

    Otherwise I'll hang on to it and see what Lexus is going to do with the next gen IS.
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,989
    Well if this TL, is a break through like this current generation was then my god the immagination can run wild as to what we might see. I was looking at 2005 TL's on autotrader and around here locally and OMG, it's ridiculous how much they are getting in resale for these cars with some high mileage on em'. :surprise:

    -Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,989
    I'm glad Honda still offers a manual with some Accords, as it has the best shifter of this whole midsize bunch.

    Well does the next TL, get a manual option or is the rumor DSG, make it's debut ????

    -Rocky
  • rv65rv65 Posts: 1,074
    09 Passat will get the new TouchScreen RNS-510 HDD Navigation system. It's quite nice IMO.
  • joe97joe97 Posts: 2,248
    I am sure this has been brought up previously, but RWD & V8 should have been offered on the Acrua line a while ago.

    And, it looks like Hyundai will have both well before they are launched on any Acura product. Shame on you Honda.
  • autoboy16autoboy16 Posts: 992
    A 3.6passat and i'm sold... But the new $36k price of entry is offsetting! I could get a TL for that price!

    I wonder if the TL will get honda's v6 diesel that will be used in the Odyssey?

    BMW has the 1series convertible/coupe coming over soon. Is the TSX closer to the 3 or the 1? Maybe acura will bring back an upscale RSX if the 1 does well! I hope to see come cabrio's in Acura's lineup soon!
  • carguy58carguy58 Posts: 2,303
    "BMW has the 1series convertible/coupe coming over soon."

    I don't know about BMW releasing a car like the 1 Series. I mean the 1 Series could bring the prestige down of the BMW brand and BMW better hope that the 1 Series isn't the next coming of the 318i.

    "BMW has the 1series convertible/coupe coming over soon. Is the TSX closer to the 3 or the 1? Maybe acura will bring back an upscale RSX if the 1 does well!"

    Everybody teased Acura because they had a car like the RSX in their line-up but now that BMW is getting the 1 Series in their line-up its all of a sudden ok if Acura has an RSX again? Thats crazy!
  • autoboy16autoboy16 Posts: 992
    I thought acura was crazed for getting rid of it!
  • carguy58carguy58 Posts: 2,303
    "I thought acura was crazed for getting rid of it! "

    I think you are in the minority in that you thought Acura was crazed for getting rid of the RSX because everybody wanted the RSX out of Acura's line-up. The RSX really doesn;t fit Acura's line-up anyway currently in my opinion.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    When Integra and Prelude were both around, I used to think that Prelude made more sense as an Acura than Integra (which would have made more sense as a Honda).

    RSX was doing little, and hurting Civic. With the new Civic Si, for being arguably a similar car but for thousands less (than Type-S), RSX's days were numbered anyway. Besides, Acura didn't need it for sales volume like it used to back in late 80s thru early 90s. Acura's bread and butter cars are now in the mid-30s to mid-40s price class (TL and MDX, which combine for almost 65% of all Acuras).

    What would make more sense is a coupe around TSX (but it would need power). And there would be the next Prelude. I see TSX as a 4-door Prelude, more practical with a little less sportiness.

    When it comes to sales, RDX is actually selling almost as well as the $10K cheaper RSX did, considering the price differential.
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    because everybody wanted the RSX out of Acura's line-up.

    Who's "everybody"?

    Admittedly, I have been critical of Acura for underachievement, especially as it relates to their so called "flagship" RL. No V8, no RWD and "super handling" it isn't, compared to a 5-series or other serious sports sedans. More recently, the only serious sports car to come out of the company was the HONDA S2000, which showcased more advanced engineering technology than anything in the Acura line-up, with the exception of the NSX.

    However, let's not forget that when Acura was born in 1986, they had two models. The Legend and the Integra.

    Frankly, I see more room in Acura's line-up for a seriously sporty and well engineered RSX than I do for the completely non-descript TSX. What the hell is that, anyway? An weak attempt at an overpriced 4 cylinder Accord for those that need an ego boost of owning an Acura instead of a Honda?

    Seriously, I do think over the last several years of it's life, the Integra/RSX devolved into a non-contributor to the Acura mission. However, I also think Acura management has been on an extended decade long lunch break when it comes to defining the Acura "mission". They seem content to use the brand to simply add a few more models to Honda's lineup, without really pushing the envelope that they did with the 1990 NSX or Honda did ten years later with the S2000.

    So, if "everybody" wanted the RSX out of the Acura line-up, add my name to the list of those that want the TSX out as well. And more importantly, to the list that want the RL to be redesigned and re-engineered to be a serious flagship. AS it is, the RL doesn't even make it to the level of Lexus second mate (the GS) and sells at huge discounts because of such underachievement. It is so far behind the 5-series (and even E class) in performance and appeal as to have absolutely meaningless sales in the luxury sedan segment. Even the last RSX did not so severely embarass itself vis a vis the competition.

    P.S. The Prelude? Born as a chick car. Died as a chick car. If you happened to be a male that was impressed somewhere in between, bite your tongue. Not something you want on your resume.
  • carguy58carguy58 Posts: 2,303
    "Frankly, I see more room in Acura's line-up for a seriously sporty and well engineered RSX than I do for the completely non-descript TSX. What the hell is that, anyway? An weak attempt at an overpriced 4 cylinder Accord for those that need an ego boost of owning an Acura instead of a Honda?"

    Now we are hearing the RSX should be put into Acura's line-up. Ok. As far the TSX is concerned there is no room in a Honda's dealers lot/line-up for it. I mean the TSX sells good so why would you want to canel a car that is selling good? It makes no sense. The main reason why the TSX was put in the NA market in the first place was because of smaller mid-size sedans on the market in 2003-2004 with the Mazda 6 and Subie Legacy Honda probably thought there were going to lose alot of sales to those 2 cars so that was the prime reason for putting the TSX into Acura;s line-up. I should also add the TSX makes a good Audi A4 competitor too. The TSX is not even based on the NA Accord. Its a different car than the NA Accord.

    "P.S. The Prelude? Born as a chick car. Died as a chick car. If you happened to be a male that was impressed somewhere in between, bite your tongue. Not something you want on your resume."

    The Prelude died because the price went up on the car way too much too where young people couldn't afford it anymore. The shoukd also add interior in the 2001 Prelude looks old like something out of 1991 as well which is definately not a good thing. I don;t see why a certain audience bought the Prelude is a big deal to you anyway. So what alot of women own BMW"s I guess BMW's are chick cars too.

    "And more importantly, to the list that want the RL to be redesigned and re-engineered to be a serious flagship. AS it is, the RL doesn't even make it to the level of Lexus second mate (the GS) and sells at huge discounts because of such underachievement. It is so far behind the 5-series (and even E class) in performance and appeal as to have absolutely meaningless sales in the luxury sedan segment. Even the last RSX did not so severely embarass itself vis a vis the competition."

    Well I think the RL is a good competitor to the GS plus the GS doesn;'t have good headroom. I agree with you though the RL does not match the 5 Series and Mercedes though.

    "Even the last RSX did not so severely embarass itself vis a vis the competition."

    Well what did the last RSX compete with the 2000 Eclipse which is a car that gen 1(90-94) and 2(95-99) Eclipse owners despise and the RSX competed with the Celica and the 00-05 Celica didn;t sell well in the long run.

    "They seem content to use the brand to simply add a few more models to Honda's lineup, without really pushing the envelope that they did with the 1990 NSX or Honda did ten years later with the S2000."

    You seems to like sports car alot. Let it me it this way Acura currently is not Mitsubishi or even Mazda or Subie here. The NSX and S2000 are niche models those 2 cars aren;t going to sell alot of copies like the TL is.
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    Don't get me wrong, I'm not really advocating that the RSX should be brought back. What I am advocating is that Acura needs a stronger mission than simply to add more shelf space to its sales platform for Honda products.

    And although I am a bit sports car oriented, that wasn't the point. As an owner of a 911, I can still recommend a Honda S2000 as a serious competitor to the Boxster. But for performance and driving dynamics, I cannot recommend the RL be considered alongside a 550i or E500.

    I am not a Lexus fan, but I am willing to give them credit where it is due. The LS460 is, for the luxury buyer, an S class competitor. Maybe not my choice, but certainly for some. Even Infiniti, with their bipolar management, threw up a large luxury sedan competitor with the Q45. Didn't fare well because of Infiniti's horrific marketing and general discombobulation. But at least they were on the playing field.

    Why is Acura such an underachiever? Honda, in my opinion, puts out as good or better vehicles as Toyota or Nissan. And Acura puts out decent vehicles, but seems willing to play in moderate to upper Honda territory rather than aspire to the same "premium" level that Lexus has succeeded in.

    Am I being selfish? You bet. Lexus gives a C, E or S class Mercedes buyer something to cross shop against, with the ES, GS, and LS. What does Acura give me to consider in lieu of a 3-series, 5-series, 7-series? I bought a 2004 TL 6-speed, but have to put up with FWD that is hardly in the same league as 3-series handling. If I was in the 5-series market, nothing. Ditto for the 7-series, although I hope to stay away from that freighter sized vehicle. It seems like Acura is pissing away an opportunity to give us well engineered, reliable Japanese sport sedan alternatives to BMW in the same way Lexus gives us luxury (but rather boring to drive) alternatives to Mercedes.

    That, to me, is the essence of Acura's dilemma. Not whether or not the RSX was an appropriate model in their line-up. But rather, what is their mission, their strategy, their passion? Becasue right now, it really doesn't look like they have much of one, compared to what one would expect from a "premium" brand. You certainly wouldn't look at any Acura products and conclude "There is no substitute". ;)
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,693
    Say it again, habitat! They should have sold only the type-S RSX beginning in '02, and then it could still be part of the line-up today. Think about it, what is this proposed CSX going to do? Compete comfortably against Honda's own Accord coupe? And stuff like the G6? What's the point? By contrast, the 1-series coupe will be a performance car, for about the same money or not much more.

    When they finally bring the new NSX out, is it going to be the only sport coupe in the Acura line-up? I wish they would bring the RSX-S back, instead of selling a 2-door trim of one of the larger less sporty sedans. Horse it up by 25 hp or so, make sure the fantastic handling is fully intact and it remains relatively light, give it a leather interior and one or two of the niceties that the more expensive sedans get, and it would sell like gangbusters at $25K and put BMW's 1-coupe right out of business.

    Make that the anchor of a LINE of Acura sport coupes, with a hardtop version of the S2000 as the next model higher, priced at $35K or so, and bumped up in power and equipment from the Honda version.

    Meanwhile the TSX and RL are truly underwhelming for their respective price points. And the TL-S is pretty amazing but at close to $40 grand it is pushing it. What has happened to Acura? Add my name to your list: I never wanted the RSX out, and I do want the TSX out. Sell the TSX as a Honda for $22K, and I would be more interested. It just dilutes the Acura name.

    And rocky: I bet the next-gen TL won't have an available stick shift at all. Not if their version of DSG is ready to go. And more's the pity. :-(

    2013 Civic SI, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (stick)

  • carguy58carguy58 Posts: 2,303
    "Sell the TSX as a Honda for $22K, and I would be more interested. It just dilutes the Acura name."

    I agree the TSx is overpriced I mean I spent 28,500 on a 02 CL base and the CL gave you alot more value for your money than the TSX does now. Like I said before the TSX has sold well but to me its overpriced. I just bought a Mazda 6i sport value edition like a month ago because the TSX was too much money and the 07 Accord was boring looking. I don't think the TSx dilutes the Acura name I mean if thats the case than the 1 Series dilutes BMW's name. People were saying the same thing about the RSX that it dilutes the Acura name now you want it back. Ok.

    "wish they would bring the RSX-S back, instead of selling a 2-door trim of one of the larger less sporty sedans. Horse it up by 25 hp or so, make sure the fantastic handling is fully intact and it remains relatively light, give it a leather interior and one or two of the niceties that the more expensive sedans"

    Didn;t the 02-06 RSX-S already have a leather interior in it that came as standard equipment?

    "and it would sell like gangbusters at $25K and put BMW's 1-coupe right out of business."

    Man, when that 1 Series comes out it might put a thorn into both Mazda's and Honda's side and maybe into VW's a little bit too if BMW plays the card's right. I am a hardcore Mazda and Honda/Acura fan too. I would never consider a 1 Series though probably because it has too little amount of headroom for me just like the 99-05 3 Series did proabably. The 99-05 3 Series felt like I was sitting in a supcompact but BMW did improve the headroom on the 06 3 Series to where its too my liking now.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    RL is not meant to be a super handler. Its purpose is to be a luxury car that offers a combination of sport (achieved via SH-AWD) and comfort (softer ride tuning). The only downside to that car is in terms of exterior styling which doesn’t stand out much (needed at this time since Acura is trying to build a name, so it can’t get away with a laid back styling exercise), mating the potent engine with the right set of cogs and better marketing approach. It is not a car that will sell on name alone, or even virtues unless it stands out.

    TL and MDX are Acura’s bread and butter vehicles. I like them both. RDX is, at the moment, playing in a niche segment and has a lot of room to grow.

    I see more room in Acura's line-up for a seriously sporty and well engineered RSX than I do for the completely non-descript TSX. What the hell is that, anyway? An weak attempt at an overpriced 4 cylinder Accord for those that need an ego boost of owning an Acura instead of a Honda?

    Only in America would someone have an issue with 205 HP four cylinder engine. It is what it is, Acura’s entry level sedan with a touch of sportiness. It is something Vigor/2.5TL should have been.

    Overpriced? I don’t think so, considering how much one ends up paying for comparably loaded BMW 3-series and Lexus IS, two cars with similar size and orientation. If we take away “ego” aspect from owning cars, companies like BMW and Mercedes would be out of business.

    That said, I don’t see how RSX would be a better choice over TSX. Not at all! In fact, RSX should compliment TSX and in fact, if the rumors stand, as such or as TSX Coupe.

    The Prelude? Born as a chick car. Died as a chick car. If you happened to be a male that was impressed somewhere in between, bite your tongue. Not something you want on your resume.

    Interesting suggestion, but I never saw Prelude as a chick car. Regardless, I have absolutely no issue putting it on my resume. It was what TSX is, but with less luxury and utility but better performance. Now if you really worry about being seen in cars that females love to drive, look no further than BMW 3-series and Mercedes C-class. I see more men driving Mini than I see them driving 3-series/C240.

    It seems like Acura is pissing away an opportunity to give us well engineered, sport sedan alternatives to BMW in the same way Lexus gives us luxury (but rather boring to drive) alternatives to Mercedes.

    I would agree with that. Honda seems overly content in maintaining status quo for Acura brand and that hurts building an image but largely among folks who buy luxury brands for ego. So, Acura needs to build upon that aspect, and do something to attract that larger chunk of buyers (mostly leasers) in the segment. The company has a lot of potential that has gone unused.
    I say, bring on a revised CSX as entry level sedan, have RSX as the coupe version, move TSX to just below where TL sits right now, and these three could share platform with Honda lineup (Civic and Accord , respectively).

    TL should be a midsize luxury car, from just under $40K to upper 40s. And RL should be a full sized luxury car beginning from the point, TL leaves off, and the two share a new chassis. Squeeze in a CL on the same chassis, which becomes Acura’s representative in GT coupe market. Let the true NSX sit on top.

    RDX needs a few tweaks, MDX would be fine with evolutionary improvements. And that’s the Acura I want to see.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    I never wanted the RSX out, and I do want the TSX out. Sell the TSX as a Honda for $22K, and I would be more interested. It just dilutes the Acura name.

    Thats interesting. RSX is what was diluting the name. TSX is where TL was, when Acura's revival program began in 1999. For $22K, you couldn't find a Civic w/leather, much less a TSX (unless stripped is the way to go for an "attractive" base price, but that will be too Lexusy).
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    RL is not meant to be a super handler. Its purpose is to be a luxury car that offers a combination of sport (achieved via SH-AWD) and comfort (softer ride tuning). The only downside to that car is in terms of exterior styling which doesn’t stand out much (needed at this time since Acura is trying to build a name, so it can’t get away with a laid back styling exercise), mating the potent engine with the right set of cogs and better marketing approach. It is not a car that will sell on name alone, or even virtues unless it stands out.

    If the RL wasn't meant to be performance oriented, perhaps you should have been in charge of their initial marketing campaign. Remember the TV ads showing the car winding through BMW style Bavaraian forests with the narrator gushing over "super handling, AWD" and "300 hp". Well, as it turns out, the "super handling" isn't close to "super" and the overly ambitious 300 hp is actually the most "impotent" 290 hp I've ever experienced. Perhaps because it's attached to a car that weighs over two tons. But even the 258 hp in my TL must be measured using Shetland Ponies compared to Porsche's Clydesdales. IMO the styling of the RL isn't the problem. It overpromised and underdelivered the substance.

    And frankly, I question whether we really need one more "luxury car that offers a (lame) combination of (quasi-)sport and comfort"? That describes EVERY competitor in the segment - E class, Jaguar S, Volvo S80, A6, Lexus GS, etc., etc. About the only car in that segment that doesn't put you to sleep behind the wheel is the 5-series - especially the 535i or 550i with 6-speed manual transmissions and sport packages. Personally, I think Acura should compete in the less crowded segment of the market.

    Overpriced? I don’t think so, considering how much one ends up paying for comparably loaded BMW 3-series and Lexus IS, two cars with similar size and orientation. If we take away “ego” aspect from owning cars, companies like BMW and Mercedes would be out of business.

    You have got to be kidding, right? In 2004, I went with a TL 6-speed instead of a 330i to save money and get a slightly more family friendly rear seat. But in a million years, I wouldn't claim the FWD 6-sylinder TL didn't give up a boatload of handling and sport to the 3 series. The 4 cylinder TSX has far more in common with a Honda Civic than anything by BMW. That's not a bad thing, it's just reality. And I think the "ego" issue needs re-examining. The Acura, Lexus and Infiniti brands were developed to sell "image". As in charging $7,000 more for an MDX than a Pilot to get about $1,500 worth of goodies. To this day, I have never owned a BMW, but if I did, it would be based upon performance and handling that is not available from the competition. That's not ego, that's substance. Good for Acura that after 15 years, they went from selling rebadged Isuzu Troopers to rebadged Honda Pilots to finally developing a ground up MDX. But they sure took their good old time about it.

    My comment regarding the Prelude was a meaningless digression. But at the time that Mazda had an RX8, Toyota had a Supra and Nissan had a 300Z, the Prelude was hardly a sports car player. It's unfortunate that, with as much engineering prowess as Honda/Acura have developed from their Formula One success, they are stuck on FWD, obese SH-AWD, and less than impressive performance in their mainstream cars (i.e. not the S2000/NSX).

    And all of this by someone who currently has a 2004 TL 6-speed and 2005 MDX in their garage and has never owned a BMW. Call it tough love, but as much as I obviously like Acura, they could be better. Way better.
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,693
    IMO diluting the name is not about a price point, but about trying to pass off cheaper products as worthy of the name. That is where the old 318ti got in trouble, at least in the eyes of the press: it was relatively slow, it wasn't particularly luxurious or sporty, and as such it didn't have the traits that the BMW name stands for.

    OK, so what does the Acura name stand for? Am I wrong in thinking it is the upscale brand of a company known for sport and for attention to detail in the engineering department? As such, the RSX-S represented the brand much better than the TSX does.

    As for your "$22K" remarks, I'm not sure I follow, but I believe you CAN for '08 get a Civic with leather for $22K. Isn't that right? So sell the TSX, a larger but still "sporting" model, with cloth and a Honda badge for $22K and I think you may have a winner, albeit low-volume and catering to a niche of course. TSX does have the moves to be sporty enough to differentiate itself from the Accord and the non-SI Civics. A tweener model with a tweener price. I bet they would sell 20K per year, without diluting the Acura name in the process.

    2013 Civic SI, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (stick)

  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    There is only one car in Acura line up right now that the company has chosen to use the “S” letter, and that is TSX. And that is the only car I truly associate sportiness with in the Acura lineup. As for RL, whoever told you it was meant to be a sport sedan, was really playing with you. But that doesn’t mean it can’t rip the curves. It can, and does so admirably for its orientation, and that comes entirely from SH-AWD.

    As for 290 HP or 300 HP, most people are like you. They don’t look beyond the engine. I did mention this in my previous post. The engine is potent, the set of cogs that are mated to it aren’t. Put those cogs in a BMW and you will definitely see my point. Weight isn’t a big issue either. In these discussions around horsepower, a lot of facts are easier to be overlooked than be considered.

    The 4 cylinder TSX has far more in common with a Honda Civic than anything by BMW. That's not a bad thing, it's just reality.

    And you felt the need to say that. Back around 2000, BMW felt the need to make a few changes, and that included a drop in pricing (and ridding itself of four banger engines). I would like you to take a guess. How is it that Acura and Audi have managed to thrive with that choice of engines, and BMW couldn’t? THAT is the reality.

    And I think the "ego" issue needs re-examining. The Acura, Lexus and Infiniti brands were developed to sell "image".

    Like I said earlier, take away ego, and likes of BMW and Mercedes will be out of business. And you’re right, the same prompted creation of Acura, Lexus and Infiniti, to woo those folks with ego issues that kept dismissing mainstream brands. Only one of them has succeeded though, to keep up with (and in some cases, exceed) BMW and Mercedes and that is Lexus.

    My comment regarding the Prelude was a meaningless digression. But at the time that Mazda had an RX8, Toyota had a Supra and Nissan had a 300Z, the Prelude was hardly a sports car player.

    Prelude was never a sports car. It wasn’t as expensive as those three cars you mentioned, either. It started its life as a sports coupe, based on the Accord. At the time it was launched, Accord was available only in three door hatch and four door sedan.

    In the late 90s, the coupe market was shrinking, but Honda had Prelude and Accord, along with Integra, selling in low to mid 20s. That’s a lot of cars to sell. Prelude had become redundant (coupled to recession in Japan in the mid-90s, which almost killed Nissan), Accord Coupe was here with a more attractive and distinctive styling. There was no point in selling more vehicles in a niche market.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,255
    Re your message #779, above, "...for performance and driving dynamics, I cannot recommend the RL be considered alongside a 550i or E500."

    While your conclusion might remain the same, I think it would be more proper to compare the RL to the E350 than to the V8 E Series, given the relative prices.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    the RSX-S represented the brand much better than the TSX does.

    How so? What does RSX-S do that Civic Si doesn’t? It doesn’t exist for that reason. For RSX to succeed, it will have to stop competing with Civic, be better than Accord coupe (not necessarily power) and be like TSX. And if it were to be that, at the minimum, we’re looking at RSX to be a “Prelude-like” coupe, as opposed to Integra-like. And that has to be an important consideration for “Acura”.

    I believe you CAN for '08 get a Civic with leather for $22K. Isn't that right? So sell the TSX, a larger but still "sporting" model, with cloth and a Honda badge for $22K

    TSX is based on global midsize platform. So, even if Honda were to sell it stripped, it would cost almost as much as Accord does. And at this point a stripped Honda (Accord) includes virtually everything that a person needs. Gone are the days when they came with roll up windows and optional AC. As a result, for $22K, you would be looking at Accord LX-P like sedan but with smaller size, almost comparable to Civic except for additional power. I simply don’t see anything but redundancy.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    If he is thinking RL and thinking 5-series/E-class with no less than a V8, it seems there is more to the picture. For starters, neither of those cars cost anywhere close to RL.
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,693
    Well, I can see that your thinking is in lockstep with the folks that actually run Acura, eh?!

    Car sales are down 30% at Acura for the first 9 months of the year, compared with last year. The overall market is down less than 3%, some luxury makes are up. This way of thinking may be bad for the health of the brand...

    Of course, they are becoming real good at selling trucks, up 50% for the year. Is that what we have to look forward to at Acura? Count me out... :sick:

    RSX has ALWAYS been "better than Accord coupe", and if it were more like TSX it would be several steps backward for that model.

    2013 Civic SI, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (stick)

  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    Acura down 30% is not due to an incompetent lineup, it is due to an aging lineup. Both TL and TSX are into their final years. Starting 2008 Acura should look good once again with the new TSX and follow by the TL and possibly a coupe version for both. Acura is in maintaining mode this year so nothing to worry about yet.

    As for the late heated discussion of the RSX I have to say that Acura has made a right decision. To compare the RSX-S with the upcoming 1-series is an apple to orange comparison. 1-series will be a RWD coupe packing with 230+ HP and sharp handling. To call it a 2002 successor maybe an over stretch but it'll definitely be a top notch performance. The RSX-S on the other hand is a... urg... Civic Si with Acura badges. Honda is smart to remove the RSX from the Acura lineup because they know the main competitor for it will be its own Civic Si.

    IMO, if Acura wants to be a successful luxury brand they should focus on making RWD (at least SH-AWD) sport-oriented luxury cars. Leave Honda to conquer the small, FWD sporty coupe market. As for TSX, with SH-AWD it should be a great entry level sedan for Acura. Honda doesn't need another sedan to steal sales from its own Civic and Accord.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    I'm not sure where you are (now) going with sales percentages, but as already noted, TSX and TL are in their fifth year, and about to be replaced. Unlike most, Acura usually does very little to change its cars. Another reason might be that few people seem to lease Acuras, at least based on the fact that Acura's lease deals suck.

    Another point you have missed completely is that while focusing on car sales and calculating percentages of, there is another vehicle Acura brought in as it phased RSX out. This isn't to suggest that Acura replaced RSX with RDX, but sold 17K units of RDX in first nine months (which add to truck sales) while RSX is gone (sold 15K units in first nine months last year).

    And there is a reason RSX is gone. It wasn't good enough. Not only that, it was also holding Civic down. Its gone, replaced by Civic Si, a similar car but for thousands less. Thats the reality.

    Say what you want about TSX, but Acura didn't expect that car to sell as well as it did. Initial projections were only 15K/year. The car averaged 35-40K units/year. Thats half of Audi's total sales (and about as many A4 Audi sells/year).
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    As for RL, whoever told you it was meant to be a sport sedan, was really playing with you. But that doesn’t mean it can’t rip the curves. It can, and does so admirably for its orientation, and that comes entirely from SH-AWD.

    Good grief, I have to ask, have you ever actually driven an RL? I have, on several 1-2 day occassions and extensively enough to know that it doesn't "rip the cures" as well as my lighter weight FWD, sport suspension TL 6-speed, let alone a RWD 5 series of any engine option.

    The engine is potent, the set of cogs that are mated to it aren’t. Put those cogs in a BMW and you will definitely see my point. Weight isn’t a big issue either.

    Excuse me again. Two tons+ isn't an issue with a 3.5 liter V6? That's 200 lbs more than the former 545i V8, a quarter ton more than the 530i and a bowling ball or two more than the former 400hp M5. For a car that is barely (if at all) bigger than a TL inside. Obesity has run rampant and Audi is especially guilty, but the RL may be the king of that hill. As far as a potent engine with lousy gearing as the excuse for anemic performance? First, IMO the engine isn't that "potent". Even at the lower restated horspeower rating, I think some of those horses are sick or missing. But apologizing for crappy gearing in their slushbox? This is the same company that eeked 240 hp out of 2.0 liters and a short throw 6-speed manual gearbox that was acclaimed by many as the best on the planet. If Acura engineers can't figure out how to gear the RL properly, or better yet offer a 6-speed manual or DSG option, they should be castrated. And maybe the old Legend GS engineers should be brought back. Or how about those HONDA S2000 engineers. They know what they are doing.

    As for "who" told me the RL was meant to be a sport sedan, well that would be ACURA, with their intial advertising and marketing campaign. Not to worry, I soon found out for myself that they were more than a little ambitious in their self promotion. But even today, look through an RL sales brochure compared to a BMW 5-series one. You can see for yourself that Acura is fairly dilusional in their continued promotion of the RL as a serious performance sedan. BMW is much more conservative in flexing it's muscle. Independent road tests continue to show they exceed their own stated performance projections. On the opposite side, no car company had to restate horsepower ratings across the board as extensively as Honda/Acura a couple of years ago when it was determined they were being a bit too generous with their self calculated figures.

    Like I said earlier, take away ego, and likes of BMW and Mercedes will be out of business.

    I guess anyone who can afford a $30-50k+ car is an ego oriented buyer in your book? I distinguish between image and substance. I've owned a Honda S2000 and currently a 911S. Purely on substance, both times. And I wouldn't have paid a nickle more for the S2000 if it came with an Acura label. BMW, Mercedes, Porsche, etc. don't have two labels. Honda/Acura, Nissan/Infiniti and Toyota/Lexus do. There are absolutely ego buyers in all the luxury brands, but the Japanese are masters at caterring to that propensity, sometimes at the expense of thinking the substance doesn't matter as much.

    P.S. I am 95% certain the original Prelude was based upon the Civic chassis, not the Accord. Another meaningless digression, but just for the record. I'm too lazy to check it out, but if you do and I'm wrong, I'll send you a couplon for a free lunch.
  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    Habitat, old buddy, the term "sports sedan" seems to have a broader definition these days. Also, maybe your definition of "sports sedan" does not quiet match with Acura's, that's a possibility. No? A homeless guy will look at me and call me rich but I'll look at you then call you rich. You probably will have to look at someone like Bill Gates in order to define the term "rich". IMO, it's all comparative, same goes for "sports sedan". Acura didn't break its promise, they were just not on the same page as you.

    Personally I wouldn't knock on Acura if Saturn is currently calling its Aura as a "sports sedan". :surprise:
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    RL's ride quality is better than TL and 5-series. And while it is no sport sedan, you would be in denial to assume that the car can't handle curves with aplomb at high speeds. You do have issues with Acura's ad showing RL carving the mountains, right? Instead of working with my opinion or mine, let me quote C&D from a comparison "Spoilsport Sedans" in which RL finished second behind M45/Sport: “Nimble Handling, Strong High RPM thrust, Comfy Ride”

    It ain't no sport sedan, but to say it can't handle at speeds, well, is purely your opinion. Its suspension is indeed tuned softer than TL, which itself is tuned softer than TSX. So, Acura went for progression from TSX to TL to RL. Still, RL is no slouch with SH-AWD.

    Two tons+ isn't an issue with a 3.5 liter V6?

    You clearly didn't get my point on "cogs". So, let me ask, do you understand the impact of transmission ratios on performance? If you "skip" transmission like you have, then consider this. RL might weigh 10% more than a BMW 528i (or 530i, if you prefer), but it has 28-30% more torque. So, things are not as gloomy as you perceive them to be.

    One of the few things Acura didn't do right was using tall and wide ratio transmission on RL. "Tall" reduces thrust (but adds speed in each gear), so the feel is not as strong at lower rpm. But once the car is rolling, this becomes less of an issue, a reason people will complain about off the line performance in RL (and they do in MDX too, for same reason), but don't so much, at speed.

    When "right" cogs are selected, a 3.5 liter engine with similar power can create a different perception. Much like this...

    It’ll take a finely calibrated backside to feel the difference between the new STS V-6 and the optional 320-hp V-8 model, which last year came bundled with several features and as a result cost about $9500 more. The two now share the same six-speed automatic transmission, and the acceleration times are within a few ticks of each other. The V-6 scoots to 60 mph in 6.2 seconds, behind the V-8 by only 0.2 second.

    And note that STS is actually heavier than RL. The 6AT really helped it mask the fact that the engine isn't a 4.6/V8, but almost 22% smaller. Thats the reality most miss, and you did too.

    In case of BMW, transmission ratios have been the long time friend. Don't believe me? Let me know, so I can show it to you. That is how even the lousy 200 lb-ft in 3600 lb 528i can create an impression. This is one major area Acura seems to overlook for whatever reason.

    I guess anyone who can afford a $30-50k+ car is an ego oriented buyer in your book?

    I thought I was clear enough that not all. But, if you want to see it that way...

    If you got in touch with more than a few folks who drive BMWs and Mercedes, you will know that there are plenty of folks who are buying those cars for namesake.


    BMW, Mercedes, Porsche, etc. don't have two labels.


    Why do you have a problem with labels? Besides, BMW and Mercedes do it differently. It is not that BMW has only sold BMWs. Where does Mini (and in the past, Rover) come from? How about Dodge, Chrysler and Mercedes associations? Someone who wants to argue against ego, should be looking at cars, not labels.

    I am 95% certain the original Prelude was based upon the Civic chassis, not the Accord.

    The 5% of you is right. Accord was a tiny car (about the size of Fit but with 3-doors, although 4-door was added with its launch in the USA). Prelude was the 2-door version of the same, but with 1.8-liter version of the 1.6 in Accord, only slightly smaller than the Accord (much like Accord Coupe is to sedan today).

    Civic was almost 1.5 feet shorter (Imagine Fit, and take 15" off it).
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    You'd make a great marketing spokesperson for Acura with your articulate enthusiasm for the RL. But you still forgot to answer my question, how much time have you actually spent behind the wheel? I respect that our opinions regarding the RL may vary, but mine is from serious seat time in the car. I hope you aren't simply reading road tests and marketing brochures and forming your opinion from a casual test drive or two around the block.

    I had no trouble understanding your explantion of Acura's odd choice of transmission gearing. But at an MSRP of $50k, I don't want excuses - and your apparent apathy for this engineering screw up is weak. The acceleration of the RL off the line is anemic, period. With the gas pedal pushed to the floor, it is barely capable of 0-60 acceleration in the low to mid 7 second range. That's a full rung down from my 1995 Nissan Maxima and a second rung down from my TL 6-speed. Not to mention a rung down from the less powerful (on paper) former BMW 530i 6-speed. It's on a completely different ladder than the new 535i. I'm not asking the RL to tempt me out of my 911, but this is hardly "flagship" performance by even the most liberal definition. The combination of a 2-ton curb weignt, V6 only engine option and slushbox only transmission option is just not cutting it.

    As for further evidence of the weight issue, the RL gets horrific gas mileage, considering its performance. I averaged less than 25 mpg on an often traveled 300 mile highway trip that my TL averages 30+, my 911 averages 27+ and even our loaded up MDX has hit 24+ on a good day.

    I can make a similar case regarding handling, although that requires even more subjective opinions on steering feedback, braking feel, nimbleness in transitions, etc. If you really think the RL handles high speed curves with "aplomb", good for you. I'd rank it slightly above the equally obese A6 Quattro, but below just about everything else in that segment (E, 5, M35, perhaps even the new GS, but don't tell louiswei).

    On the positive side, I will say this, I'd rather be in the passenger seat of an RL than a TL. Perhaps even a 5 series or E-class. It's a very attractive and comfortable riding car, with lot's of do-dads to play with from that seat. When my wife was driving it, I enjoyed being a passenger. Unfortunately for Acura, I don't buy a car to spend time in the passenger seat.

    Lastly, if I'm so far off base with my assessment, why can't Acura give the cars away, even offering $7,000 discounts? The car is only 3 years old. The S2000 still had a waiting list after 4-5 years and as a "niche" car, sold nearly as many units annually as Acuras's mainstream flagship. Clearly you understand where I'm coming from on that fact??
Sign In or Register to comment.