Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
Comments
FWD will survive because:
1. It's the cheapest and there is always a market for the cheapest.
2. Economy cars don't need much more than 200HP where torque steer is not an issue.
3. Works in both snow and non-snow states.
RWD will survive because:
1. Enthusiasts love RWD and there are enough of them that the market will provide it. AWD may have better traction, but it's fun to hit a turn, spin out the back, and then accelerate to straighten out. Can only do that in a RWD car.
2. Non-snow states don't need AWD traction, so they'll save the $ and gas $ by going with just RWD. For example, everyone I know who got a new truck/SUV recently took the RWD version over the AWD version b/c they don't need AWD in Cal.
I said that they were wounded or dying not dead YET. And, like you, I doubt they will totally become extinct. But, the point is that all the car companies have an AWD strategy or at least ONE AWD car already on the market with more planned.
Like soil erosion or the deforestation of the Amazon it (the encroachment, so to speak, of AWD) continues unabated. One of the key reasons however is a point with which you and I appear to disagree.
You said:
"1. Enthusiasts love RWD and there are enough of them that the market will provide it. AWD may have better traction, but it's fun to hit a turn, spin out the back, and then accelerate to straighten out. Can only do that in a RWD car."
I agree enthusiasts do love RWD but they also love stick shifts and I think, like sticks are morphing into automatics that TWD will (and already is, in fact) morphing into AWD -- ESPECIALLY for thos who love performance. Yes, AWD does have better traction and it is fun to hit a turn and (with ESP turned off) kick out the tail, floor the car at the apex and have both the front and the rear wheels pull and push the car through the turn faster and under greater control than could ever happen in an RWD car.
I have been, in a current generation Audi, to four high performance driving schools in Seefeld Austria and steering with the throttle is not only possible but emminently doable -- and I said with the current generation Audis which, as you probably know are shall we say nose heavy. The push of the front wheels further to the front, as in the new A6 for example (and soon to be in the A4) will only make the quattro equipped cars better balanced. Moreover, many of the cars, such as Audi are pressing for something less than 50 50 torque split (the current Audis are 50 50 torque split, the future ones will be, perhaps 40 60, etc).
A complaint or critique I have read here about AWD says something like many AWD cars are derived from [failed] FWD cars and that the addition of the two rear wheels being driven makes them better balanced but they are still fundamentally "wrong" since they started life out as FWD.
This point, does have some merit -- Volvo, for example puts 95% of its torque to the front wheels of their otherwise contender car the S60 Type R -- one can only wonder "what were they thinking?"
I have READ that Acura's new SH AWD does not have 50 50 torque split, but rather 90 10 -- which again begs the question "what were they thinking?"
At least, so the argument goes, 50 50 torque split with either electronic or torque sensing torque shift capabilities could be argued to be "a reasoned compromise" -- Mercedes and Chrysler, go figure, are doing 38 62 split and I believe that BMW is 40 60. Of course it would seem that even 45 55 would be a giant step in the right direction for Volvo and Acura for example. Audi has already indicated its intention to split the torque somnething less than 50 50, most likely 40 60 would be the "insider's" bet on that.
But Audi has remained a stalwart on AWD for so long and has had the ability to use its quattro system to differentiate itself from BMW and Mercedes -- but NOW that both the other German Giants have pledged "all" models will have AWD "available" or "standard" even Audi is caving into the pressure to balance the weight distribution better and bias the AWD system so that in, in stasis mode, so to speak, will have a bit more of the power directed at the rear wheels than at the front. One can only hope and imagine that Acura and Volvo will soon follow in similar tiretreads.
SH AWD buys Acura a couple of years, I should think -- and there will not be too much made, by Acrua, of the 90 10 torque split (even though they will argue that "most of the available torque will go where it's needed -- instantly.")
The main point is/was, to politely dispute that AWD can't "wag its tail." I am living proof that it not only can, but when it does it leaves its RWD couterparts at the apex of the curve looking at tailights and dust.
Would I gain any points with you if I mentioned that I have never, ever owned an automatic. Neither has my wife. And we are both over 45. My 6 year old daughter mastered the 1-2 shift from the passenger side of my S2000 before I traded it a few weeks ago for the TL 6-speed.
You make some good points, but I have to say that I subjectively disagree with you regarding AWD replacing RWD as MY setup of choice for a sport sedan or sports car. I am already displeased that so many so called sports cars weigh as much or more than my 1995 Nissan Maxima. The Audi TT Quatro is juat a joke (and pig) compared to my former S2000. Whether the AWD system adds 100, 200 or 300 lbs to the weight of the car, it's only justification in my opinion is if you want to drive in inclement weather. Mercedes has 4-matic on just about every model. AMG doesn't have it on any models. Same with BMW vs. Motorsport.
So adding weight to the car is my enemy, unless it provides a significant benefit. If I wanted my sport sedan to mush through Ohio or Penssylvania winters, I might consider taking a 330ix over a 330i. But if I wanted a real sport coupe, there is no way I would ever take the bloated 3,825+ lb S4 over the nimble 3,400 lb M3 and I have driven both. There are other opinions out there, but I'm just giving you mine.
salbaby,
I bit my tongue once, then twice then three times. Now you forced me to speak up. I respect that some folks out there may want to think a Subaru is a poor man's M5 and that Subaru is on the verge of taking Formula 1 by storm. But at least for me, a Subaru is a Subaru. And it could go from 0-100 in under 5 seconds, but I'd have to be both poor and blind to get into one. And then I wouldn't be allowed to drive anyway. There must be another forum you can sneak your Subaru plugs in that would be more receptive than an Acura forum, no??
Try the News & Views board for those conversations - there are some really good discussions going on over there about these very things.
But we are entitle to our opinions... Right? I'm glad the traded in your S2000 for the TL. The TL is at least a more masculine car. I for one wouldn't be caught dead in a S2000 or any other car that girls call "cute".
Umm.. kind of hard to think of the TL as masculine.... I just don't see it.
regards,
kyfdx
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
"Fun to drive" Subarus fall into that category right, any auto enthusiasts knows that. When an Forester XT smokes a 03 V6 Accord in AutoX, it makes you think. Right?
TL is marketed as masculine, "aggressive styling, 270 hp" etc... No soft line like Audis.
I am considering a TL and 05 Legacy GT and like what the people here post about the TL.
My point was that I doubt most buyers - you may be the exception - stay awake at night trying to decide between a Subaru Legacy and an Acura TL. And, I suspect, most TL buyers aren't too self conscious about their masculinity (or femininity, as the case may be). I didn't get hung up on that 25 years ago, I'm sure not about to now. But, hey, it's your money.
P.S. Being open minded, I read Edmunds' review of the 2005 Legacy. It gave it good marks for an improved interior, suggesting that you may forget that your not in a VW (apparantly the category leader). Fortunately, they didn't go so far as to compare it to VW's upscale sibling, Audi, or you'd be back to square one.
And with respect to AWD ranting, I do apologize for my passion on the issue. The fact -- not opinion or rant -- is that Acrua, like all other Premium Brands(and there is or will be a trickle down -- and that is also fact) will be offering model wide AWD as either standard or optional is NOT because they think it will in any way be a negative, they think the buying public wants it, they think they need it to compete, they think it will make money and they know it is an engineering solution to the issues that have started confronting FWD (particularly) cars as horsepower and torque keep climbing skyward.
Not, YET, an Acura owner, I applaud Acura for taking the step, first with the new RL of SH AWD being standard and next for apparently moving to add SH AWD to the TL (sooner rather than later). Acura, first with the new TL then with the upcoming RL then with the upcoming TL has once again started coming on strong in response to both the market and technology. BTW, in my garage, currently, are two Audis, both coming off lease in less than a year (2003 TT 225HP coupe and 2003 allroad -- both are stick shifts).
And, to prevent anyone from wading backwards through posts, both my wife and I put the TL as #1 (with an asterisk) on our test drive lists, in that we liked, checked that, loved, everything about the TL except the torque steer. SH AWD will banish that and probably, knowing Acura increase the performance (and if they do it "right", even the economy -- or at least the economy hit will be 2%).
The Acura and Audi A6 threads are so engaging right now because the posters are so passionate and the products (not even out yet) are so highly anticipated. Most of what I, for one, say are strong opinions, some are just "the facts." I'll try to be clearer FNO.
FWIW, I just had another friend from Pittsburgh trade his 2000 E430 sport for a 545i 6-speed with the active sport suspension. I'm being promised a drive when I see him in a few weeks. He claims that the handling is better than any other sedan on the market, including the new E55 and all Audi offerings.
There clearly are a variety of opinions out there.
The advances in automatics (and next gen autos) are making the performance argument weaker all the time (the fun argument is another subject as is the "control" agument). New 7speed autos are "just around the corner" -- which also makes me convinced that Acura/Honda will "quickly" bring their auto equipped cars to 6spd offerings.
Like you, however, I plan to fight for stick shifts even if I am a loney voice screaming in the wilderness (manual transmissions forever!)
The TL's 6-speed, while not quite the world class short throw 6-speed of the S2000, is about as good as it gets in a 5 passenger sedan, and in the same league as the 330i performance I drove (which is really only a 4 passenger car).
Hopefully, at least a few manufacturers like BMW and Acura will keep manual transmissions alive. I'd hate to think I might have to compromise with an AMG E55 someday!
The bad.. No auto on head-lights, un-acceptable, my Taurus in the 80's had it, come on Honda, btw are they adjustable I seem to over-drive the low beams they seem to shoot too low. I sit very low and the front seat bottom could use another inch in length. The dash is too wide I hit my leg on it most times as I get in, and the memory seats are useless to me because I have to put it all the way back to save my right knee from the dash that juts out too far, and I hit the high door sill when getting out...The auto trans. auto shifts down hard when coming up to a stop light, and the car jerks in reverse as I back out of the garage, when the car is cold
Very poor out-ward visibility, is it me or does this car have HUGE blind spots?? Any reaction, or comments, there is more but this is a start
Thanx.... Duke
Wife and I noticed the visibility issue when we test drove the 04 TL last Oct. We then did some more test drives with the rear headrests removed and noticed improved visibility. The positives of the car far outwieghed this issue and she traded in her 01 TL on the 04. The visibility was reduced from the previous generation TLs in the interest of styling. If rear seat use is occasional, removal of the rear headrests will improve visibility.
It would be interesting if some agency such as the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety could develop test standards and quantitatively measure visibility (with only driver on-board) and provide data for comparison.
Wonder about truth in advertising. Car makers are always touting new models with new-and-improved info. Should they be required to state in advertising what they have diminished or degraded, especially when safety is involved? Realisticly, this is as always buyer-be-ware as in any contemplated purchase.
Duke...if you are the only driver of your TL I have an idea for you on the auto seat adjustment. Have the memory position linked to the key-fob adjusted to the position best suited for entering the car. Program the other memory location to your ideal driving comfort. When you open the car with the key-fob the seat will move so you can enter easily. Then switch to the other memory position after you get in. Vise versa on exit. If your wife drives the car also this idea will probably not work unless you like the seats in the same position. I share your complain about the high and wide door sill which makes entry and exit a little inconvenient.
Just wanted to comment on the auto headlight situation. I've programmed my TL to turn off the headlights when I close the door upon exiting, and to turn on (if left on) once the car is unlocked. That essentially functions as an auto on/off. I personally don't mind turning the headlights on/off when necessary, but when driving around after dusk I usually just leave the switch in the on position and don't worry about it until the next day when I turn them back off for daytime driving.
The downside to the Bluettooth setup is that I can't retrieve my messages from my office voice mail, since I can't enter my access code. I've tried using the "send" function per the instruction booklet, but by the time it goes through, my voice mail has hung up. Anyone else have a solution??
As for your complaints regarding the transmission downshifting and entering reverse, it makes me glad I got the 6-speed. I still don't trust Honda/Acura on automatics, given the major problems thay have had over the past two+ years. I hope for your sake it's just an annoyance and not a forecast of future failure.
Set your side-view mirrors out much further than you would normally. This takes getting used to, but after a while you won't even notice it. The idea is that you want to see the next lane, not the side of your car. The way to set it is to put your face (cheek) up against the driver's window and move the mirror out until you just see the side of the car. For the right side, move your head to the centerline of the car and do the same thing.
This has helped me greatly. If you can get used to it, it may save an accident.
Try it - You'll like it!
The mercedes runs very nice -- a little smoother than the TL -- and of course the gas mileage is tremendous as it is a diesel and the fact that it is about 45 cents cheaper helps also.
However, I already miss the TL. There is no bluetooth in the MB and they want $1250 to install Sirius radio.
When I went to tint the car, I was told about the scratches due to the way the door sill is made.
To make a long story short, I am beside myself.
The moral of the story is you never appreciate what you have until it is gone.
I can guarantee that my next car will be the ACURA RL hybrid ( I hope in two or three years).
Thanks for letting me vent and enjoy your TL's
I hope that, other than losing Bluetooth and being overcharged for Sirrus, that you are happy with the car. It is interesting that I know of several people that considered both the TL and E320 CDI in spite of a $20k price difference. I guess it's because one is leading edge technology and the other is leading edge engine design / fuel efficiency.
What swung me to the TL was my very strong preference for a 6-speed and, in spite of FWD, a bit more of a driver's car. The TL techno-goodies helped, especially the 8" voice activated Nav system compared to the smaller screen Comand system in the Mercedes. But, in all likelihood, had I gone for the E320 CDI I'd find reasons to affirm that it was the right decision. Like every time I passed a gas station.
So hang in there and don't keep looking over your shoulder. The E320 CDI is a hell of a nice car and, in all likelihood, if you do decide to trade it in 2-3 years, you will fare very well. My marketing director is trading her 1999 E300 TD for a E320CDI coming in July and the dealership, not known for good trade in offers, if giving her $21,000 for a 6 year old car that only cost her $43,000 brand new. Go look at what a 6 year old Acura is worth and I'm quite sure it's not 50% of its new price.
The TL was faster, and more comfortable, than the 530 by a long shot. The interior on the 525/530 was surprising cheap, even with leather. I was not impressed with what 50k+ could buy. Not very good ergonomics. The 525 was slower, or at least seemed to be, than my 4 banger TSX. The 530 was fast as hell. With variable steering, it was fun to drive, but a bit unnerving till I got used to it.
Compared to my TSX, the 325/330 interior was not as plush at least in appearance in my opinion. At least not another 13k worth. I didn't drive the 3 series, and imagine the 330 is even faster than the 530. But it's a lot smaller than the TL.
The TL was faster, more comfortable, and had ever bit as good a materials as the 530. So, if I had to choose, and money was no object, I would still choose the TL over the beemers.
Status or the "look at me, I'm in a BMW" doesn't factor in for me. I buy all my cars outright (don't like owing money or leasing).
I couldn't wrestle a real price from the BMW dealer, other than low fifties, or low forties for the 3 series.
I also looked at but didn't drive an Audi A4 and A6. Nice interiors, but outside is about as boring as you can get. Interior ergonomics better than BMW, but not by much, and inferior to TL's.
The Acural dealer quoted $31,300 for a non-navi, a little high but not by much. The TL wins hands down over the BMW's not only for value, but for interior ergonomics and performance.
Now, one final question: Has Acura gotten the bugs out of the first year TL? My TSX was pretty much defect free and it's a blast to drive. From what I've read, I'm a bit concerned that about 12% of 04 TL owners have complained to the gov't about defects! That's a huge number. That's probably the only thing holding me back at this point. Of those of you who have purchased in the last 4 months or so, have you had any problems to be concerned with?
GM
Friends of ours have had a TL automatic since November with 7,500 miles and no bugs for them, either.
Regarding the BMW's, I would tend to agree with your assessments. However, for what it's worth BMW was running some incentives on the 3-series and I could have picked up a 330i, sport package, sunroof, xenons, and a few other goodies for $1,200 under invoice - about $35,500. It's just too small for our family. If I went for the 5-series, it would have to be a 545i 6-speed at a $22k premium to the TL (through European Delivery). I made the mistake of driving one after the 530i 6-speed and there is no comparison. However, at around $55k through European Delivery, I felt the TL was a more prudent decision.
Where did you see/hear that 12% of TL owners are complaining? Did they specify about what? The previous TL had serious automatic transmission defects, are you sure it wasn't pre-2004 complaints?
For comparison (and probably a bad one), its like comparing a Rolex and a Seiko (no flames.. I said it was a bad one). It is pretty much impossible to justify the price difference.. but, if you want a Rolex, you have to pay for it. Where the comparison breaks down, is that a BMW can claim some practical superiorities over other makes (handling, road feel, exterior looks, etc), that may be more than just subjective.
regards,
kyfdx
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
from the previous generation of tl to the 04? If so are you happy with the change and what differences besides the obvious restyling?
So far, I don't think they ride as "hard" as I would have expected, given that they are 235/45 series tires. Mind you, I had a Honda S2000 that had 205/55 up front and 225/50 in the back. So I expected an even lower profile tire to ride pretty hard, notwithstanding the much softer TL suspension. Other than potholes, I haven't found the Potenza ride to be objectionable (and I can accept that road noise goes up a bit with high performance tires).
If you get a chance, test drive a 6-speed with HPT package (most 6-speeds have the upgraded tires) and compare them before you switch. There are even better tires than the Potenzas in terms of both performance and ride comfort available through Tire Rack. And in the Tire Rack rating guide, the standard Tourenzas are near the very bottom of the list.
Other than that, I love the car!
Spitfire Mike: I'm 6'3" so my head, while not touching the headliner, is not too far away. When opening the sunroof, I was unable to tolerate the amount of air rushing past my head and the resulting noise was not acceptable. I had the visor on my '02 model, and noticed a significant difference after installation (several months after buying that car). With the '04 TL, I believe I test drove one without the visor, but, in any case, went ahead and had the dealer install a visor at delivery. Yes, the car does have a little pop up visor, but it is not large enough to break up much of the incoming wind. With the visor, I enjoy travelling with the roof fully open at highway speeds (70-75 mph) and can still enjoy plenty of volume from the CD player at levels of around 10 (volume adjustment goes from 0-40). I think it imparts a sporty look to an already good looking car as well. In short, I recommend the visor.
Hope this helps both of you.
Just finished a 5500 road trip from Colorado to East Coast in my brand new TL (A/Nav). By the trip computer I averaged 50 mph and 28 mpg. The car was flawless. Smooth, fast, comfortable. Sound system + XM great. Navigation was precise, easy to use... and kept my wife entertained.
Only complaint was that the Bridgestones were noisy on concrete, OK on black top.
For me the TL is the best value on market. Every accessory known to man is standard, quick performance with good mileage, Japanese reliability and the Acura VIP customer care package.
Mechanical Quality:**
Feature & Accessory Quality: ****
Body & Interior Quality: **
Overall Quality: ***
I'm getting 15-19 for mixed driving with 1,600 miles on the odometer (6-speed). That seems kind of low. I managed 22+/- for similar mixed driving in my Honda S2000 and that included an occassional test of the 9,000 rpm redline. I'll be testing the highway mileage over the 4th of July weekend, but I hope the TL is at least in the range of my 1995 Maxima (28-30) or S2000 (30-32).
Thanks in advance for responses.