By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
That is why I made a point to take CD down to the Acura dealer to hear for myself what the big deal was when I was considering the car.
I put the CD in, adjusted the bass and treble up, waited and was underwhelmed by the clarity of the highs and the lack of bass despite the built-in subwoofer. The perfect stereo for talk radio listeners.
I read that it is very difficult to do anything to improve the system because of the proprietary, non standard design of the Bose. It is not as simple as just buying a better quality new amp and speakers like you can with an Accord.
The base stereo in a Lexus ES300 was better, much less the upgraded Nakamichi or the new Mark Levinson system. The Harmon Kardon system in the 325i I test drove was much better. Even the Monsoon system in a VW Passat GLX I drove sounded a little better than the Bose in the Acura TL, though it had to be played at too high a volume level to get much bass out of it.
There are so many factory systems that blow away the TL's Bose system, that I don't know what test it could be rated as #2 in a comparison.
It is pretty easy to improve on the Accord's system without having to replace the deck. You can get some nice Infinity, Polk, or MBQuart 6.5" front door speakers, a 3 channel amp and a quality 10" sealed subwoofer and you will have sound that will be much better than what Acura gives you with TL. Even just adding an Infinity Basslink to the Accord's factory sound system and nothing else will still probably exceed the sound quality of the Bose in a TL.
The $329 lease I see is not 0 down. It says something like $1800 down. Also keep in mind that the lease may be good, but you'll pay more for fuel and insurance on a TL compared to an Accord.
Also, I wonder if it is wise to buy a car (TL)for which a new model will be out imminently.
So, does it boil down to personal preference or can anyone put forth one more, ultimately convincing (one way or the other!) recommendation?
Price-wise, my guess is about $30-32k MSRP - to keep that "value differentiation" between it and the Accord EX-v6 and the Acura TSX.
http://members.cox.net/rjcarter/images/04tl.jpg
To sheilar3, if total cost of ownership is top priority with driving/ownership experience placing 2nd, I'd recommend in these terms (03 Accord vs 03 & 04 TL):
1) 1st choice: 03 Accord V6 - regular gas/lower insurance/high resale/reasonable purchase price/handling & power very good
2) 2nd choice: outgoing TL - premium gas/higher insurance/low to moderate resale/moderate purchase price/handling & power very good (we own an 00 TL and an 03 Accord V6 to compare)
3) 3rd choice: new gen TL - see 2) above except high purchase price and resale, handling & power are expected to be excellent
If driving/ownership experience (aka car buff) is top consideration, I'd just reverse the order.
Hope this helps.
Newly changed 2003 Accord V6 EX or
2003 Acura TL which the model is changing in 2004
My calculation resulted as they cost me same with 2.9% 60mo finanacing on Acura TL.
I'm leaning toward TL, I need to make decision soon... help
One reason I'm reluctant to get an Accord is because it's in its first year and there are already a number of bugs being discovered, things like popping in the A-pillar, problems with the radio unit, rotten egg smell, etc. At least the TL has been around long enough to know what the issues are. The TL may not be as modern but it definitely looks better, has the Acura name, is more of a luxury car, and if the monthlys are the same, then it's a better value. If the Accord EXV6 and TL-S offer the same lease, I'd go with the TL. If I were buying, I wouldn't even consider the 03 TL.
If I were buying, I would definitely go with a car at the end of its life cycle. Prices are cheaper and all possible bugs would have been worked out. That is only because I keep my cars for the long haul.
Later...AH
Bought 03 TL base blue color
36900 + Tax + Tag and I get free oil change for life with 2.9% 60mo financing.
Alltogether made downpayemnt of around $2800 and monthly payemt of $450 for 60 months.
I'm planning to keep it for 5 years. I hope it holds good value after 5 years.
Not all bugs may have been worked out. There are still people with 03 TLs who are having transmission problems.
So what prevents us from extrapolating those "transmission problems" to the 03 V6 Accord, since it is sharing the exact same 5-speed Automatic transmission ?? Along with any additional new bugs that may have crept in from the newer design ?
Later...AH
The TSX without navi is $26,990.
YES, they have been. Anyone buying a 2003 TL now will definitelly be buying one that was manufactured after May of 2002. I have not seen a single report of transmission failures on these 2003 TLs.
I would bet my bottom dollar on it. Why would Honda manufacture a different 5-speed transmission (incidentally built in Japan), when there is an off-the-shelf product that is already being put into a 225HP and a 260HP product of theirs. It would make absolutely no business sense at all, to develop a new 5-speed Automatic from scratch, which on any logical basis, would have the exact same design anyway. Why would they need to, if the transmission has been analyzed by their engineering team and any bug found, has been corrected ?
At the most, some of the gear ratios may be slightly different, while retaining everything else.
Later...AH
So in other words, you don't know for a fact that it's the same transmission.
Car companies generally redesign all the major components whenever they develop a new model, even if the current version of the component is fine. There's always room for improvement. The real question is whether Acura really solved the transmission problem.
I think you are completely missing the point. The Honda Accord is coming from a 4-speed Automatic transmission. When a 5-speed Automatic transmission (from Honda's premier division - Acura) is added, it is a huge improvement. Re-engineering a completely new transmission is a different ballgame altogether and no company ever does it when a perfectly good and working version of it is available off-the-shelf.
Incidentally, a while back there was a news item where they explained that Honda was puzzled at the failure rate (industry acceptable rate I believe is around 4% but for Honda, 1.6% was HUGE) in their 5-speed Auto transmissions, since that was not merely happening in a high-performance product like the TL-s. It was happening in Odyssey's, TLs and many other non-high-perf products of theirs. An engineering analysis done, showed that a component from one of their suppliers (in Japan) was found to be defective, which was affecting a bunch of their cars. They should ideally have identified those "bunch of cars" and localized the problem and corrected it, according to me. Unless the "bunch of cars" is a huge number.
The 7yr/100K warranty extension is just a PR exercise, basically to avoid recalling the 100s of thousands of cars on the road for the transmission replacement. They rightly surmise that failures would definitely happen but they are spreading it out over a wide period (through the warranty extension), so that they would not have to foot a huge expenditure right away.
Later...AH
Later...AH
As for the transmission bug, wasn't this also happening in the 4-speed ones too? I have an Accord with the 4-speed automatic and I got one of those warranty extension mailers. Surely Honda must have known which exact cars got the defective part. I guess they figured it would be too expensive to round up all the people affected. I wonder if anyone has sued Honda over this.
Later...AH
Also, with the Accord, I was a little skeptical, since it is a first year model, and we would have to get the extended warranty on the Accord ($1000), which makes the difference about $3000.
And the Accord rear needs to have a spoiler installed for it to look good (another $500).
I personally felt the leather to be better in the TL (IMO). The Sequential SportShift was also a big seller for us. We knew that the layout of the interior was not as modern as the Accord, but considering all the factors, including the dealer (David McDavid Acura) reviews, it was well worth going for the TL.
Both feel to have the same amount of space and power, even though the Accord has 15 more HP.
Hope this helps. Let me know if I can be of any further help.
I would say drive the Accord and the TL back to back the same day, and then make your decision. Since Accord is a first year model, you might want to consider an ext. warranty. The difference would be around $3000-$3500.
Good luck with your purchase. Please let me know if I can be of further help.
The types of production problems in the first year Accords are usually bugs that turn up within the the first weeks of ownership, not years down the road.
The accord may be a tad more modern than the TL, but overall the TLS wins this battle.
Also, you should consider dealer service, Acura service in my estimation or what I have experienced so far is Excellent.These guy go out of their way to satisfy any little minor/major issues you have with your car.Example-I had my fisrt oil channge several weeks ago.When I went to pick the car I noticed some condensation in one of the front lights(they hand wash the car after every service).I was FURIOUS, but they calmed me down and replaced the light free of charge.The Service Manager also stated that if condensation occurs again they will definitly step up to the plate and resolve free of cost.
Additionally, come Aug 03 you won't be driving "yesterday's news" for 3 years if that's at all a factor.
How would the dealers be able to get rid of the '03s if it was cheaper to get an '04 instead?
For the 03 TL, Acura is discounting heavily (with rebates and other incentives) to make up for the expected drop in residual value when the 04 comes out. For the 04, it can work with MSRP because the residual on the new car will still be high after 36 or 39 months.
If the above is true, 2 other variables come into play: cost of money (money factor) and competition. The state of the economy tells us that the money factor will hold until post-recession, and competition - BMW 3 series/MB C-class/Audi A4/Jaguar X-type - they'll probably maintain current lease rates up to year end.
All to say that Acura - to remain competitive - will most likely not significantly increase lease rates on the 04.
One last note: when new cars come out, they stop leasing the previous gen cars, instead using low APRs to clear out the old model. Why ? Because the lease rates will probably be identical, and no one will lease the old car. The 04 RX330 and the 03 RX300 come to mind.
In Atlanta, the Jag/BMW/MB/Audi camps are leasing their TL counterparts from $329-$399 with some money down for 39 mos/12k miles.
Considering that Acura has always successfuly positioned the TL as a value-luxury car, it just seems unlikely that they'll stray far from market rates unless they've changed their marketing strategy for the 04.
Dealers clearing out the 03, I imagine, will try to discourage people from waiting for the 04. On a $600 TL lease, recent experience tells me the good salesfolks at Acura and Honda aren't very accurate at price forecasting.
Just my 2 cents.
As far as the Acura dealers trying to discourage me from waiting for the new TL, before they had a chance to mention the 03 TL, I lied and told them that I didn't like it and that my current lease wouldn't be up until November. I made it clear I wasn't waiting at all. Despite that, they all said $600 a month.
Example: Let's start with the fact that the TL and same-class cars are within a narrow MSRP band. If the residual value of one car, say a Jaguar X-type, drops more than the others, its formulaic lease increases as a result (residual value loss is spread out over the lease term).
Consequently, if it leases for say $100 more per month versus its competition, it simply won't sell. What could/would happen behind the scene is that Jaguar/Ford guarantees to buy back the car from the lease company at a fixed residual (and somehow absorbs the loss). This is so that the car is lease-competitive at the front end.
If the manufacturer isn't willing to take the loss, leasing stops being a viable facility and the maker starts offering financing deals.
Above brand-specific example is for illustration only but the concept is real.
Just to validate the $600 forecast, an MDX (MSRP: $36.2k) currently leases for $449/0 down. By inference the 04 TL's MSRP must be at around $41k (!?) to lease for $600/month.
On the BMW 3-series, believe they're not on clearance yet - with one more model year to go.
Hopefully all this discussion doesn't come across as adversarial, because the intent is to provide a "dispassionate" view to help in decision-making. Cheers !
I would guess, unless you are willing to pay 10% above MSRP (likely to be ~36,000) you won't get one until early '04 (jan/feb). This happens all the time on "new" models - (see G35, still at MSRP + after 8 months)
This is consistent with both the $600 lease rates tha aka150 states, and atlantabenny's analysis of an MDX (2 years old) vs a new TL.
~40k for the new TL seems very reasonable market value for the first 6 months.
Also, lease rates are 100% a financial formula - if you see a rate under/over "mkt" for competing vehicles, the difference is in the lease termination residuals. Lease terms are set strictly by the time value of money (interest rate) and the differential between the MSRP (not MKT!) and residual. Lease rates are also typically higher than loans as the lessor has to assume more risk
For comparison
BUY a TL-TypeS 2003 for 28K (which you can get) with 3.9% financing for 3 years and trade in in 2006 when paid off. A 2003 Type-S will be within ~$3K of a 2004 TL (no Type S) and you will get around 20K on an '06.
EXAMPLE: (Both are zero down!)
Buy '03 TL-s (3.9%) : $825/mo for 3 years = $28800 total less 20000 trade in = $9800 for 3 years
Lease '04 TL (5%): $550/mo for 3 years = 19400 for 3 years, (40K MSRP less 23000 residual for 3 years)
You pay $10K more over 3 years for the priveledge of driving the '04. Or, said antother way, you could lease a car worth 10K more lease after next.
You can spin the #'s however you want, but the '03 TL-Type S at invoice are one of the deals of the decade.
If you wait until next year, the price (and therfore lease cost) will drop ~10 to 15% vs early release. So, if you have to have it, you will pay, and it will be "fresh" for about 6 to 8 months until everyone else has one, and then it is "me too" other than paying 10% more.