The Civic's wider now, and the new CR-V will be on its platform, so it should be wider too. The platform also has more caster now, which contributes to steering feel, but I don't know if that'll change with a higher vehicle.
They won't give the new CR-V three rows though, will they?
Hopefully not, and I doubt it. If anything, I predict the reasoning for the 3rd row in the RAV was so that the new FJ can pick up the sales of those who don't neccessarily want 3 rows. I don't see Honda going with the 3rd row for the CRV and counting on the RDX for picking up all of the others.
BTW, I am still blown away by the idea of making the next gen RAV4 redundant with the already successful and equally efficient Highlander in the market place. Seems kind of odd to have two identical models on the lot offering little advantage over the other at what I am predicting to be equal price points. :confuse:
"Check out the Edmunds blogs for the new Camry. Slightly less boring, still very safe, but the V6 is what gets my attention, plus the hybrid."
In my opinion the styling for the new Camry looks like the talights were taken off the 02 Es300. In my opinion Toyota should have made the car more sporty looking on the outside. The side of the new Camry still looks the same as the current model. Toyota will now have the kitchen sink thrown at the them in terms of competition in the mid-size category with the release of the 07 Altima, 08 Accord, and 08 Mazda 6.
"And the Accord rear really was ugly, I don't know what they were thinking."
The whole design bothered me of the 03 Accord because the headlights were too small in my opinion. The headlights of the 96-97 and 98-02 Accords were much bigger than the current models's. The side of the 03 Accord looked good. I was thinking maybe the 03 Accord would have been a cutting edge design in 1990 but in 02-03? No.
"I think the only reason they added the spin was because Toyota has been making so many announcements lately that it is going to straighten up its act on the styling score, and hire some real stylists. Sounds like that was all talk, if Honda could cause them to stick the Corolla back in the oven after it was already mostly finished."
Yeah thats funny that Toyota said like a year ago we are going to focus more on styling and then they go back at the last minute to make last second tweaks to the 08 Corolla styling. If Toyota has done anything wrong over the years its been styling. Its not that Toyota sells any less cars now then they did in the 90's its just that they have the highest average buyer of any Japanese brand.
"A lot of people think the Civic looks weird. I wonder if it'll be like the Audi TT or the 5-series, which a few years later look pretty normal. But that's what happens when you lead... if you get people to follow you."
Yeah the Civic Coupe does looks weird but it does look very edgy at the same time and it shakes off Honda's ciriticism by the automotive press as being bland over the years with their styling of cars especially the last generation Civic(01-05) and current Accord. I remember an article on the internet showing a picture of the 01-05 Civic Sedan's tailights and in the article the writer was questioning has Honda gotten bland with their styling from where they were in the late 80's with the CR-X. I also remember reading an article an automotive magazine (not sure what magazine it was)in 1999-2000 comparing the Maxima(Probably GLE trim) with the 1999 Acura TL and they listed under negative for the TL: bland styling. I don't hear any complaints about the 04 TL having bland styling. In my opinion cars like the 99-05 3 series, and Mazda 3 has pushed honda on the styling enevelope with the current TL and Civic Coupe.
The last thing I want to see is "more aggressive marketing" instead of some real "engineering prowess". That's precisely what is wrong with the current car. If you don't think relying on engineering prowess works, consider the Porsche 911 or Honda's own S2000 for that matter. I hardly recall ever seeing a television advertisement for either of those cars.
And I completely disagree with you. Acura RL spells more engineering in it than the typical marketing moves that its competitors spew. Your opinion may differ, of course.
I’m not talking about television advertisements alone but doing the bean counter style things that Honda doesn’t do, especially necessary in a class where poseur-ness rules.
You can’t compare cars like S2000 to RL either. S2000, as specialized as it is, and when it arrived, had a bulls eye for a sports car enthusiast, offering things that are rare in its class (and a good reason for it). And of course, this is backed up by limited number of units Honda could sell, not a volume that will be healthy for a car like RL.
Bottom line is, AHM needs to be aggressive, and figure out ways to create an appeal to sell more than 15-20K units of RL per year. At this time, lack of marketing effort (it DOES NOT lack engineering effort), won’t let that happen. Perhaps throw in a high performance model, and make some noise to get the lower end model get noticed. Isn’t that the reason why most vehicles in this price class are sold with optional V8, although six cylinder counterparts carry the sales volume?
"The article states that the changes will set the release back at least six months. Anybody know when the Corolla is scheduled for release? If it's late, we'll know."
I would guess September of 07 when 08 models would generally come out. I think however and I don't really know this but I think Toyota might have originally planned to release the 08 Corolla in early 07 because the current Corolla came out as an 03 model in early 02.
I will hate to see CR-V get any bigger. Pilot is there for those who need a bigger vehicle. Even in something as large as Pilot, third seat is pretty much useless for adults. And it will be only academic in smaller utes.
Once again, I expect Honda to take CR-V another step up in refinement, upgrade to VTM-4, and option a V6.
Anybody heard what the future holds for the Element? Will it become a larger X-Terra type fighter, stay compact, or just be phased out at the end of its' cycle?
I do not mind if the new CR-V lacks a third row. It just needs a roomier front seat as far as legroom goes, gutsier motor for its weight and a clamshell rear door like the Element. It's the front seat legroom coupled with the non-telescoping wheel that takes it off my list even though on paper I like it a lot. What I like about the CR-V is the Honda reliability, thoughtful interior bits and fuel efficiency.
I like the RAV4 on paper too but the true test will be sitting in it. It has a telescoping wheel which helps the long of leg get comfy.
Bottom line is, AHM needs to be aggressive, and figure out ways to create an appeal to sell more than 15-20K units of RL per year. At this time, lack of marketing effort (it DOES NOT lack engineering effort), won’t let that happen.
Sorry, IMO the way to create the appeal IS through a better car. Not that the RL lacks quality, but it certainly lacks $50k+ driving character and excitement, IMO. As I said before, I drove one for 2 days as a loaner and was glad to get my TL 6-speed back.
Perhaps Acura could double their advertising and marketing budget and capture a few more more sales against the Lexus GS and Audi A6. But I sincerely believe that if it spent those dollars on engineering a really great driving sport sedan to appeal to the enthusiast, it would be the only real Japanese competition to the BMW 5-series - from the 525i through the 550i 6-speed. And it would be much better embraced by enthusiasts like me.
I can compare the S2000 to the RL. Not as a car, per se, but as a relative "marketing" success. When the S2000 was conceived, Honda made a commitment to make it a $32k car seriously competitive with a $45k+ Porsche Boxster. And because it succeeded, it hardly had to do any advertising. Even to this day, the S2000 is spoken highly of by the auto magazines and it continues to win comparison tests. Around the same time, Toyota reintroduced the MR2. And advertised it much more heavily. It lacked the goods and met a well deserved demise.
Maybe I'm personalizing it too much. But no amount of aggressive advertising or marketing is going to persuade me to buy the current RL. A gun to my head probably wouldn't. But make it something that gives the 550i 6-speed a run for the money and I'll be happy to give it serious consideration.
Do you really think that folks with $50k+ to spend on a luxury/sport sedan are that unfamiliar with the RL or are that easliy persuaded by aggressive marketing? Certainly no-one is more aggressively marketing themselves right now than GM and we all know where they are headed.
$50k+ for a V6 anything is insane. So is NOT OFFERING a V8 at any price. Hardly a flagship model. Even Consumer Reports harped on it. Essentially a glorified Accord.
Ditto. No one here is a bigger fan of the CR-V than myself, but this new RAV4 finally gets the job done. In a heads up paper comparo, the CR-V would find itself selling on price and price alone. That's never happened before.
Essentially, Toyota finally got the size issue resolved, plus they added a big helping of essential content and options.
FWIW, the next gen CR-V may not be based on the Civic, as someone else remarked. Rumor has it, the CR-V will be based on the same platform as the RDX. And the RDX is supposed to be an "all new" platform.
Given that the RDX will feature Acura's SH-AWD, I think it's fair to assume the CR-V will be getting VTM-4 or some variant of it. Perhaps they'll leave out the side to side locking clutch packs to save weight. The result would be a system not unlike the one in the 2005+ Ford Escape.
I'd like to see them combine some features of the Element and CR-V. Namely put a 5th seat in the Element, and move the moonroof to where I'd actually use it.
Why does my cargo need a moonroof? It's wasted back there. How often do you really transport grandfather clocks? Once in your lifetime, if you even own one? And how many surfers put on their wet suits in a vehicle that has a donut spare and therefore isn't allowed on any beaches?
Agreed on the front legroom, that was my issue with the CR-V (wife was shopping one in '02).
I do like the clamsheel doors and the unpainted cladding on the Element, plus the unconventional styling. Beef up the payload, too.
Element could stay small, and CR-V could grow very slightly. That base engine is fine, though, and if you want more power you'd probably get an RD-X anyway.
Do you really think that folks with $50k+ to spend on a luxury/sport sedan are that unfamiliar with the RL or are that easliy persuaded by aggressive marketing?
Once again, I must say, aggressive marketing isn't just running extra television commercials, but throwing in some bean counter stuff that a lay person understands rather than a purely engineering stuff. This is exactly where the class of buyers differ between an S2000 and RL.
"Why does my cargo need a moonroof? It's wasted back there."
You wouldn't sleep in the Element like the guy in the brochure? ;-)
Seriously, I wondered why they didn't offer either 2 sunroofs, or one huge sunroof. Plus as I understand it, you have to get AWD in order to get the roof. It should be offered on all of the EX models.
In terms of driving it on the beach - beaches that you can drive on are becoming fewer and fewer (at least in my part of the country) anyway. I like the idea of the plastic/rubber interior. Since my wife isn't thrilled about owning a truck, I could at least take the seats out and pack it down with landscaping supplies without worrying about messing up carpet - or having to cover up the interior first.
For all of it's faults, I wouldn't mind owning one.
Beach access is plentiful in the Mid-Atlantic. I can choose between North Bethany, South Bethany, Assetegue, Chincotegue, or any of the beaches in the Outer Banks if I drive a bit south.
But you gotta have a full-size spare or they stop you right at the gate.
Gotta remember that the Element is supposed to be the least expensive of Honda's utility vehicles. You start giving it things like a traditional moonroof or extra seating and the costs will rise, too.
"Once again, I must say, aggressive marketing isn't just running extra television commercials, but throwing in some bean counter stuff that a lay person understands rather than a purely engineering stuff. This is exactly where the class of buyers differ between an S2000 and RL."
Sorry if I'm slow, but what in the world do you mean by "bean counter stuff"?
All I know is that I'm a "lay person", I think I'm in the socio-economic "class" that Acura wants to appeal to, they succeeded in getting my bucks with the S2000, MDX and TL 6-speed, but the RL is well behind the BMW 5-series on my preference scale.
But you've still go me wondering what "bean counter stuff" is. :confuse:
The existing moonroof is a pop top. If they moved it forward, they'd get a lot of grief for it not being motorized. They'd have to make it a power roof and that would add costs.
has a long-term RL, and they did an update this month. They refer to its "soft-ish ride" and "subdued V-6", and apparently one of the editors' wives called it an "old man's car".
All terms I expect to be applied to Lexus' flagship, not Acura's. In fact, when you are talking about $50K cars, "old person's car" is not a terrible indictment, as it is mostly older people that have the dough for cars like that. But I believe the hype over the current gen's release was mostly just that - hype. It is not much more of a driver's car than the old model was.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
It is not much more of a driver's car than the old model was
It doesn't take much for me to disagree with you there. Have you driven both? Pushed them around?
The most they share is price class, and name. Just because the new RL is on the softer side (but compared to what?), does not make it same as the old. When was the last time you read "nimble handling" and Acura RL in the same sentence? I didn't before the 2005 RL's arrival.
Lack of low end punch (often compared to V8 competition) and not so large cabin (talk about "old people's car") is usually the negative that gets mentioned with the RL.
I have driven the old one quite a bit, was most surprised that Honda would put out such a snoozer with low limits.
Have only test driven the new one, and I would agree it has higher limits than the old car (so does almost any car over $30K from ANY manufacturer, including Buick). Its moves are decent, but bested by Acura's own (less expensive) TL, at least in seat-of-the-pants feel. And certainly whooped by the Lexus GS (which I have also driven), which can be had with less power and AWD or better accleration and RWD for the same money as the RL. And having WAY better moves either way. Even if those moves have a certain surgical quality to them.
Now, can the GS use its NAV system to tell me how to fix problems in the car, like the RL supposedly can? I don't know, but I don't think that makes the RL the better car. And how did they make the RL's interior less spacious than the Accord OR the TL?
And hey, I didn't even mention the Infiniti M cars (whose interiors I hate - talk about funky) or the perennial fave, the BMW 5-series. Which has an actual manual transmission, and can also be had for less money in RWD, or the same money with less power and AWD (right?), or more money with more power.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Let me refer you to a C&D comparison test then... of course, RL was one of the three (of eight) tested with six cylinder engine among the "spoilsport" sedans. It finished second in the comparison behind M45, and ahead of GS430 (third) and 530i (finished sixth).
If you continue to compare RL to TL and say RL is softer... well it is supposed to be. TSX to TL to RL progression is expected to do that. TL is no TSX when it comes to sportiness, and so is RL when it comes to the same (although it will be an easier car to push around high speed curves than TL would be, thanks to SH-AWD). This is also why you see real wood in RL, compared to real aluminum in TL. Acura created a different appeal with RL.
But to say that the new RL is no better than the old, is simply, I would say, wrong.
BTW, the one weak area in RL is its gearing. It NEEDS 6-speed automatic, given its heft to better utilize the available power. The gearing, except for first, is too widely spread and tall. Much of RL's criticism comes from acceleration, and the root cause is right here. Although, I wonder how many $50K buyers actually utilize their car's potential doing 0-60 or 5-60 mph. Heck, I do more than just fine in a car that has 150 HP and weighs over 3200 lb.
No prob, I get you that the new is better than the old, and I never meant to imply it wasn't. But then, wouldn't you hope that in every case the new model would be better than the old?! ;-)
C&D and virtually every car magazine in America HATES the new VDIM system in the Lexus GS (and IS) and knocked off MAJOR points because of it. Otherwise, the GS would have beaten out the RL in that comparo.
You say TL is no TSX in sportiness, but I don't agree. I have lots of seat time in the TL now and several drives in the TSX. The TL is much faster in a straight line and equally responsive in turns. With better brakes. The TL is a car you can leave in 'D', whereas the TSX's engine needs to be nursed using the sport-shift feature. I haven't driven a manual-shift TL, so I can't make a straight across comparison there, but certainly you use the stick to keep the TSX revving most of the time, something I don't think you would need to do anywhere near as much in the TL with the 6-speed.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
"NSX... gone for now! Is it an engineering failure, or marketing?"
Marketing was a problem.
But mostly... it was a late-80s car competing against late-90s supercars.
Six cylinders and 280hp were very competitive back when it came out. The aluminum chassis was a breakthrough, and VTEC was not a new concept but was still rare and valuable. But in the last decade supercars have enjoyed a resurgence and a new horsepower war, leaving the NSX far behind (at least in a straight line).
Honda couldn't afford to update it (or at least, there were higher priorities), and should've let it die after a generation's time.
my local dealer has been trying to sell the one he has had on his showroom floor for AT LEAST six months. He now runs screamer ads in the local paper promising "$17K off sticker!". This is a showroom queen that has been parked indoors the whole time and has almost never been test driven.
I would think someone might be interested because it might someday be a collectible? Not sure why some cars become collectibles and others don't, but this is a car sold in ultra-low volumes in the U.S. (triple digits annually) for many years now, and which was an exotic way back when (as opposed to an eccentric, which it is now). Not to mention the handling, which makes it more fun to drive than other cars with lots more power, IMO.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Honda still makes great cars. Assuming it's an isolated incident the transmission recall will be forgotten. Honda's generic styling is probably the biggest strike against it in a marketplace where quality choices are everywhere, increasingly from American manufactures. If quality and performance stay competitive and styling gets a boost (new Civic is a great start), Honda can stop the slide.
"The TL is a car you can leave in 'D', whereas the TSX's engine needs to be nursed using the sport-shift feature. I haven't driven a manual-shift TL, so I can't make a straight across comparison there, but certainly you use the stick to keep the TSX revving most of the time, something I don't think you would need to do anywhere near as much in the TL with the 6-speed."
I dunno about more fun than the TL, but that's exactly why the TSX is so much fun to drive. It requires driver involvement.
I agree with the notion that the RL need not be more sporty than the lower models. I mean, the 3 series will better the 5 series in a canyon.
"Honda's generic styling is probably the biggest strike against it in a marketplace where quality choices are everywhere, increasingly from American manufactures."
I know Honda's styling has been criticized as bland but they have taken steps to fix it with the 04 TL and 06 Civic Coupe. Thew issue I have is you said American Manufacturers. What is so much better about the way an American Car looks than a Honda looks. I know Chrysler has been noted for the styling but Ford and GM? Gm has good styled trucks and maybe the Caddy convertible. The Ford Focus looks alright and the Ford F-150 abd Ford Exploer looks good for a pick-up but eveything else they have is kinda passe looking. I don't care for the Mustang's retro look. Mazda and Nissan probably do have the most distinctive looking cars now. I don't care for the new wave of BMW and Vw styling.
I don't disagree with anything you said... just wanted to bring home a point that fine engineering needs great marketing effort, otherwise it becomes an also ran event, as is true with NSX.
If you choose to use "otherwise" as an excuse for Lexus GS, is there anything stopping from the same for RL in its weak areas? BTW, GS isn't a sporty car either... IS is expected to serve that purpose, pretty much like TSX and TL duo from Acura.
"Once again, I must say, aggressive marketing isn't just running extra television commercials, but throwing in some bean counter stuff that a lay person understands rather than a purely engineering stuff."
Apparently, you don't know what a typical "bean counter" approach might be. Lets start with counting the cylinders... making sure they offer massagers in the seats, 12 or 16 way power seat adjustment, red carpet rolls out... wait I'm getting carried away.
well, I think both cars demand an above-average amount of driver involvement, but if you keep the TL revving you will go a LOT faster than if you keep the TSX revving.
robert: the difference is, Lexus has an electronic nanny limiting performance, the Acura has insufficient power and chassis (for the weight) for performance. So the Lexus is the performer being held back by an electronic leash, the Acura is the overweight performer who needs a total workout program, including weight-lifting and weight loss.
The Lexus could be a great performer tomorrow if we installed a button to turn off VDIM entirely, the RL could be a great performer three or four years from now after Honda developed a proper V-8 or potent hybrid V-6 system, and engineered it in RWD (or started to build it entirely of aluminum and magnesium)to reduce the weight.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Apparently, you don't know what a typical "bean counter" approach might be. Lets start with counting the cylinders... making sure they offer massagers in the seats, 12 or 16 way power seat adjustment, red carpet rolls out... wait I'm getting carried away.
Pardon the interuption, but are you NUTS!!
As a BMW M5 owner, you are free to claim that I'm not the target market for an Acura RL. But Acura apparantly thought differently and invited me to take an RL for a weekend getaway to a nearby golf resort last summer, in exchange for my opinions.
The RL has more than enough technology, gadgetry and luxury amenities. In those areas, it is probably tops in it's class. But if you think the Acura RL is exciting to drive, check your pulse. You may be dead. Or at least have spent too much time in Toyota's or GM's
I would be the first to admit that the 530i non-sport automatic that was used in the comparison test you cited would not find it's way into my garage. But the 2006 530i Sport 6-speed with 255 hp would, if I was constrained to $50k or less. Somewhere along the line, Acura missed their own mark. They targeted "affluent driving enthusiasts" like me, or so their invitation claimed. They missed. And it's not due to a lack of 16 way power seats.
Let us not start naming each other, just talk about cars.
Remember, when you talk about driving excitement, you are talking in relative terms, not absolute. An M5 driver isn’t going to find RL exciting. I prefer Accord to Camry because I find it “more” exciting to drive. Put me in a Camry, and I just don’t have the enthusiasm that I tend to, in an Accord. But, some time in S2000, and Accord isn’t as exciting, but there are good reasons for it. Remember, I didn’t say Accord is not exciting anymore. Not all cars are meant to be identical in all characteristics. If something moves your boat, it doesn’t mean it would everybody else’s. Besides, getting an opinion is just that, to get a feedback.
This isn’t about what you like either. It is about a car and whether it delivers the goodies that it is MEANT TO, or not. I’ve yet to understand why in the world would anybody compare RL in its stock form, to sport sedans. With A-Spec, I would expect RL to be there, not without.
BTW, it wasn't just the power output that put BMW 530i back in the pack (sixth among eight cars).
Lexus has an electronic nanny limiting performance, the Acura has insufficient power and chassis (for the weight) for performance. So the Lexus is the performer being held back by an electronic leash, the Acura is the overweight performer who needs a total workout program, including weight-lifting and weight loss.
As much as I would like to see RL being lighter, I cannot challenge the engineers who designed the package. If you have seen the underside of the RL in person, or in video that I have, you will see a lot of weight saving measures that was adopted in the RL, including a two-piece carbon fiber drive shaft that forms a part of SH-AWD, and extensive use of aluminum alloy. But, that’s something I leave it to Honda to worry. I’m not trying to lift RL myself, anytime soon, so the couple of extra pounds don’t mean anything to me.
From the driver seat though, how much a car connects (too much and it gets bashed as is the case with M35/M45 or too little as is typical of Lexus) is something I value more. In a luxo-cruiser with intelligent driving skills I do not disagree with the middle ground. Besides, didn’t you forget to mention that even RL has enough electronic nannies at work yet they don’t seem to intrude much?
V8 would indeed work well for RL, but at the same time, it is not that people don’t buy six cylinder versions. In fact, that IS what they typically buy. And another thing you seem to ignore, when talking about power and its delivery is that Honda’s choice of wide and tall gearing DOES NOT do justice to the power output of the engine.
Change that, and much of lack of power criticism will evaporate.
you could be right, and an 8-speed automatic is all that Honda needs to turn the RL into a star.
But I just read in Autoweek that someone has figued out a long and complicated procedure that turns off the Lexus VDIM entirely, and a professional tester then went out and drove it and it just blew him away. And that was the GS300. Imagine what he would have been able to do in the V-8...
"I’m not trying to lift RL myself, anytime soon, so the couple of extra pounds don’t mean anything to me"
Now c'mon, I know you can do better than this! I have never tried to lift any car (except a friend's Beetle once a long time ago, as a gag, me any my friends carried his car around the corner, you should have seen the look on his face when he came out of the house...but I digress! :-P), but I SURE AS HECK know the handling advantages (and acceleration advantages) of a light vehicle vs a heavy one.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
you could be right, and an 8-speed automatic is all that Honda needs to turn the RL into a star.
Well, people will still complain about softer suspension, without realizing what the car is meant to be about... a luxo cruiser. But since when did we all start putting things in perspective?
Can't say about 8-speed, but IMO, the only major disappointment I have with the current RL is that it uses 5-speed automatic. The first gear is short, but after that, the ratios drop like an apple did on Newton's head. Honda needs to shorten the gearing up, and bring them closer, like the competition has (even with 5-speed in M35 which is geared aggressively).
As for weight... M35x weighs slightly more than RL, and A6 3.2Q weighs almost as much. But I think this curb weight (3984 lb) would be justified in RL, if AHM added some "air" on the inside, with a bigger shell, of course.
BTW, as much as we have talked about softer ride in RL, who here thinks Lexus GS is a mark of a true sport sedan?
"And another thing you seem to ignore, when talking about power and its delivery is that Honda’s choice of wide and tall gearing DOES NOT do justice to the power output of the engine. Change that, and much of lack of power criticism will evaporate."
Careful now, your suggestion (a good one) sounds a lot more like re-engineering than marketing or "bean counting".
For the record, the 8-9 invitees to the Acura "give us your opinion" weekend were evenly split between BMW, Mercedes and Audi owners. No Lexus, Infiniti, or domestic owners were invited. As it was explained to us, Acura was targeting the "enthusiast" that would typically buy German luxury sport sedans.
It sounds like you think the new RL is a desireable and successful car, as is. You might want to read the WSJ article today regarding BMW taking over the top luxury sales spot for Mercedes, with over 1 million sales worldwide. Lexus is the top Japaneses brand, but far distant at around 400,000 units. Acura was not mentioned, but I saw another article crediting the TL as one of the top ten cars for 2005 in terms of increased sales.
I have to believe the RL is a big dissapointment for Acura in terms of market acceptance. As others have pointed out, there is room for a serious luxury sport sedan from Japan. We already have a $60k+ Lexus LS, $50k Lexus GS, $35k Lexus ES and even $60k Lexus SC to cure all but the worst cases of insomnia.
Believe it or not, it would still be a marketing defined re-engineering (instead of the other way around). I doubt a typical $50K luxury car buyer goes about measuring fractions of a second in his/her 0-60 run, or goes for track time every weekend.
BTW, I find it ridiculous to dub every German sedan “sport sedan”. Sure they ride firmer than most Japanese and all American competition, but if they were sport sedans, I somehow find offering “sport package” as an option let us just call it, weird.
It sounds like you think the new RL is a desireable and successful car, as is. You might want to read the WSJ article today regarding BMW taking over the top luxury sales spot for Mercedes, with over 1 million sales worldwide.
And by that logic, Accord and Camry would be far more desirable than any car that sells in fewer units.
I have to believe the RL is a big dissapointment for Acura in terms of market acceptance.
I couldn’t speak for Acura, but if there is disappointment, what could it stem from? As far as my opinion goes, one engine, one trim, one price, how much more should one expect? Why else does everybody else offer stripped versions, with a variety of engines? Same logic applies to Ridgeline.
there is room for a serious luxury sport sedan from Japan.
I agree. But should we expect the RL (as is) to be that? I thought "RL" implied "Road Luxury". May be offering A-Spec package would help, but IMO, Acura would do better offering a TL-S. It won't need much, may be 3.5/V6, 6MT, sport tuned chassis, and SH-AWD, possible for $40K!
I think if you go back and look at this debate, you are arguing several points for argument's sake. Perhaps I am, too.
My suggestion way back was that a version of the RL that could take on the best of the "German sports sedan" would help sales and dispel criticism that the car is more image than substance when it comes to performance. My suggestion had been a sport tuned suspension, 6-speed and V-8 (or higher output V-6). If they dumped "SH-AWD" for RWD w/ stability and traction control, I wouldn't shed too many tears (since the car could be shedding about 400 lbs of the nearly 600 it weighs more than a TL). Perhaps AWD should be a separate version for those that really want to spend the extra money and be straddled with the extra weight.
I can't figure out if you are enamored with the current RL or making excuses for it's limited market appeal (or both). But it certainly isn't flying off the showroom floors. I could pick up a RL from any one of about 7 dealers in my area for invoice ($45k). There is not a single unsold 550i at the 4 BMW dealerships I called last week and they are selling at MSRP ($65k +/-). It doesn't take Warren Buffet to figure out which one is the success.
And please understand that I'm not disputing that a lot of buyers don't care as much about performance and driving feel as I do. But guess what, they appear as apt to buy a Lexus, Cadillac or even Toyota Avalon as an RL, based upon the RL's sales figures.
You just reminded me of a sales person at Toyota dealership and how he tried to impress me (actually my friend who was there to buy a car) suggesting how he has sold a few cars to Dallas Cowboys and that they pay MSRP. Well, I’ve never paid MSRP, so it makes me wonder why people really do that. It would apply to 550i just as much to RL. When automakers announce MSRP, the first thing I do is calculate about 90% of that price. That’s usually where the listed invoice normally is. Anything more, I have a plenty of choices around. Enamored or not, I would do the same for RL. $45K sounds about right.
Your argument also brings up an interesting comparison IMO. I wouldn’t call TSX a failure for Acura even though TL handily outsells it. Acura’s prelim TSX sales target was just 15K units (18K units for RL which, BTW, it will exceed). Not often do you see people associate meeting or slightly exceeding sales expectation with failure, do you?
Forget RL for now since if Honda cares for more sales, they will have to offer more than one price, one engine, one trim option. Tell me what you think about my suggestion for TL (the Type-S) above?
Comments
The Civic's wider now, and the new CR-V will be on its platform, so it should be wider too. The platform also has more caster now, which contributes to steering feel, but I don't know if that'll change with a higher vehicle.
They won't give the new CR-V three rows though, will they?
I don't know... Back to Honda...
In my opinion the styling for the new Camry looks like the talights were taken off the 02 Es300. In my opinion Toyota should have made the car more sporty looking on the outside. The side of the new Camry still looks the same as the current model. Toyota will now have the kitchen sink thrown at the them in terms of competition in the mid-size category with the release of the 07 Altima, 08 Accord, and 08 Mazda 6.
The whole design bothered me of the 03 Accord because the headlights were too small in my opinion. The headlights of the 96-97 and 98-02 Accords were much bigger than the current models's. The side of the 03 Accord looked good. I was thinking maybe the 03 Accord would have been a cutting edge design in 1990 but in 02-03? No.
Yeah thats funny that Toyota said like a year ago we are going to focus more on styling and then they go back at the last minute to make last second tweaks to the 08 Corolla styling. If Toyota has done anything wrong over the years its been styling. Its not that Toyota sells any less cars now then they did in the 90's its just that they have the highest average buyer of any Japanese brand.
Yeah the Civic Coupe does looks weird but it does look very edgy at the same time and it shakes off Honda's ciriticism by the automotive press as being bland over the years with their styling of cars especially the last generation Civic(01-05) and current Accord. I remember an article on the internet showing a picture of the 01-05 Civic Sedan's tailights and in the article the writer was questioning has Honda gotten bland with their styling from where they were in the late 80's with the CR-X. I also remember reading an article an automotive magazine (not sure what magazine it was)in 1999-2000 comparing the Maxima(Probably GLE trim) with the 1999 Acura TL and they listed under negative for the TL: bland styling. I don't hear any complaints about the 04 TL having bland styling. In my opinion cars like the 99-05 3 series, and Mazda 3 has pushed honda on the styling enevelope with the current TL and Civic Coupe.
And I completely disagree with you. Acura RL spells more engineering in it than the typical marketing moves that its competitors spew. Your opinion may differ, of course.
I’m not talking about television advertisements alone but doing the bean counter style things that Honda doesn’t do, especially necessary in a class where poseur-ness rules.
You can’t compare cars like S2000 to RL either. S2000, as specialized as it is, and when it arrived, had a bulls eye for a sports car enthusiast, offering things that are rare in its class (and a good reason for it). And of course, this is backed up by limited number of units Honda could sell, not a volume that will be healthy for a car like RL.
Bottom line is, AHM needs to be aggressive, and figure out ways to create an appeal to sell more than 15-20K units of RL per year. At this time, lack of marketing effort (it DOES NOT lack engineering effort), won’t let that happen. Perhaps throw in a high performance model, and make some noise to get the lower end model get noticed. Isn’t that the reason why most vehicles in this price class are sold with optional V8, although six cylinder counterparts carry the sales volume?
RDX could keep a short wheelbase, while CR-V could grow slightly. Didn't it have a 3rd row in some Asian markets already?
They can do it without hurting the Pilot much, since the Pilot is a lot wider.
-juice
I would guess September of 07 when 08 models would generally come out. I think however and I don't really know this but I think Toyota might have originally planned to release the 08 Corolla in early 07 because the current Corolla came out as an 03 model in early 02.
Once again, I expect Honda to take CR-V another step up in refinement, upgrade to VTM-4, and option a V6.
I like the RAV4 on paper too but the true test will be sitting in it. It has a telescoping wheel which helps the long of leg get comfy.
Sorry, IMO the way to create the appeal IS through a better car. Not that the RL lacks quality, but it certainly lacks $50k+ driving character and excitement, IMO. As I said before, I drove one for 2 days as a loaner and was glad to get my TL 6-speed back.
Perhaps Acura could double their advertising and marketing budget and capture a few more more sales against the Lexus GS and Audi A6. But I sincerely believe that if it spent those dollars on engineering a really great driving sport sedan to appeal to the enthusiast, it would be the only real Japanese competition to the BMW 5-series - from the 525i through the 550i 6-speed. And it would be much better embraced by enthusiasts like me.
I can compare the S2000 to the RL. Not as a car, per se, but as a relative "marketing" success. When the S2000 was conceived, Honda made a commitment to make it a $32k car seriously competitive with a $45k+ Porsche Boxster. And because it succeeded, it hardly had to do any advertising. Even to this day, the S2000 is spoken highly of by the auto magazines and it continues to win comparison tests. Around the same time, Toyota reintroduced the MR2. And advertised it much more heavily. It lacked the goods and met a well deserved demise.
Maybe I'm personalizing it too much. But no amount of aggressive advertising or marketing is going to persuade me to buy the current RL. A gun to my head probably wouldn't. But make it something that gives the 550i 6-speed a run for the money and I'll be happy to give it serious consideration.
Do you really think that folks with $50k+ to spend on a luxury/sport sedan are that unfamiliar with the RL or are that easliy persuaded by aggressive marketing? Certainly no-one is more aggressively marketing themselves right now than GM and we all know where they are headed.
Essentially, Toyota finally got the size issue resolved, plus they added a big helping of essential content and options.
FWIW, the next gen CR-V may not be based on the Civic, as someone else remarked. Rumor has it, the CR-V will be based on the same platform as the RDX. And the RDX is supposed to be an "all new" platform.
Given that the RDX will feature Acura's SH-AWD, I think it's fair to assume the CR-V will be getting VTM-4 or some variant of it. Perhaps they'll leave out the side to side locking clutch packs to save weight. The result would be a system not unlike the one in the 2005+ Ford Escape.
Why does my cargo need a moonroof? It's wasted back there. How often do you really transport grandfather clocks? Once in your lifetime, if you even own one? And how many surfers put on their wet suits in a vehicle that has a donut spare and therefore isn't allowed on any beaches?
Agreed on the front legroom, that was my issue with the CR-V (wife was shopping one in '02).
I do like the clamsheel doors and the unpainted cladding on the Element, plus the unconventional styling. Beef up the payload, too.
Element could stay small, and CR-V could grow very slightly. That base engine is fine, though, and if you want more power you'd probably get an RD-X anyway.
-juice
Once again, I must say, aggressive marketing isn't just running extra television commercials, but throwing in some bean counter stuff that a lay person understands rather than a purely engineering stuff. This is exactly where the class of buyers differ between an S2000 and RL.
You wouldn't sleep in the Element like the guy in the brochure? ;-)
Seriously, I wondered why they didn't offer either 2 sunroofs, or one huge sunroof. Plus as I understand it, you have to get AWD in order to get the roof. It should be offered on all of the EX models.
In terms of driving it on the beach - beaches that you can drive on are becoming fewer and fewer (at least in my part of the country) anyway. I like the idea of the plastic/rubber interior. Since my wife isn't thrilled about owning a truck, I could at least take the seats out and pack it down with landscaping supplies without worrying about messing up carpet - or having to cover up the interior first.
For all of it's faults, I wouldn't mind owning one.
But you gotta have a full-size spare or they stop you right at the gate.
-juice
Sorry if I'm slow, but what in the world do you mean by "bean counter stuff"?
All I know is that I'm a "lay person", I think I'm in the socio-economic "class" that Acura wants to appeal to, they succeeded in getting my bucks with the S2000, MDX and TL 6-speed, but the RL is well behind the BMW 5-series on my preference scale.
But you've still go me wondering what "bean counter stuff" is. :confuse:
The Element is a "no frills" kind of vehicle, and I have to believe a lot of people that buy them do so with that understanding.
All terms I expect to be applied to Lexus' flagship, not Acura's. In fact, when you are talking about $50K cars, "old person's car" is not a terrible indictment, as it is mostly older people that have the dough for cars like that. But I believe the hype over the current gen's release was mostly just that - hype. It is not much more of a driver's car than the old model was.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
It doesn't take much for me to disagree with you there. Have you driven both? Pushed them around?
The most they share is price class, and name. Just because the new RL is on the softer side (but compared to what?), does not make it same as the old. When was the last time you read "nimble handling" and Acura RL in the same sentence? I didn't before the 2005 RL's arrival.
Lack of low end punch (often compared to V8 competition) and not so large cabin (talk about "old people's car") is usually the negative that gets mentioned with the RL.
Have only test driven the new one, and I would agree it has higher limits than the old car (so does almost any car over $30K from ANY manufacturer, including Buick). Its moves are decent, but bested by Acura's own (less expensive) TL, at least in seat-of-the-pants feel. And certainly whooped by the Lexus GS (which I have also driven), which can be had with less power and AWD or better accleration and RWD for the same money as the RL. And having WAY better moves either way. Even if those moves have a certain surgical quality to them.
Now, can the GS use its NAV system to tell me how to fix problems in the car, like the RL supposedly can? I don't know, but I don't think that makes the RL the better car. And how did they make the RL's interior less spacious than the Accord OR the TL?
And hey, I didn't even mention the Infiniti M cars (whose interiors I hate - talk about funky) or the perennial fave, the BMW 5-series. Which has an actual manual transmission, and can also be had for less money in RWD, or the same money with less power and AWD (right?), or more money with more power.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
If you continue to compare RL to TL and say RL is softer... well it is supposed to be. TSX to TL to RL progression is expected to do that. TL is no TSX when it comes to sportiness, and so is RL when it comes to the same (although it will be an easier car to push around high speed curves than TL would be, thanks to SH-AWD). This is also why you see real wood in RL, compared to real aluminum in TL. Acura created a different appeal with RL.
But to say that the new RL is no better than the old, is simply, I would say, wrong.
BTW, the one weak area in RL is its gearing. It NEEDS 6-speed automatic, given its heft to better utilize the available power. The gearing, except for first, is too widely spread and tall. Much of RL's criticism comes from acceleration, and the root cause is right here. Although, I wonder how many $50K buyers actually utilize their car's potential doing 0-60 or 5-60 mph. Heck, I do more than just fine in a car that has 150 HP and weighs over 3200 lb.
C&D and virtually every car magazine in America HATES the new VDIM system in the Lexus GS (and IS) and knocked off MAJOR points because of it. Otherwise, the GS would have beaten out the RL in that comparo.
You say TL is no TSX in sportiness, but I don't agree. I have lots of seat time in the TL now and several drives in the TSX. The TL is much faster in a straight line and equally responsive in turns. With better brakes. The TL is a car you can leave in 'D', whereas the TSX's engine needs to be nursed using the sport-shift feature. I haven't driven a manual-shift TL, so I can't make a straight across comparison there, but certainly you use the stick to keep the TSX revving most of the time, something I don't think you would need to do anywhere near as much in the TL with the 6-speed.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Marketing was a problem.
But mostly... it was a late-80s car competing against late-90s supercars.
Six cylinders and 280hp were very competitive back when it came out. The aluminum chassis was a breakthrough, and VTEC was not a new concept but was still rare and valuable. But in the last decade supercars have enjoyed a resurgence and a new horsepower war, leaving the NSX far behind (at least in a straight line).
Honda couldn't afford to update it (or at least, there were higher priorities), and should've let it die after a generation's time.
I would think someone might be interested because it might someday be a collectible? Not sure why some cars become collectibles and others don't, but this is a car sold in ultra-low volumes in the U.S. (triple digits annually) for many years now, and which was an exotic way back when (as opposed to an eccentric, which it is now). Not to mention the handling, which makes it more fun to drive than other cars with lots more power, IMO.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I dunno about more fun than the TL, but that's exactly why the TSX is so much fun to drive. It requires driver involvement.
I agree with the notion that the RL need not be more sporty than the lower models. I mean, the 3 series will better the 5 series in a canyon.
I know Honda's styling has been criticized as bland but they have taken steps to fix it with the 04 TL and 06 Civic Coupe. Thew issue I have is you said American Manufacturers. What is so much better about the way an American Car looks than a Honda looks. I know Chrysler has been noted for the styling but Ford and GM? Gm has good styled trucks and maybe the Caddy convertible. The Ford Focus looks alright and the Ford F-150 abd Ford Exploer looks good for a pick-up but eveything else they have is kinda passe looking. I don't care for the Mustang's retro look. Mazda and Nissan probably do have the most distinctive looking cars now. I don't care for the new wave of BMW and Vw styling.
"Once again, I must say, aggressive marketing isn't just running extra television commercials, but throwing in some bean counter stuff that a lay person understands rather than a purely engineering stuff."
robert: the difference is, Lexus has an electronic nanny limiting performance, the Acura has insufficient power and chassis (for the weight) for performance. So the Lexus is the performer being held back by an electronic leash, the Acura is the overweight performer who needs a total workout program, including weight-lifting and weight loss.
The Lexus could be a great performer tomorrow if we installed a button to turn off VDIM entirely, the RL could be a great performer three or four years from now after Honda developed a proper V-8 or potent hybrid V-6 system, and engineered it in RWD (or started to build it entirely of aluminum and magnesium)to reduce the weight.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Pardon the interuption, but are you NUTS!!
As a BMW M5 owner, you are free to claim that I'm not the target market for an Acura RL. But Acura apparantly thought differently and invited me to take an RL for a weekend getaway to a nearby golf resort last summer, in exchange for my opinions.
The RL has more than enough technology, gadgetry and luxury amenities. In those areas, it is probably tops in it's class. But if you think the Acura RL is exciting to drive, check your pulse. You may be dead. Or at least have spent too much time in Toyota's or GM's
I would be the first to admit that the 530i non-sport automatic that was used in the comparison test you cited would not find it's way into my garage. But the 2006 530i Sport 6-speed with 255 hp would, if I was constrained to $50k or less. Somewhere along the line, Acura missed their own mark. They targeted "affluent driving enthusiasts" like me, or so their invitation claimed. They missed. And it's not due to a lack of 16 way power seats.
Remember, when you talk about driving excitement, you are talking in relative terms, not absolute. An M5 driver isn’t going to find RL exciting. I prefer Accord to Camry because I find it “more” exciting to drive. Put me in a Camry, and I just don’t have the enthusiasm that I tend to, in an Accord. But, some time in S2000, and Accord isn’t as exciting, but there are good reasons for it. Remember, I didn’t say Accord is not exciting anymore. Not all cars are meant to be identical in all characteristics. If something moves your boat, it doesn’t mean it would everybody else’s. Besides, getting an opinion is just that, to get a feedback.
This isn’t about what you like either. It is about a car and whether it delivers the goodies that it is MEANT TO, or not. I’ve yet to understand why in the world would anybody compare RL in its stock form, to sport sedans. With A-Spec, I would expect RL to be there, not without.
BTW, it wasn't just the power output that put BMW 530i back in the pack (sixth among eight cars).
As much as I would like to see RL being lighter, I cannot challenge the engineers who designed the package. If you have seen the underside of the RL in person, or in video that I have, you will see a lot of weight saving measures that was adopted in the RL, including a two-piece carbon fiber drive shaft that forms a part of SH-AWD, and extensive use of aluminum alloy. But, that’s something I leave it to Honda to worry. I’m not trying to lift RL myself, anytime soon, so the couple of extra pounds don’t mean anything to me.
From the driver seat though, how much a car connects (too much and it gets bashed as is the case with M35/M45 or too little as is typical of Lexus) is something I value more. In a luxo-cruiser with intelligent driving skills I do not disagree with the middle ground. Besides, didn’t you forget to mention that even RL has enough electronic nannies at work yet they don’t seem to intrude much?
V8 would indeed work well for RL, but at the same time, it is not that people don’t buy six cylinder versions. In fact, that IS what they typically buy. And another thing you seem to ignore, when talking about power and its delivery is that Honda’s choice of wide and tall gearing DOES NOT do justice to the power output of the engine.
Change that, and much of lack of power criticism will evaporate.
But I just read in Autoweek that someone has figued out a long and complicated procedure that turns off the Lexus VDIM entirely, and a professional tester then went out and drove it and it just blew him away. And that was the GS300. Imagine what he would have been able to do in the V-8...
"I’m not trying to lift RL myself, anytime soon, so the couple of extra pounds don’t mean anything to me"
Now c'mon, I know you can do better than this! I have never tried to lift any car (except a friend's Beetle once a long time ago, as a gag, me any my friends carried his car around the corner, you should have seen the look on his face when he came out of the house...but I digress! :-P), but I SURE AS HECK know the handling advantages (and acceleration advantages) of a light vehicle vs a heavy one.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Well, people will still complain about softer suspension, without realizing what the car is meant to be about... a luxo cruiser. But since when did we all start putting things in perspective?
Can't say about 8-speed, but IMO, the only major disappointment I have with the current RL is that it uses 5-speed automatic. The first gear is short, but after that, the ratios drop like an apple did on Newton's head. Honda needs to shorten the gearing up, and bring them closer, like the competition has (even with 5-speed in M35 which is geared aggressively).
As for weight... M35x weighs slightly more than RL, and A6 3.2Q weighs almost as much. But I think this curb weight (3984 lb) would be justified in RL, if AHM added some "air" on the inside, with a bigger shell, of course.
BTW, as much as we have talked about softer ride in RL, who here thinks Lexus GS is a mark of a true sport sedan?
Careful now, your suggestion (a good one) sounds a lot more like re-engineering than marketing or "bean counting".
For the record, the 8-9 invitees to the Acura "give us your opinion" weekend were evenly split between BMW, Mercedes and Audi owners. No Lexus, Infiniti, or domestic owners were invited. As it was explained to us, Acura was targeting the "enthusiast" that would typically buy German luxury sport sedans.
It sounds like you think the new RL is a desireable and successful car, as is. You might want to read the WSJ article today regarding BMW taking over the top luxury sales spot for Mercedes, with over 1 million sales worldwide. Lexus is the top Japaneses brand, but far distant at around 400,000 units. Acura was not mentioned, but I saw another article crediting the TL as one of the top ten cars for 2005 in terms of increased sales.
I have to believe the RL is a big dissapointment for Acura in terms of market acceptance. As others have pointed out, there is room for a serious luxury sport sedan from Japan. We already have a $60k+ Lexus LS, $50k Lexus GS, $35k Lexus ES and even $60k Lexus SC to cure all but the worst cases of insomnia.
BTW, I find it ridiculous to dub every German sedan “sport sedan”. Sure they ride firmer than most Japanese and all American competition, but if they were sport sedans, I somehow find offering “sport package” as an option let us just call it, weird.
It sounds like you think the new RL is a desireable and successful car, as is. You might want to read the WSJ article today regarding BMW taking over the top luxury sales spot for Mercedes, with over 1 million sales worldwide.
And by that logic, Accord and Camry would be far more desirable than any car that sells in fewer units.
I have to believe the RL is a big dissapointment for Acura in terms of market acceptance.
I couldn’t speak for Acura, but if there is disappointment, what could it stem from? As far as my opinion goes, one engine, one trim, one price, how much more should one expect? Why else does everybody else offer stripped versions, with a variety of engines? Same logic applies to Ridgeline.
there is room for a serious luxury sport sedan from Japan.
I agree. But should we expect the RL (as is) to be that? I thought "RL" implied "Road Luxury". May be offering A-Spec package would help, but IMO, Acura would do better offering a TL-S. It won't need much, may be 3.5/V6, 6MT, sport tuned chassis, and SH-AWD, possible for $40K!
My suggestion way back was that a version of the RL that could take on the best of the "German sports sedan" would help sales and dispel criticism that the car is more image than substance when it comes to performance. My suggestion had been a sport tuned suspension, 6-speed and V-8 (or higher output V-6). If they dumped "SH-AWD" for RWD w/ stability and traction control, I wouldn't shed too many tears (since the car could be shedding about 400 lbs of the nearly 600 it weighs more than a TL). Perhaps AWD should be a separate version for those that really want to spend the extra money and be straddled with the extra weight.
I can't figure out if you are enamored with the current RL or making excuses for it's limited market appeal (or both). But it certainly isn't flying off the showroom floors. I could pick up a RL from any one of about 7 dealers in my area for invoice ($45k). There is not a single unsold 550i at the 4 BMW dealerships I called last week and they are selling at MSRP ($65k +/-). It doesn't take Warren Buffet to figure out which one is the success.
And please understand that I'm not disputing that a lot of buyers don't care as much about performance and driving feel as I do. But guess what, they appear as apt to buy a Lexus, Cadillac or even Toyota Avalon as an RL, based upon the RL's sales figures.
Your argument also brings up an interesting comparison IMO. I wouldn’t call TSX a failure for Acura even though TL handily outsells it. Acura’s prelim TSX sales target was just 15K units (18K units for RL which, BTW, it will exceed). Not often do you see people associate meeting or slightly exceeding sales expectation with failure, do you?
Forget RL for now since if Honda cares for more sales, they will have to offer more than one price, one engine, one trim option. Tell me what you think about my suggestion for TL (the Type-S) above?