Are you a current Michigan-based car shopper? A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/2 for details.
The advantages of a performance hybrid are not just in the 0-60 acceleration runs. The 240 hp of Honda's V6 give you fast, but the torque provided by the IMA system gives you both fast and effortless. If we were talking about race cars or a poor man's sporty coupe, fast would be enough for me. But with luxury cars, "effortless" is just as important a virtue. Although most buyers go for the V6 models in the RL's class, I think a little more "effortless" would be good for the car's image.
As mentioned above, you really can't compare a Hybrid Accord sedan with a 5AT to a 6MT Coupe. When compared against a typical 5AT Accord sedan, the hybrid model is both faster and more effortless. I believe it was Edmunds who got their Accord Hybrid to toast treads all the way up to 30 mph. If that's not real world, what is?
FWIW, the Ridgeline is targeted at the Tacoma, Frontier, Dakota, and (most directly) the SportTrac. As small as it is, the Ranger is sorta in a class of its own.
"I'd be interested to see how the Accord Hybrid compares to an Accord V6 auto - that's more "apples to apples"."
exactly. And the several tests I have seen all have the Accord V-6 auto at from 5/10 to 7/10 of a second slower to 60 than the hybrid. As for the V-6 6-speed, let us also not forget that you have to buy the much less popular coupe to get that powertrain - V-6 sedans are all auto, all the time! :-)
BTW, got a little sidetracked there earlier with the Ridgeline stuff, but look at the RL's fuel economy: 18/26. So they went with the V-6 for "green" reasons eh? The Lexus GS430 gets 18/25. A negligible difference at best.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
but look at the RL's fuel economy: 18/26. So they went with the V-6 for "green" reasons eh? The Lexus GS430 gets 18/25. A negligible difference at best.
And it makes you wonder, why? Why the V6? When you consider that the GS430 flat out kicks the RL in the teeth with regards to acceleration, it's pretty clear that it's the GS that's more efficient.
I guess I just can't help but be disappointed because I know that Honda could've made a true GS430/M45 competitor instead of a fancy $49K AWD TL with NAV.
How many of you Edmunds car freaks would honestly take the RL over a M45 or GS430? Seriously, put your biases aside, and ask yourself that question, and try to come up with an honest answer.
Sat in the RL at the auto show. It had quite a gathering. As far as the gas mileage between the GS430 and RL you have to add the AWD to the equation. I'm sure that makes a difference.
And I for one would choose the RL over the GS. The RL still has soft touch material on the door sills and other surfaces while the GS has gone to hard plastics.
If RL keeps finishing 7th in sales in its class, like it did last month, it will be a major problem. To have a major investment like that not paying off.
RL is caught between a rock and a hard place. GS300 has the Lexus quality, ride and name, M35 has the Infiniti performance. It's ironic RL shines when compared only to the Germans. But unfortunately RL's main competition is always M and GS.
Take the whole segment over. Like the TSX, they set a sales goal to try to meet. The TSX only sells fractions of the segment leaders but is a major success as far as Honda is concerned.
I wouldn't buy a RWD car, so my choice in that segment would be either the RL or the GS.
Honestly, I said way up above in post #4593, there's nothing about the RL other than the SH-AWD that would compell me to buy it over a TL that costs $15K or so less. I like the looks of the TL better anyway
Difference is Honda didn't have to make any extra investment in TSX, it's already sold elsewhere as Accord. Honda just has to ship them over, any sales is gravy.
For RL, Honda made a lot of investment. New body, new AWD system. RL is only sold in Japan and NA (unlike plans to sell Lexus and Infiniti to sell worldwide eventually), so significance of US is only magnified. I think RL's very important to Acura, it's their probably last chance in a while to prove it can play in the major premium league. Else it's relegated to playing with the likes of Volvo!
Man, I would've thought for sure at least you would've taken a GS over the RL, being a Lexus owner right now. You live in Georgia right? Do you really need AWD and it's extra weight down there? I checked out the new GS too and it still uses soft plastics. What areas of the interior are you talking about? I find it hard to believe that someone would choose the RL over a GS simply because they feel that the GS's interior is too cheap. You don't seem to hear that complaint about a Lexus. GS430 over the RL in Georgia seems like a no-brainer to me, but I guess not.
I don't understand why people keep saying things like "Honda wasn't trying to be best in class" Why not? What's the point of even trying if you're not shooting for the best? Remember, we're not talking about GM here, we're talking Honda/Acura.
It was probably less of an investment than you think - it shares the same basic engine block with the Pilot/Ridgline, probably shares a lot of "under the skin" components with other big Hondas... less of an investment than going with a total "clean sheet" RWD design that would go 'head to head' with the big Lexus models.
car companies aim to have sales commensurate with what they spent to put the car out there, and Honda is a small company, so it is not looking to change the world. I get that part. When people say best in class, they are talking about sales. It is no surprise to me that RL is seventh in sales in its class; lots of people don't want the AWD or some of the other stuff it is loaded with. I guess you could look at it this way: except for the punishment twins (WRX STi and Evo), the RL is the most power you can get with AWD right now, isn't it? Maybe there is an Audi Quattro with more power?
I guess I just can't get over the fact that Honda, the light and efficient engineer's company, has added all the weight of AWD to its car to avoid having to develop a RWD platform. You just know that this will trickle down to the TL, and eventually probably the Accord V-6s too, especially the next time they gain power.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I think (off the top of my head) that Mercedes, Lexus and Audi have AWD available vehicles with more power than that. Not for certain though. I'll try to look it up.
Mercedes S500 w/4matic (AWD) 302hp and 339lb/ft torque
Audi A6 quattro 4.2L 335hp and 310lb/ft torque
Lexus (duh on my part) GS430 isn't available in AWD yet. So nope there.
*also, I'm sure there's some super car or something out there also that I'm not bothering with the time to look up. Does Lamborghini still sell some AWD versions of their cars?
well it wouldn't be the first time I've been accused of being to literal, but
"I guess you could look at it this way: except for the punishment twins (WRX STi and Evo), the RL is the most power you can get with AWD right now, isn't it?"
doesn't sound like that to me. Even if it was for FWD converted to AWD, the Audi A6 is a FWD'er available in AWD.
*not trying to bust your chops Nippon, just you probably know I'm way to anal about statements in the townhall.
yep, that's a good one. For whatever reason, I just (other than their SUV) think of Porsches in the basic ol' 911 format. Keep forgetting that they've offered AWD for years on some of their models.
As far as in the same market though, not many of what was just mentioned would be competing in the same class as the RL except (at least in my opinion) the Audi A6.
car companies aim to have sales commensurate with what they spent to put the car out there, and Honda is a small company, so it is not looking to change the world. I get that part. When people say best in class, they are talking about sales.
Well, they used to be best in class in sales because they used to be the only Japanese luxury nameplate. Think about it, they used to be first place because they were the first. Both the Civic and Accord sell very well in their classes because they're the best or near the best in at least a few categories. The Ody kicks [non-permissible content removed] too. Don't tell me that the little Honda company can't build world beaters.
Also, Honda will spend the money for a RWD platform for the S2000 but not for a luxury flagship? Nissan builds 3 different cars and a few SUVs off of the same FM platform--the G35, the 350Z, and the new M and Honda is OK spending money on a RWD platform for one measly roadster? Honda could've used one RWD platform for at least two Acura models that without a doubt would've sold more than the S2000. It just doesn't make sense.
you guys are funny. Trust TownHallers to get picky about it! Of course, you are also right! OK, I wasn't particular about the RWD/FWD thing, but I wasn't really including near-$100K supercars either. Or dedicated sports cars like the Porsche. Now the Mercedes I completely forgot, and I figured the Audi 4.2 Quattro must be more powerful. Actually, a point in Honda's favor here is that both of those sedans are way more money to buy.
newcar: you are AWESOMELY on point there - why the S2000, and not the Acura flagship? A VERY good question. I think it is an example of someone at the top deciding once again (a la RL Mk I) that the $50K super-zoot Acura didn't really need to be that sporty, because that is not really what buyers in this echelon really want. It just needed to be sporty enough to match the Honda "image", something the first RL wasn't. Thus, AWD instead of dedicated RWD. But I dunno - lots of buyers are looking for a double shot of sport in a sedan that also caters to their every whim, and up until last year, most of them were buying BMW 5-series, with some also trickling over to Mercedes AMG sales. Now 5-series sales have fallen back, but I don't think it is because of the RL, oh no, it is because of Bangle and i-Drive. And right now there are probably a fair number of frustrated premium car buyers out there as a result. Maybe they will get into the new Infiniti M, and Infiniti will finally get a shot at some actual sales - I think it deserves some.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Well, the A6 4.2L quattro isn't really "way" more than the RL.
And I'm glad you brought up Bangle and I-drive, because I believe those two things put Acura into a perfect position to eat BMW's lunch. One RWD platform could've given Acura a RWD TL and an RL, plus an SUV, and really would've helped in differentiating certain Acuras from regular Hondas.
Do you think Nissan was able to cash in on the FM platform investment after the 350Z, G35, M35, M45, Murano, FX35, and FX45?
The S2000 was a birthday present to the company (50 years in business). The car was not meant to be a commercial endeavor, as much as it was a chance to let the engineers go to work without having to worry about making a profit. Happy birthday! Go nuts. Build what you want.
The S2K is built in a factory where only limited production vehicles are assembled - largely by hand. Vehicles like the NSX and Insight are assembled there. This factory is where they work on a lot of experimental stuff. It is not a pragmatic choice for mass production. Not appropriate for the RL.
So the RL would have to be built somewhere else. Honda doesn't have a factory for a RWD platform. So that means a whole new production line. Which means a whole new supply line. That's a lot for a vehicle that is essentially a niche player. An RL built in that manner might sell 10-20% more than the current AWD model.
Wow. 10-20% That's like... 200 vehicles each month.
And, unlike Nissan, Honda does not have a sugar daddy named Renault. Honda gets cash infusions from their own sales.
No doubt there are potential benefits for a new line. 4-8 years from now, they could have 3 or 4 RWD vehicles produced from the same facility. In 6-10 years, that facility could be profitable.
Now take a look at what they've got with the AWD RL. It can be built on existing lines. The SH-AWD system has been given very positive reviews. It is like RWD? Nope. Is it better than FWD or typical AWD? Yep. It's essentially as close to RWD as you can get. But it costs a fraction in development and it can be added to the TL, MDX, RDX, and anything else Honda wants to build.
Benefits? In 2 years, they can have 3 or 4 AWD vehicles with similar characteristics. Both the RL and SH-AWD will be profitable far sooner than having to pay off a RWD factory.
If Honda/Acura wants to do a RWD platform 5-7 years down the road, that's fine. But they've got bigger fish to fry today. Cripes, they didn't have a single pick-up truck until last month. They still don't have a full-size truck. No full-size SUV, either. They need more diesels in the UK. In fact they need to spend a few billion adding a new plant to serve as a hub for those diesel engines.
I don't think you can call it a failure if a certain competitor from Lexus or Infiniti outsells it.
You have to look at the old model (they sold about, oh, three per year) and then look at the change in market share for the new one. Then look at forecasts and see if it met expectations from Acura.
Sales by itself means very little. The Mini Cooper would be considered a failure if that's all that mattered. I believe the Aztek outsells the Cooper easily.
Lest anyone think that the RL is a failure in my opinion, I don't think that. It is just easily surpassed in its segment, segment being based solely on size and price range. In actual fact, it is kind of an odd duck, being the only AWD player to try to climb so high in the market except for German models which also come equipped as RWD if you prefer.
But I remember the excellence of the first and second-gen Legends. 15 years later, this is what those Legends have become. Yes, Infiniti and Lexus have also arrived since then, so competition is much tougher now, and it is harder to stand out the way those Legends did. But still... (he said wistfully)
varmint: I agree - the decision was made on cost rather than engineering criteria. And so be it if that is what Honda has to do to stay small but strong. I would much rather that than Honda being swallowed up like so many other small fry have been. But what about the potential to share the hypothetical RL RWD platform with the TL, the MDX, and anything else Honda would like to introduce as an Acura? RWD is what has separated Lexus and Infiniti from Toyotas and Hondas, which is why Infiniti worked so hard to eliminate all the FWD cars from its lineup, and why Toyota will do the same in a few years. RWD gives those premium brands their premium. OTOH, Acuras seem a lot like Hondas. Is it a good model for the long term?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Benefits? In 2 years, they can have 3 or 4 AWD vehicles with similar characteristics.
They could have that right now. The "SH" part of SHAWD has been around for a while.
If being "good enough", saving development money, and not taking risks is most important, the Accord would still only offer a 4 cyl and Acura wouldn't exist.
RWD gives those premium brands their premium. OTOH, Acuras seem a lot like Hondas. Is it a good model for the long term?
In a nutshell, yes. Acura should be asking itself, "what is it that MB, BMW, Lexus, and Infiniti know that we don't?"
I think part of the 'problem' is that the Accord has really moved upscale compared to when Acura first came out back in the 80s. Back then, you couldn't get an Accord with leather, V6, etc.. (Not sure when the first Accord V6 came out, wasn't it in 1996 or something?) Back then the differences were more clear - Acuras had the DOHC engines, Hondas generally had SOHC, the Legend was much bigger than an Accord, much more luxury features, etc...the Integra was much sportier than a Civic....
Now, you can get a loaded EX Accord that is bigger and more powerful than the old Legend. What separates a TL and an Accord? Not much, really...other than the styling...A really 'loaded' Accord EX V6 with leather isn't much different than a TL.
Honda has moved upscale faster than Acura has, so now they are closer together in the market, if that makes sense...
a TL is like an Accord V-6 with sport package. Bigger rims, better suspension, and of course another 30 hp are also part of the equation. Not to mention the availability of a very slick six-speed manual that you can't get in the Accord, except the coupe.
newcar: I meant, was Honda's long term model a good one. I don't particularly think so, but then again, one can only do what one can afford to do. If that is the long and the short of it for Honda, then be prepared for Acura's preeminence in the world of premium brands to continue its downward slide.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
What I mean is, there used to be MUCH more "distance" between the top Accord and the top Legend, back in the late 1980s.... If the Legend/RL kept pace with the Accord's move upmarket, it would be more in the LS430 range by now. The top-of-the-line Accord is now where the Legend was 20 years ago.
"But what about the potential to share the hypothetical RL RWD platform with the TL, the MDX, and anything else Honda would like to introduce as an Acura? RWD is what has separated Lexus and Infiniti from Toyotas and Hondas" - Nippon
Yeah, I hear that. There is potential for RWD in the Acura lineup, I just question the priorities. I mean... let's take a look at some of the numbers for a second.
Lexus has an entry-level RWD sedan on the market (IS300) and also a FWD sedan (ES300). The ES300 sells gobs of copies. The IS300 sells one or two. Heck, the TSX with FWD and a four cylinder engine sells at least four times as many units as the IS300! The Acura TL sells something like 20 times as many. I think the TL outpaces the RWD G35 sedan by about 50%.
The best seller on the Lexus lot is the RX330 ever since the RX300 was introduced. It's an AWD vehicle based on a FWD platform. YTD it has sold about 4 times as many copies as the RWD-based FX45 and FX35 combined. The Acura MDX (AWD based on a FWD platform) in it very last year of production still sells roughly twice as many units as the two Infinitis.
Wanna read something silly. The 4 cyl, FWD Acura TSX sells more copies than the V6-powered, RWD G35 coupe. Yeah, I know that's a sedan vs coupe comparison (not apples to apples), but the G35 coupe is no slouch.
So, while I agree that having RWD in the RL's class would probably boost sales slightly, there is little to suggest that it makes much of a difference at the level of the MDX and TL. Meanwhile, going with Acura's AWD in these vehicles could boost performance higher with only minimal cost and pretty much zero risk. If that's not a win/win situation, what is?
Not sure what you mean about the "SH part having been around for a while". If you mean ATTS, that was a completely different design. I know Robertsmx liked to compare the two, but in reality they're very different animals.
I don't think Honda/Acura does take many risks. They cannot afford many flops. That is true. But there's a difference between not taking many risks and not taking any risks at all. Your example of a 4 cyl Accord is a good one. Did they really take a big risk by offering a V6 about 10 years after everybody was doing it?
Based on what I've read, it appears they take their risks one at a time.
As for the last, don't think for a second that BMW isn't scratching their heads, asking how a gussied up Accord sedan bested the sales of their ultimate driving machine last year. Especially, when their car was sold as a sedan, coupe, convertible, and wagon.
Infiniti sells RWD cars and trucks with powerful V6s, even more powerful V8s, (mostly) handsome styling, optional AWD on several models, a full-size SUV, two mid-size SUVs, and a coupe that everybody loves. They have almost a complete line of cars.... and Acura outsells them with three cars and a V6 SUV. :surprise:
Folks, there are issues Honda needs to address. Their buyers are getting older, they don't yet have a full line of cars, and their volume sellers (Civic and Accord) are under attack from much more competitive models than the segments saw in prior years. Incentives are dragging the whole market down in the USA. In China, the people's nationalism has turned to near outrage with the Japanese and boycotts of Japanese products. In southern Asia, Honda products are being cloned, manufactured cheaply, and the results are cutting into Honda sales. And in Europe, Honda still has a way to go toward winning over the buyers and getting their product line recognized.
Honda has issues they must deal with. Acura in the US is not one of them.
Not sure what you mean about the "SH part having been around for a while". If you mean ATTS, that was a completely different design
I thought the Prelude type-SH had a similar system for the front wheels, at least that's what some of the mags have been saying. I didn't know that they were completely different designs.
Heck, the TSX with FWD and a four cylinder engine sells at least four times as many units as the IS300! The Acura TL sells something like 20 times as many. I think the TL outpaces the RWD G35 sedan by about 50%.
What about the 3 series? It seems like I see more of those here in Minneapolis than Ford Tauruses. I find it hard to believe that the TSX, a "gussied up Accord sedan" (you said it, not me ) outsold all variants of the 3 series. If that's true, that's really, really sad.
Your example of a 4 cyl Accord is a good one. Did they really take a big risk by offering a V6 about 10 years after everybody was doing it?
I was refering to the Acura brand when I was talking about taking a risk, and in 1986, a Japanese company coming out with a luxury brand was seen as kind of risky.
Can you imagine if the Accord still didn't have a V6 today? You really don't "need" the V6 in the Accord, but more than one person in here has made the argument that the Accord "needed" the V6 to compete. Couldn't you make the same argument about the RL and a V8? Maybe not, if you lower the expectations of what it means to compete.
That last thing you said does strike a chord: Honda has big fish to fry in the world, and the Acura brand in the U.S. is not one of them. The European market is becoming just as entrenched as the U.S. market, and unlike here they have a tiny presence in Europe. Indeed, Europe is where Toyota is really focusing its attention right now as well.
And the news from China is not good for any Japanese manufacturer - the biggest demonstration in the country since Tiananmen Square occurred a couple of weeks ago, and it wasn't against the government, it was a nationalistic demonstration of anger at the Japanese for war atrocities. All Japanese products for sale in China suffer heavily as a result of this fervor, and none are more visible than Japanese cars. The biggest emerging market in the world is possibly going to ignore Japanese vehicles completely. VW and Buick are just LOVING IT! :-)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
this has been years ago now, but back in college one of my friends had a 1984 or 1985 Accord. I could've sworn it had leather. Lemme go find my old Consumer Guide from that era...
Yup, sho' nuff, there was a model of the Accord in '85, called the SE-i, which had leather standard. Also had a power glass moonroof with sunshade, fuel injection, alloy wheels, remote fuel filler door release, dual electric remote mirrors. Also had power windows and locks, a/c, etc, which were also standard on the lesser LE model. All this for the princely sum of $12,945 for the 5-speed, $13,295 for the automatic. Destination charge added $175. Only thing they don't list is radio options. Maybe the sound systems were dealer-installed options? My book also lists no options at all...simply states "Options are available as dealer-installed accessories; prices vary."
Now yeah, I guess you could argue that $13K was a lot of money back then. And it was, compared to today. In comparison, a Cavalier 4-door sedan started at $6,606 back then. Ages ago I spec'd one out the way I'd want it, and came to around $11,155. That included the V-6 engine, but no alloys or sunroof (don't ask me why...I was only 15 or so when I did it!)
Another friend of mine in college had a 1980 Accord hatchback. Had a crushed velour/mousefur interior that would've done any Electra, Ninety-Eight, or Bonneville Brougham proud! These things were a far cry from the Accords of today, but for the time they did infuse a level of luxury in small cars that the domestics sure weren't delivering.
"I thought the Prelude type-SH had a similar system for the front wheels, at least that's what some of the mags have been saying. I didn't know that they were completely different designs."
That Prelude could spin the outside front wheel faster than the inside one. I'm sure Honda used some of what it learned for SH-AWD, but really the only thing they have in common is their goal and basic concept of torque distribution.
My problem with SH-AWD is that it negates the one advantage that there is to FWD - interior space utilization. Honda's always gone for the "whole package" thing, compromising the drive for comfort. It's why a lot of their cars have their engines pushed so far forward. They're an anti-BMW (who sacrifice interior room for that 50-50 weight distribution). But the RL isn't very big on the inside. I think SH-AWD will find itself more useful in a full-sized car, and I hope Honda puts out such a flagship.
The best thing Acura did with car was NOT go RWD, but instead go with this great new SH-AWD. You are going to find that AWD is going to be the next must-have, especially from premium cars. Mercedes now offers it on every sedan. Not so 10 years ago. AWD is the direction to go, not RWD.
...in the 1980s, Honda sound systems were installed by the dealer. At least, they were for the first brand-new Honda I ever bought (a 1988 Civic DX sedan).
As for those Honda prices - in the 1980s, a Honda buyer considered him- or herself lucky just to pay sticker. Honda dealers were notorious for putting "sucker stickers" on their cars, and charging big bucks for wax jobs, pinstripes, mud flaps, etc. (and making those options mandatory).
Honda didn't follow Datsun, then Nissan down the path of having all A/C as a port or dealer-installed accessory, with the notorious and inevitable failings that approach always has. Factory A/C is the ONLY way to go!
To put andre's 1985 Accord SE-i in perspective, this month's C&D that has the reprint of the 1983 sport sedans comparo in Baja lists their '83 Cressida stick shift with a $13K price sticker. And those cars had that wonderful crushed-velvet-feel material on their seats too. Not to mention the Supra's 143 hp inline six and an 8.7 0-60 time - heck that car could still hold its own on the streets today, 20 years later! That car also had as standard equipment all the options listed on the SE-i except the sunroof, which was optional. But it DID have a full-auto cassette deck stereo with a high power amp/7-band equalizer standard as well. And glory be, it was RWD.
And the Accord? Had about 98 hp IIRC. Funny. Always loved those old Cressidas.
Bob: I agree that AWD is going to become much more popular in the years to come, but only as a complement to a 2WD version, and among all those 2WD competitors, the RL will stand alone as AWD only. Not to mention the highly desirable RWD configuration will be the option on those other cars, not FWD like the brother-of-RL, the TL. Think of LA for goodness' sake - the single largest car market in the United States. And in the sun-baked desert, just how many people will want to, in effect, pay a premium for AWD? Indeed, the unpopularity of AWD is what has made it so hard for Subie to gain a good footing there. Now just imagine most of the sun belt, which includes the majority of the older folks who can afford cars like these - the whole region an area where the benefits of AWD are few.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Nip,I have absolutely no interest in RWD cars; none whatsoever. Give me AWD any day of the week. The premium (and mainstream too) carmakers are now just discovering what Subaru and Audi have known all along, that AWD is (for most driving situations) superior to any other type of drive system. Each year we see more and more AWD offerings, and from carmakers who never before offered AWD. That trend will continue for sure.
Rumor has it that we will see more AWD Acuras, as Acura sees that as a feature that will help further separate Acura from Honda. I would not be surprised to see all Acuras with SH-AWD in the future.
Subaru and Audi have known all along, that AWD is (for most driving situations) superior to any other type of drive system.
For most driving situations, AWD is dead weight.
I can understand the need for AWD if you live in an area with both mountains or hills and snow but I've had 7 cars here in Minnesota, none of them AWD, so obviously I have never needed it.
And in warmer climates, it's pretty much 99.9% useless. Do Subarus sell better in the Northeast, or in the Southwest?
Nippononly points out the largest car market in the US---LA--- and asks how many people want to pay the premium for AWD in LA. That's a good question, because you pay the premium up front and at the gas pump. I remember going by a Ford dealership in LA and seeing a row of brand new Ford Explorers parked in front and noticed that none of them had front differentials. I wonder why.
Owners of AWD cars will disagree with you on that.
I never said it was "needed," but it does make life much easier than RWD or FWD in the winter. Besides that, AWD is much safer in the rain, and on some AWD models (Subaru, Acura RL, Audi), AWD is used as a driving enhancement on all kinds of roads.
The only advantage RWD has is manufacturing cost, minimal fuel mileage gains and perhaps(?) ultimate driving performance—and I'm sure owners of STis, Evos, Porsche AWD, and Audi S4s would disagree with that too.
Owners of AWD cars will disagree with you on that.
Of course they would, they don't want to feel like they picked the wrong car.
I just completely disagree that "that AWD is (for most driving situations) superior to any other type of drive system"
Superior how? How would've AWD been superior for me today on the way to work, which for me, qualifies as "most driving conditions"? How would AWD be superior on a drive from San Diego to LA? Atlanta to Birmingham? Does it stop you from hydroplaning? How is AWD superior for most people in "most" driving conditions? If AWD is superior for most driving conditions, how come all AWD cars are not AWD all the time?
An exception to the rule (snowy mountain, 400 hp Porsche) doesn't negate the rule.
will also add cost and mechanical complexity, and ultimately cut into your payload rating (curb weight goes up, but GVWR doesn't).
I can see how it would make things easier in snowy/icy weather, and possibly rain too, although the quality/type of your tires is probably a bigger factor. And then you get the unintended consequences that come with AWD. People feel safer, so they drive faster. Therefore, when they DO wipe out, the results are much more spectacular than if they had been driving something that would have simply started spinning out at a much lower speed, therefore not allowing them to go any faster in the first place.
I guess if you're comparing AWD to an FWD car, it would improve performance as the car gets weighted down, as well. Since most cars get weight added to the rear axle as you add passengers and cargo (the front seat is usually centered between the axles, the back seat is almost over the rear axle, and any cargo is going on top of the rear axle or behind it), it would help with traction.
AWD is probably one of those things like air bags, ABS, traction control, FWD, etc. Once we got used to having them, we wonder how we ever got along without them. Nevermind the fact our forefathers and mothers got along just fine. However, the driving public has gotten so dumbed down by all this stuff that if they ever went back to those old-style cars, most of us would probably kill ourselves instantly!
C'mon, on a two ton plus luxury car we're talking about a 3-5% weight difference. Same for cost, at $50,000 do you really think there is an issue of affordability?
"Boy, I can afford $48,500, but $50,000 is just WAAAAY out of my price range!" LOL
If you apply full throttle and the tires chirp, you've exceeded the limit of traction with your RWD or FWD vehicle. I'd argue this happens routinely.
And the point is with AWD you have that extra margin of safety, i.e. when you hit full throttle you are *not* at the limits of adhesion, in fact you have traction to spare:
My guess is if you buy a sports sedan you are going to be using that power at least occasionally. Why not get traction so you can apply that power in more situations, more safely?
My Miata is fun, don't get me wrong, but I can't floor the throttle until the steering wheel is close to pointing straight. And if I let off the throttle mid corner, it's Spin City. ESP can address some, not all, of these issues.
I can see newcar31's point - If I lived in Florida or California, I might buy a RWD car...living in the Northeast, I'd prefer the bad weather security of AWD...If I were looking at a $50K luxury car, I'd want it to have AWD.
Comments
As mentioned above, you really can't compare a Hybrid Accord sedan with a 5AT to a 6MT Coupe. When compared against a typical 5AT Accord sedan, the hybrid model is both faster and more effortless. I believe it was Edmunds who got their Accord Hybrid to toast treads all the way up to 30 mph. If that's not real world, what is?
FWIW, the Ridgeline is targeted at the Tacoma, Frontier, Dakota, and (most directly) the SportTrac. As small as it is, the Ranger is sorta in a class of its own.
exactly. And the several tests I have seen all have the Accord V-6 auto at from 5/10 to 7/10 of a second slower to 60 than the hybrid. As for the V-6 6-speed, let us also not forget that you have to buy the much less popular coupe to get that powertrain - V-6 sedans are all auto, all the time! :-)
BTW, got a little sidetracked there earlier with the Ridgeline stuff, but look at the RL's fuel economy: 18/26. So they went with the V-6 for "green" reasons eh? The Lexus GS430 gets 18/25. A negligible difference at best.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
And it makes you wonder, why? Why the V6? When you consider that the GS430 flat out kicks the RL in the teeth with regards to acceleration, it's pretty clear that it's the GS that's more efficient.
I guess I just can't help but be disappointed because I know that Honda could've made a true GS430/M45 competitor instead of a fancy $49K AWD TL with NAV.
How many of you Edmunds car freaks would honestly take the RL over a M45 or GS430? Seriously, put your biases aside, and ask yourself that question, and try to come up with an honest answer.
Well, it's not going to make or break Honda, but IMO it's the latest and biggest disappointment as far as Honda is concerned.
And I for one would choose the RL over the GS. The RL still has soft touch material on the door sills and other surfaces while the GS has gone to hard plastics.
RL is caught between a rock and a hard place. GS300 has the Lexus quality, ride and name, M35 has the Infiniti performance. It's ironic RL shines when compared only to the Germans. But unfortunately RL's main competition is always M and GS.
Honestly, I said way up above in post #4593, there's nothing about the RL other than the SH-AWD that would compell me to buy it over a TL that costs $15K or so less. I like the looks of the TL better anyway
For RL, Honda made a lot of investment. New body, new AWD system. RL is only sold in Japan and NA (unlike plans to sell Lexus and Infiniti to sell worldwide eventually), so significance of US is only magnified. I think RL's very important to Acura, it's their probably last chance in a while to prove it can play in the major premium league. Else it's relegated to playing with the likes of Volvo!
Man, I would've thought for sure at least you would've taken a GS over the RL, being a Lexus owner right now. You live in Georgia right? Do you really need AWD and it's extra weight down there? I checked out the new GS too and it still uses soft plastics. What areas of the interior are you talking about? I find it hard to believe that someone would choose the RL over a GS simply because they feel that the GS's interior is too cheap. You don't seem to hear that complaint about a Lexus. GS430 over the RL in Georgia seems like a no-brainer to me, but I guess not.
I don't understand why people keep saying things like "Honda wasn't trying to be best in class" Why not? What's the point of even trying if you're not shooting for the best? Remember, we're not talking about GM here, we're talking Honda/Acura.
I guess I just can't get over the fact that Honda, the light and efficient engineer's company, has added all the weight of AWD to its car to avoid having to develop a RWD platform. You just know that this will trickle down to the TL, and eventually probably the Accord V-6s too, especially the next time they gain power.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Audi A6 quattro 4.2L 335hp and 310lb/ft torque
Lexus (duh on my part) GS430 isn't available in AWD yet. So nope there.
*also, I'm sure there's some super car or something out there also that I'm not bothering with the time to look up. Does Lamborghini still sell some AWD versions of their cars?
"I guess you could look at it this way: except for the punishment twins (WRX STi and Evo), the RL is the most power you can get with AWD right now, isn't it?"
doesn't sound like that to me. Even if it was for FWD converted to AWD, the Audi A6 is a FWD'er available in AWD.
*not trying to bust your chops Nippon, just you probably know I'm way to anal about statements in the townhall.
As far as in the same market though, not many of what was just mentioned would be competing in the same class as the RL except (at least in my opinion) the Audi A6.
Well, they used to be best in class in sales because they used to be the only Japanese luxury nameplate. Think about it, they used to be first place because they were the first. Both the Civic and Accord sell very well in their classes because they're the best or near the best in at least a few categories. The Ody kicks [non-permissible content removed] too. Don't tell me that the little Honda company can't build world beaters.
Also, Honda will spend the money for a RWD platform for the S2000 but not for a luxury flagship? Nissan builds 3 different cars and a few SUVs off of the same FM platform--the G35, the 350Z, and the new M and Honda is OK spending money on a RWD platform for one measly roadster? Honda could've used one RWD platform for at least two Acura models that without a doubt would've sold more than the S2000. It just doesn't make sense.
newcar: you are AWESOMELY on point there - why the S2000, and not the Acura flagship? A VERY good question. I think it is an example of someone at the top deciding once again (a la RL Mk I) that the $50K super-zoot Acura didn't really need to be that sporty, because that is not really what buyers in this echelon really want. It just needed to be sporty enough to match the Honda "image", something the first RL wasn't. Thus, AWD instead of dedicated RWD. But I dunno - lots of buyers are looking for a double shot of sport in a sedan that also caters to their every whim, and up until last year, most of them were buying BMW 5-series, with some also trickling over to Mercedes AMG sales. Now 5-series sales have fallen back, but I don't think it is because of the RL, oh no, it is because of Bangle and i-Drive. And right now there are probably a fair number of frustrated premium car buyers out there as a result. Maybe they will get into the new Infiniti M, and Infiniti will finally get a shot at some actual sales - I think it deserves some.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
And I'm glad you brought up Bangle and I-drive, because I believe those two things put Acura into a perfect position to eat BMW's lunch. One RWD platform could've given Acura a RWD TL and an RL, plus an SUV, and really would've helped in differentiating certain Acuras from regular Hondas.
Do you think Nissan was able to cash in on the FM platform investment after the 350Z, G35, M35, M45, Murano, FX35, and FX45?
The S2K is built in a factory where only limited production vehicles are assembled - largely by hand. Vehicles like the NSX and Insight are assembled there. This factory is where they work on a lot of experimental stuff. It is not a pragmatic choice for mass production. Not appropriate for the RL.
So the RL would have to be built somewhere else. Honda doesn't have a factory for a RWD platform. So that means a whole new production line. Which means a whole new supply line. That's a lot for a vehicle that is essentially a niche player. An RL built in that manner might sell 10-20% more than the current AWD model.
Wow. 10-20% That's like... 200 vehicles each month.
And, unlike Nissan, Honda does not have a sugar daddy named Renault. Honda gets cash infusions from their own sales.
No doubt there are potential benefits for a new line. 4-8 years from now, they could have 3 or 4 RWD vehicles produced from the same facility. In 6-10 years, that facility could be profitable.
Now take a look at what they've got with the AWD RL. It can be built on existing lines. The SH-AWD system has been given very positive reviews. It is like RWD? Nope. Is it better than FWD or typical AWD? Yep. It's essentially as close to RWD as you can get. But it costs a fraction in development and it can be added to the TL, MDX, RDX, and anything else Honda wants to build.
Benefits? In 2 years, they can have 3 or 4 AWD vehicles with similar characteristics. Both the RL and SH-AWD will be profitable far sooner than having to pay off a RWD factory.
If Honda/Acura wants to do a RWD platform 5-7 years down the road, that's fine. But they've got bigger fish to fry today. Cripes, they didn't have a single pick-up truck until last month. They still don't have a full-size truck. No full-size SUV, either. They need more diesels in the UK. In fact they need to spend a few billion adding a new plant to serve as a hub for those diesel engines.
You have to look at the old model (they sold about, oh, three per year) and then look at the change in market share for the new one. Then look at forecasts and see if it met expectations from Acura.
Sales by itself means very little. The Mini Cooper would be considered a failure if that's all that mattered. I believe the Aztek outsells the Cooper easily.
-juice
Lest anyone think that the RL is a failure in my opinion, I don't think that. It is just easily surpassed in its segment, segment being based solely on size and price range. In actual fact, it is kind of an odd duck, being the only AWD player to try to climb so high in the market except for German models which also come equipped as RWD if you prefer.
But I remember the excellence of the first and second-gen Legends. 15 years later, this is what those Legends have become. Yes, Infiniti and Lexus have also arrived since then, so competition is much tougher now, and it is harder to stand out the way those Legends did. But still... (he said wistfully)
varmint: I agree - the decision was made on cost rather than engineering criteria. And so be it if that is what Honda has to do to stay small but strong. I would much rather that than Honda being swallowed up like so many other small fry have been. But what about the potential to share the hypothetical RL RWD platform with the TL, the MDX, and anything else Honda would like to introduce as an Acura? RWD is what has separated Lexus and Infiniti from Toyotas and Hondas, which is why Infiniti worked so hard to eliminate all the FWD cars from its lineup, and why Toyota will do the same in a few years. RWD gives those premium brands their premium. OTOH, Acuras seem a lot like Hondas. Is it a good model for the long term?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
They could have that right now. The "SH" part of SHAWD has been around for a while.
If being "good enough", saving development money, and not taking risks is most important, the Accord would still only offer a 4 cyl and Acura wouldn't exist.
RWD gives those premium brands their premium. OTOH, Acuras seem a lot like Hondas. Is it a good model for the long term?
In a nutshell, yes. Acura should be asking itself, "what is it that MB, BMW, Lexus, and Infiniti know that we don't?"
-juice
Now, you can get a loaded EX Accord that is bigger and more powerful than the old Legend. What separates a TL and an Accord? Not much, really...other than the styling...A really 'loaded' Accord EX V6 with leather isn't much different than a TL.
Honda has moved upscale faster than Acura has, so now they are closer together in the market, if that makes sense...
newcar: I meant, was Honda's long term model a good one. I don't particularly think so, but then again, one can only do what one can afford to do. If that is the long and the short of it for Honda, then be prepared for Acura's preeminence in the world of premium brands to continue its downward slide.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Yeah, I hear that. There is potential for RWD in the Acura lineup, I just question the priorities. I mean... let's take a look at some of the numbers for a second.
Lexus has an entry-level RWD sedan on the market (IS300) and also a FWD sedan (ES300). The ES300 sells gobs of copies. The IS300 sells one or two. Heck, the TSX with FWD and a four cylinder engine sells at least four times as many units as the IS300! The Acura TL sells something like 20 times as many. I think the TL outpaces the RWD G35 sedan by about 50%.
The best seller on the Lexus lot is the RX330 ever since the RX300 was introduced. It's an AWD vehicle based on a FWD platform. YTD it has sold about 4 times as many copies as the RWD-based FX45 and FX35 combined. The Acura MDX (AWD based on a FWD platform) in it very last year of production still sells roughly twice as many units as the two Infinitis.
Wanna read something silly. The 4 cyl, FWD Acura TSX sells more copies than the V6-powered, RWD G35 coupe. Yeah, I know that's a sedan vs coupe comparison (not apples to apples), but the G35 coupe is no slouch.
So, while I agree that having RWD in the RL's class would probably boost sales slightly, there is little to suggest that it makes much of a difference at the level of the MDX and TL. Meanwhile, going with Acura's AWD in these vehicles could boost performance higher with only minimal cost and pretty much zero risk. If that's not a win/win situation, what is?
I don't think Honda/Acura does take many risks. They cannot afford many flops. That is true. But there's a difference between not taking many risks and not taking any risks at all. Your example of a 4 cyl Accord is a good one. Did they really take a big risk by offering a V6 about 10 years after everybody was doing it?
Based on what I've read, it appears they take their risks one at a time.
As for the last, don't think for a second that BMW isn't scratching their heads, asking how a gussied up Accord sedan bested the sales of their ultimate driving machine last year. Especially, when their car was sold as a sedan, coupe, convertible, and wagon.
Infiniti sells RWD cars and trucks with powerful V6s, even more powerful V8s, (mostly) handsome styling, optional AWD on several models, a full-size SUV, two mid-size SUVs, and a coupe that everybody loves. They have almost a complete line of cars.... and Acura outsells them with three cars and a V6 SUV. :surprise:
Honda has issues they must deal with. Acura in the US is not one of them.
I thought the Prelude type-SH had a similar system for the front wheels, at least that's what some of the mags have been saying. I didn't know that they were completely different designs.
Heck, the TSX with FWD and a four cylinder engine sells at least four times as many units as the IS300! The Acura TL sells something like 20 times as many. I think the TL outpaces the RWD G35 sedan by about 50%.
What about the 3 series? It seems like I see more of those here in Minneapolis than Ford Tauruses. I find it hard to believe that the TSX, a "gussied up Accord sedan" (you said it, not me
Your example of a 4 cyl Accord is a good one. Did they really take a big risk by offering a V6 about 10 years after everybody was doing it?
I was refering to the Acura brand when I was talking about taking a risk, and in 1986, a Japanese company coming out with a luxury brand was seen as kind of risky.
Can you imagine if the Accord still didn't have a V6 today? You really don't "need" the V6 in the Accord, but more than one person in here has made the argument that the Accord "needed" the V6 to compete. Couldn't you make the same argument about the RL and a V8? Maybe not, if you lower the expectations of what it means to compete.
And the news from China is not good for any Japanese manufacturer - the biggest demonstration in the country since Tiananmen Square occurred a couple of weeks ago, and it wasn't against the government, it was a nationalistic demonstration of anger at the Japanese for war atrocities. All Japanese products for sale in China suffer heavily as a result of this fervor, and none are more visible than Japanese cars. The biggest emerging market in the world is possibly going to ignore Japanese vehicles completely. VW and Buick are just LOVING IT! :-)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Yup, sho' nuff, there was a model of the Accord in '85, called the SE-i, which had leather standard. Also had a power glass moonroof with sunshade, fuel injection, alloy wheels, remote fuel filler door release, dual electric remote mirrors. Also had power windows and locks, a/c, etc, which were also standard on the lesser LE model. All this for the princely sum of $12,945 for the 5-speed, $13,295 for the automatic. Destination charge added $175. Only thing they don't list is radio options. Maybe the sound systems were dealer-installed options? My book also lists no options at all...simply states "Options are available as dealer-installed accessories; prices vary."
Now yeah, I guess you could argue that $13K was a lot of money back then. And it was, compared to today. In comparison, a Cavalier 4-door sedan started at $6,606 back then. Ages ago I spec'd one out the way I'd want it, and came to around $11,155. That included the V-6 engine, but no alloys or sunroof (don't ask me why...I was only 15 or so when I did it!)
Another friend of mine in college had a 1980 Accord hatchback. Had a crushed velour/mousefur interior that would've done any Electra, Ninety-Eight, or Bonneville Brougham proud! These things were a far cry from the Accords of today, but for the time they did infuse a level of luxury in small cars that the domestics sure weren't delivering.
That Prelude could spin the outside front wheel faster than the inside one. I'm sure Honda used some of what it learned for SH-AWD, but really the only thing they have in common is their goal and basic concept of torque distribution.
My problem with SH-AWD is that it negates the one advantage that there is to FWD - interior space utilization. Honda's always gone for the "whole package" thing, compromising the drive for comfort. It's why a lot of their cars have their engines pushed so far forward. They're an anti-BMW (who sacrifice interior room for that 50-50 weight distribution).
But the RL isn't very big on the inside. I think SH-AWD will find itself more useful in a full-sized car, and I hope Honda puts out such a flagship.
Bob
As for those Honda prices - in the 1980s, a Honda buyer considered him- or herself lucky just to pay sticker. Honda dealers were notorious for putting "sucker stickers" on their cars, and charging big bucks for wax jobs, pinstripes, mud flaps, etc. (and making those options mandatory).
To put andre's 1985 Accord SE-i in perspective, this month's C&D that has the reprint of the 1983 sport sedans comparo in Baja lists their '83 Cressida stick shift with a $13K price sticker. And those cars had that wonderful crushed-velvet-feel material on their seats too. Not to mention the Supra's 143 hp inline six and an 8.7 0-60 time - heck that car could still hold its own on the streets today, 20 years later! That car also had as standard equipment all the options listed on the SE-i except the sunroof, which was optional. But it DID have a full-auto cassette deck stereo with a high power amp/7-band equalizer standard as well. And glory be, it was RWD.
And the Accord? Had about 98 hp IIRC. Funny. Always loved those old Cressidas.
Bob: I agree that AWD is going to become much more popular in the years to come, but only as a complement to a 2WD version, and among all those 2WD competitors, the RL will stand alone as AWD only. Not to mention the highly desirable RWD configuration will be the option on those other cars, not FWD like the brother-of-RL, the TL. Think of LA for goodness' sake - the single largest car market in the United States. And in the sun-baked desert, just how many people will want to, in effect, pay a premium for AWD? Indeed, the unpopularity of AWD is what has made it so hard for Subie to gain a good footing there. Now just imagine most of the sun belt, which includes the majority of the older folks who can afford cars like these - the whole region an area where the benefits of AWD are few.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Rumor has it that we will see more AWD Acuras, as Acura sees that as a feature that will help further separate Acura from Honda. I would not be surprised to see all Acuras with SH-AWD in the future.
Bob
For most driving situations, AWD is dead weight.
I can understand the need for AWD if you live in an area with both mountains or hills and snow but I've had 7 cars here in Minnesota, none of them AWD, so obviously I have never needed it.
And in warmer climates, it's pretty much 99.9% useless. Do Subarus sell better in the Northeast, or in the Southwest?
Nippononly points out the largest car market in the US---LA--- and asks how many people want to pay the premium for AWD in LA. That's a good question, because you pay the premium up front and at the gas pump. I remember going by a Ford dealership in LA and seeing a row of brand new Ford Explorers parked in front and noticed that none of them had front differentials. I wonder why.
I don't get what you're trying to say here? (post #4653)
Owners of AWD cars will disagree with you on that.
I never said it was "needed," but it does make life much easier than RWD or FWD in the winter. Besides that, AWD is much safer in the rain, and on some AWD models (Subaru, Acura RL, Audi), AWD is used as a driving enhancement on all kinds of roads.
The only advantage RWD has is manufacturing cost, minimal fuel mileage gains and perhaps(?) ultimate driving performance—and I'm sure owners of STis, Evos, Porsche AWD, and Audi S4s would disagree with that too.
Bob
Of course they would, they don't want to feel like they picked the wrong car.
I just completely disagree that "that AWD is (for most driving situations) superior to any other type of drive system"
Superior how? How would've AWD been superior for me today on the way to work, which for me, qualifies as "most driving conditions"? How would AWD be superior on a drive from San Diego to LA? Atlanta to Birmingham? Does it stop you from hydroplaning? How is AWD superior for most people in "most" driving conditions? If AWD is superior for most driving conditions, how come all AWD cars are not AWD all the time?
An exception to the rule (snowy mountain, 400 hp Porsche) doesn't negate the rule.
I can see how it would make things easier in snowy/icy weather, and possibly rain too, although the quality/type of your tires is probably a bigger factor. And then you get the unintended consequences that come with AWD. People feel safer, so they drive faster. Therefore, when they DO wipe out, the results are much more spectacular than if they had been driving something that would have simply started spinning out at a much lower speed, therefore not allowing them to go any faster in the first place.
I guess if you're comparing AWD to an FWD car, it would improve performance as the car gets weighted down, as well. Since most cars get weight added to the rear axle as you add passengers and cargo (the front seat is usually centered between the axles, the back seat is almost over the rear axle, and any cargo is going on top of the rear axle or behind it), it would help with traction.
AWD is probably one of those things like air bags, ABS, traction control, FWD, etc. Once we got used to having them, we wonder how we ever got along without them. Nevermind the fact our forefathers and mothers got along just fine. However, the driving public has gotten so dumbed down by all this stuff that if they ever went back to those old-style cars, most of us would probably kill ourselves instantly!
"Boy, I can afford $48,500, but $50,000 is just WAAAAY out of my price range!" LOL
If you apply full throttle and the tires chirp, you've exceeded the limit of traction with your RWD or FWD vehicle. I'd argue this happens routinely.
And the point is with AWD you have that extra margin of safety, i.e. when you hit full throttle you are *not* at the limits of adhesion, in fact you have traction to spare:
http://www.4x4abc.com/4WD101/tractionuse4.html
My guess is if you buy a sports sedan you are going to be using that power at least occasionally. Why not get traction so you can apply that power in more situations, more safely?
My Miata is fun, don't get me wrong, but I can't floor the throttle until the steering wheel is close to pointing straight. And if I let off the throttle mid corner, it's Spin City. ESP can address some, not all, of these issues.
-juice