Howdy, Stranger!

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

Acura RL



  • libertycatlibertycat Posts: 593
    I hope Acura makes this a full-size luxury sedan with a V8 and a MUCH more luxurious interior but chances are they won't. Whatever <sighs>. I'm still curious about it.
  • chiggy45chiggy45 Posts: 10
    I saw a picture in a magazine that showed the supposed future RL. It looked great, and was said to boast an AWD V8. Although, I think Acura may have changed their mind, I think Acura should shoot past a V8, and maybe go even higher with a V10 or 12. I mean, Acura has to do something to lure drivers away from the Lexus LS and Benz's Sclass. I think the only way they can really charge more is if they offer so much that people just don't know what to do. Similar to what they did when they introduced the TL.
  • libertycatlibertycat Posts: 593
    Acura is going to have a V6/FWD according to Edmunds. Really dumb of them, but WHATEVER. I just found what u said about V10s and 12s humurous since Acura probably won't even have a V8. Most likely, the RL will remain mid-level, competing with Seville, Deville, Town Car, and S80.
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    Most reports indicate the RL will remain a V6, but will use the IMA hybrid system to give it more power. It's appears (know one can say for certain) that Honda is trying to move past V8s.
  • libertycatlibertycat Posts: 593
    Name one Honda/Acura that had a V8. I sure can't think of a single one.
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    I was only quoting what Automobile stated. If anyone can produce a V6 with 400hp its Honda. I agree that would be an expensive engine, and would be more fitting for the NSX, not the RL.

  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    "Name one Honda/Acura that had a V8. I sure can't think of a single one."

    I'm sorry, was that intended for me?

    Honda has never produced a V8 for a production model passenger car. It appears they do not intend to anytime soon. The horsepower wars are getting to the point where it may not be possible to compete with an ordinary V6. Many believe that Honda will have to build a V8, or get out of the luxury car business.

    However, V8 engines may become obsolete in several years. Smaller, more efficient engines mated with hybrid drivetrains could be the next big thing. When I wrote, "It's appears that Honda is trying to move past V8s", I meant that they may skip the V8 and go straight to the hybrid solution.
  • libertycatlibertycat Posts: 593
    Yes, that was meant for you.
  • What would you do? End of July I have a decision- buy my RL3.5 for the $23K residual, or succumb to new car fever.

    My practical side the home equity loan and buy the car. Has the Navi system I need, as a Realtor, and it's crazy to give the car back and "leave 28K miles on the table."

    My other practical side says "since I write off most of my car expenses, putting cash in any car ain't no investment."

    My impulsive side wants a new car. Can lease a new RL3.5 for less than my current lease payment ($550/month) or I can lease an Accord V6 Navi for around $450/month.

    The thumb wrestling continues...can't really find any Navi equipped cars at that price point that are very exciting (yeah, I know, keep your sex appeal issues off the highway, LOL). A6/ES300/Avalon/Camry's with NAVI are either dang rare, or all the dealers are yanking the lease numbers aren't competitive with those I quoted above.

    Different categories of questions, but I'd appreciate y'all's input. Thx~Geo.
  • mrrogersmrrogers Posts: 391
    Thomas Stanley wrote a book called "The Millionaire Next Door." He discovered that most millionaires drive Fords. They also do not lease. In another of his books, he mentioned that personally he always owns a two to three year old premium Lexus, Infiniti, or Acura that he purchased used at a good price. Based on his two books, I recommend that you buy this 28K mile creampuff, and start planning what you will do with your million dollars.
  • mike734mike734 Posts: 128
    Sell the car on your own. If you can get more than $23000, pocket the diff and buy or lease new. BTW pay less per month in the future by negotiating less miles per month. It seems you don't use 12K per year. If you can't get $23000 for the car, then, by definition, it's not worth it. Personally I like to stick with what I know. Is the car working to your liking? Do you like the car? Does the new model (of whatever you are looking at) have features you can't live without?

    You need to look at all these questions and more. It can't just be a financial decision because a new car is never a good financial decision. ;-)

  • bwoolley1bwoolley1 Posts: 4
    Everything I have heard is pointing towards a V6 hybrid for the next RL. It will have atleast 300hp and achieve 30-40 mpg. If everything goes as planned the new RL with change the premium market. It will also be larger then the current model, probably to accomodate the fuel cells.
  • libertycatlibertycat Posts: 593
    I have heard the same thing and it has ALL been mentioned on this board, LOL, and I agree except for the 300 horses. I doubt this will happen but we'll see.
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    If they go the route of using hybrid power, as has been widely rumored, then 300 hp is a given. It's expected that the new V6 used in the 2004 TL will run between 270 and 280 horsies. Even the Civic's IMA system would produce enough power to put it near 290 ponies. 20-30 horses is not much given that the IMA used in the RD-X design offers about 50 hp.

    So, if they use an IMA system, I'd guess the hp rating to be somewhere between 310-330.
  • chiggy45chiggy45 Posts: 10
    Beyond the engine, the RL needs to be heavily upgraded on in the inside. I mean, the 2004 RL has less luxury options than the Honda Accord EX V6. So, whatever they do, they need to go beyond the normal Honda or even the TL. It would be nice to see some reclining/vibrating/heated/cooled seats in the back. What do you think?
  • jwilson1jwilson1 Posts: 956
    If so, since you can write it off, I'd stay with the lease.

    You don't say what the car looks like .... if it's still 'like new' and you're not looking at anything that is remarkably different .... I'd stay with what I've got, unless you can make money on the individual sale of course!

    As your customer, I'd be more impressed (and comfortable) riding to see a property in the RL than in a plain 'ol vanilla Honda -- Real estate seems to me to have alot of image stuff attached to it .... I'd go with aLexus or M-B personally, not because they're better cars but because they offer a status image customers might like and because you can write the car off.

    What will you decide? JW
  • msgreenmsgreen Posts: 67
    rumors were that this car was to be updated in 02. Did not happen. Same for 03 and 04, did not happen. More importantly than a total upgrade, Honda did NOT even make a few changes to this marque that would have kept owner/buyer interest. Examples include the VTEC engine from the MDX and five speed auto tranny. Why???? This would have cost Honda virtually nothing, but would have helped keep things fresh until the "big" change (whatever that is). Huge mistake in my opinion. I was fired up to buy the "new" RL in 02. Did not happen and when it became clear that there was no end to the "new RL" saga, I gave up and bought a BMW. Super car which I love, and maybe I should be happy that Honda screwed this up so bad, but in my heart, I am not happy. Honda needs to kick itself in its butt over poor handling of RL upgrades and its poor information output re new models (only Japanese products are this tight mouthed), which do not help sell models to those not simply walking up to the showroom. Good luck, Honda, but you could have sold MANY more RLs over the past few years with even modest changes (which were already part of your existing offerings). Shame on you for your insensitive behavior towards die-hard RL fans.
  • l943973l943973 Posts: 197
    The RLs aren't that bad. They are sell more than the new Infiniti M45 in the same price range and that has a 340 hp V8. Acura sold 4500 RLs since June and Infiniti has sold about 1600 models. Just goes to show that throwing in a V8 with lots a power isn't the answer. (Honda executives said the same thing in an interview a few months back).

    The new RL design probably won't happen until 05/06 because they are currently debuting the new completely redesigned 04 TL this fall and TSX. The RL and NSX are the last two models in need of a redesign. I guess they want to make sure they get it right.

    Currently the RL has 3.5L 225 hp which is competitive with its other front wheel drive 6-cylinder competitors.

    (FWD) Volvo S80 2.9L 194hp I-6
    (FWD) Audi A6 2.8 3.0L 220 hp V-6

    The reason why there is no VTEC in the RL is because the engine was design to provide power at the low rpms. VTEC is used to get more power at higher rpms usually around 3500 rpm and higher. VTEC has been around since late 1989. If Acura really wanted VTEC in the RL, they probably would have put it in by now.

    The RL offers a lot, it just seems to get a bad rap all the time because it has no V8.
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    The Japanese V8 models are pretty much there for press drives. They are not volume cars, but they make the entire model-line look a little better. The RL lacks that halo effect.

    I agree that the RL is badly neglected, but I can't fault Acura for not updating it in the past two years. If the rumors about using a hybrid drive train are true, then waiting for it to be viable was probably a smart move.

    For example, if they had redone the RL for 2003, it probably would have gotten the MDX's 260 hp engine with FWD and trim/design upgrades similar to everything else on the market. Then we'd have to wait for 2008 for the next redesign. By waiting a bit longer, Honda may be able to release a 2005 RL with a AWD high-performance hybrid system that will be unique and make a bigger splash.

    Build a decent product now, or build a superior product a little later.

    1943973 - Actually VTEC allows an engine to breathe better at both high and low rpms. Without variable valve technology an engine must pick between high or low rpm performance. Most select a middle ground. With VTEC (or similar systems), the engine can breathe comfortably at any rpm.
  • l943973l943973 Posts: 197
    VTEC worked differently back in the old days before the new CL and MDX came out. Back then, it was either on or off at a certain RPM. In the NSX, it was around 5600 RPM. In the S2000, its around 7500 RPM. I can't vouch for the S2000, but I can tell you at 5600, my NSX seems to get a second wind and really moves.

    Thats why I don't think the old VTEC technology is in the RL.

    From what I've read in the past, the 2005 RL
    - 203 in in length (S-Class, A8L, 745Li size)
    - 3.0L V6 at around 200 hp w/IMA at 100hp giving it a even 300 hp.
    - (AWD) front driven by IMA, rear driven by gasoline like the DN-X
  • l943973l943973 Posts: 197
    They are claiming 4WD and now AWD. Maybe from the MDX?


    The 3.0L iVTEC engine they mention is here

    The technology will probably consists of:
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    Sorry... this is off topic.

    Even the earliest versions of VTEC made use of two valve settings. Both are part of the VTEC system. Both improve performance. Both are equally important.

    One setting is for high rpm performance. It allows the engine to breathe deeper and longer during each piston cycle. When people remark on VTEC "kicking in", what they mean is the valves have switched from the low rpm setting to the high rpm setting.

    The other setting is for low rpm operation. At low rpms, the engine doesn't need to breathe like a marathon runner, shallow and quick breaths are all it takes. This prevents that fish out of water situation. One setting without the other, would be very bad.

    Honda's early uses of VTEC were aimed at increasing the total output of the engine. So the low rpm settings were used to increase fuel economy, lower emissions, and keep the engine running smooth. That allowed the engine to build a modest amount of torque in the mid range. When that curve began to fall off, VTEC would engage the high rpms settings and carry that same torque into the higher rpms, where it generates more power. The aggressive valve settings are biased toward the high end since more power was the primary goal.

    It didn't have to be that way. If Honda had preferred, they might have biased the engine toward the low end of the RPM band. The low end could have created large amounts of torque in the low range, then used slightly more aggressive valve settings in the mid range to prevent the engine from gasping at the top. This would not have created as much horsepower as the route described in the paragraph above. Such an engine would have been better suited for a towing vehicle or off-roader, not a sports car.

    When Honda started building truck-like vehicles, they changed the bias of the VTEC. The MDX required more grunt off the line. So Honda adjusted the VTEC settings to provide more power through the low and mid ranges. It didn't matter that the torque curve tapered off in the high rpms. A high revving engine would have been inappropriate for an SUV.

    One good example of this is the 2.4L K-series engine as found in the CR-V and the Accord. In the CR-V, it is biased for power at the low end. That engine makes 162 lb-ft at 3,600 rpms. In the Accord, the same block is biased for efficiency and does not need the same low end grunt. It makes about 161 lb-ft at 4,500 rpms. Both use the same i-VTEC system (just tuned differently) and make 160 horses. The TSX uses a third tuning of the same engine, which provides torque at the low end and power in the upper revs. The catch is a preferrance for premium fuel as well as lower overall fuel economy and emissions.

    In the end, the engine uses either the high or low settings depending on which is the appropriate tool for the job. As cars run at both rpm ranges, both are necessary.
  • l943973l943973 Posts: 197
    Thanks. So why isn't VTEC incorporated in the RL?
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    As far as I can tell, the RL should have VTEC in some form. I would think that a low-end bias would be good for this vehicle. Get the torque up front and make acceleration feel effortless.
  • l943973l943973 Posts: 197
    Just from my own experiences with the car, torque on the RL is more than adequate at low rpms. The car doesn't feel bogged down when accelerating from a stop and has more pick up than the Lexus GS 300, Audi A6 2.8 and Volvo S80 that I test drove a few years back. With those models, I had to rev past 4000 rpm before the car started moving at a decent pace.
  • msgreenmsgreen Posts: 67
    Re my post #15 above, that is my point. If Honda was going to wait until 05 or 06 (whenever) to update the RL, OK, no doubt they have business reasons. However, in my humble opinion, they badly hurt the RL by not upgrading it with at least the offerings they had in other lines. For example, the MDX has had the 3.5L V6 with VTEC and 240 HP for several years. The five speed auto has been available with that engine for a similar period. WHY, didn't Honda make these standard in their top of the line brand???? It was essentially a no cost issue for them and would have at least made the brand more comparable to other brands with similar engines/transmissions. To me, this is just crazy. This has nothing to do with the re-do of the exterior/interior styling or any other Techno-Wiz upgrades planned for the future, it is just common sense. BMW has a 528 and upgrades to a 3L and 5sd auto during the E39 model run. They did not wait for the E60 because the competition was killing them with more HP, etc. Same for Acura, not making improvements which were essentially "free" to the company has hurt sales of this car....
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    Comparing the RL with the M45 really doesn't say much, seeing as thought the M45 is also a dud. Both the A6 and S80 have more powerful versions available, Acura clearly lacks that. Acura may be competitive with those V6 models, but it's lunchmeat next to the E320, 530i, A6 2.7t and others, when it comes to the overall package, though it's 225hp is within that class' average. Acura killed the RL with most buyers by claiming it competed with the V8 powered versions of those cars, which was a truly ridiculous claim.

  • l943973l943973 Posts: 197
    No doubt the A6 and S80 have more powerful versions, but they also cost more. Reliablity is pretty important to me. I have reservations about buying any Audi, BMW or Mercedes just for that reason even if they are suppose to be better. I want a car I never have to worry about and the RL is tops in that category. I think Consumer Reports still ranks it very high. So far, the only problem I've had that required me to take it in for service is an 02 sensor going bad as 30k. I'm at 112k now with no problems.

    I only mentioned the M45 because its in the same price range as the RL. Its hard to compare an RL to other V8 models because they cost several thousands more. Add up the options on those cars and the price difference it even worst.

    Even a BMW 530i will run you around 47k on average (thats not fully loaded either). I have two friends who paid around that much for their cars. The Mercedes E320 will probably be competitive to the 530 in pricing. An RL will be under 40k. Thats a pretty big price difference even for the V6 models!

    I think the reason Honda doesn't just through things into their top model is because they are pretty slow about researching the market.

    To me, just throwing the MDX engine into the RL would seem like a desperate move. The RL should have its own engine or something unique that makes it stand out from its competitors. I don't think a 260 hp 03 MDX engine would help because journalists would just complain that other brands have 300hp V8 and the RL is still underpowered.
Sign In or Register to comment.