Acura RL

steveaccord · May 2004

Exactly my point of stressing that V8 per se can have very little relevance when comparing vehicles. I also think it is a relevant comparison because Jag has recovered quite a bit of credibility duirng this past year (according to JD Power initial quality report) and it is often looked at as an established ultra luxury segment vehicle (at list XJ8 high end trim).
I Agree with you on the fact that there are V8 that are in a league of their own yet I made my view clear before, with the current gasoline pricing (in excess of 2.25 a gallon in the Chicago metropolitan area) I would stick to a V6 anyhow!

steveaccord · May 2004

I concur,
the only gain woudl be achieved if you provided the accelerator with extra power (hybrid tranny using the ~ 100HP for that purpose?). But that would trow us back in asessing if this type of technology would be prime time ready or too experimental for mass-marketing!

ceric · May 2004

From the explanation and looking at the device, I think the planetary gear set acts as a transmission(in term of gear change) while entering a curve. This is my understanding of what they mean by "accelerating". i.e. spin faster than it originally is. There is no extra power available. The power is channeled from the inner rear corner to the outer rear corner. With planetary gear change, the outer wheel is able to spin faster than w/o the planetary gear. In normal driving (straight-line), spinning is synch up with the drive shaft.

Correct me if I am wrong. But this is what is unique about SH-AWD to provide "active yaw control".

markcincinnati · May 2004

Yes, active yaw control from side to side rather than ONLY front to rear. Moreover, the way the write up could be interpreted, it is possible to conclude that as the car enters a right curve that the left rear wheel is able to provide some additional accelerative force (a 5% increase) over, for example, an Audi quattro or Mercedes 4Matic in the same circumstances.

I am wondering, with all the recent talk about rear-biased AWD, if the SH-AWD will provide FWD, neutral or RWD bias? BMW and Mercedes provide something on the order (depending on who you talk to) of 40% F and 60% R torque split (BMW sales reps claim 32% F and 68% R, Mercedes and the new Chryco 300C claim 38% F and 62% R, as I recall) -- and Audi, in point of reference claims an intial 50-50% split, while Volvo's AWD claims 95% F and 5% R, even in the S60 Type R.

Do we know the design goal of SH-AWD with respect to "initial torque split?" It would seem that a minimum of 50-50 would be desirable from an ad-copy writer's perspective and that perhaps 40-60 would be even more "stylish" (to quote Clint Eastwood).

robertsmx · May 2004

We do know SH-AWD can split the torque 30% (front) and 70% (rear), and is continuously variable (unlike other systems). And that may be the torque split (30-70) to start the car. I dont think it would really matter if the car has 70-30, 50-50 or 30-70 split as the default as long as the system works seamlessly.

lexusguy · May 2004

Yes, I believe that the whole idea of SH-AWD is it will give the optimal torque distribution based on the needs at hand. So, perhaps if you floor the car, most of the torque will hit the rear wheels, and in stop and go traffic, perhaps more torque is given to the fronts.

markcincinnati · May 2004

The "argument" used by BMW and Mercedes (generally against rival Audi, by the way) is that a REAR biased start torque split is "best."

I don't think that Volvo's 95 - 5 split makes much sense, but once you get to 50 50 I am less than convinced of a big wow difference.

I doubt that the SH AWD will start at 30 70 however.

And, although I agree that your suggested possible splits probably don't make much difference with a seamless system, the argument for rear biased AWD is growing louder and louder.

We test drove a Merc and a Bimmer recently and when we came in in an Audi they nearly fell over themselves to tell me that "Audi don't know how to do AWD!" I couldn't believe it. Now, the BMW and the DM offerings were very nice yet, I could not with a straight face claim that Audi's AWD is an after thought and that "really Audi is a pretender in the AWD sweepstakes."

You may have your biases but that one just doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

I hope, for Marketing Purposes only that Acrua thumbs its nose at the rest of them and offers AT LEAST 50 50 and perhaps maybe even 40 60 or someother rearward bias. So that other issues can be discussed intelligently.

lexusguy · May 2004

95\5 is basically FWD. What is even the point of that?

saugatak · May 2004

95-5 is so that Volvo can market an AWD.

ceric · May 2004

After researching Nissan ATTESA-ETS on the net (figures, articles), I don't seem to find any major differences between Acura's SH-AWD and Nissan's ATTESA-ETS Pro, other than
- SH-AWD split F/R 30/70 to 0/30: ATTESA 50/50 to 0/100.
- SH-AWD varies rear L/R 0-100 to 100-0. ATTESA can also do the same thru similar clutches or so called "Active LSD".

Other than the mentioned "acceleration device" in video of SH-AWD, I cannot find other substantial differences between the two. Any comments? Why Acura claim SH-AWD is "world's first!"?

pg48477 · May 2004

Attesa-ets moves torque to the wheels with no traction to wheels with more traction, which is the same as any other AWD system. SH-AWD measures G forces and moves torque according to a need for better handling, this system can accelerate on wheel if needed. Nissan's AWD does not make a care handle better in dry weather, and Hondas AWD does. No other awd can do it, at least for now.

pg48477 · May 2004

The point is, that the best set up for cruising on the highway or normal driving in the city is FWD. According to Volvo if you want to experience performance of the vehicle system shifts to 50/50, but if you just driving around 95/5 is more than enof.

markcincinnati · May 2004

So SH AWD will indeed be rearward biased at 30F 70R? Color me, from a marketing perspective, impressed that Acura decided on this approach.

Where, praytell, can we find out information, now, about the torque at RPM of the engine?

shotgun · May 2004

RPM and Torque data has not yet been released - It appears to be TOP SECRET information.

jrock65 · May 2004

The main difference between the RL AWD system and other AWD systems is that it distributes up to 100% of available rear torque to one or the other wheel, depending on circumstances.

We'll see how it translates in the rear world, but it does sound promising.

lexusguy · May 2004

FWD is not the best at anything. It has absolutely zero performance advantages over RWD or AWD, and several significant disadvantages. The only reason its used at all is because, combined with a foward weight bias of most pedestrian passenger cars, it provides better foul weather traction than RWD. A supposed "performance" car sending maximum torque to the front wheels is rather rediculous. Ever driven the old 93 Viggen? FWD and fast dont mix.

ceric · May 2004

There are many generations and versions of ATTESA-ETS. The one I was talking about was used on GT-R R34, which has ATTESA-ETS Pro. It comes with dual clutches to control torque split between left and right wheels. They call it "Active LSD". Other than the fact that SH-AWD can accelerate 5% on the outer rear wheel, I failed to see the difference.

The ATTESA used on G35x is an inferior, or simplified system, which does not come with the Active LSD.

jrock65 · May 2004

I had no idea that the GTR had an AWD system like that. That does sound a lot like SH-AWD.

Well, the GTR isn't here, yet. Maybe they'll adopt that AWD system in the G35 and M35 somewhere down the line.

pg48477 · May 2004

According to Honda and Volvo. FWD set up is better for highway cruising, I have much more trust in them than you. I was not talking about performance, but just everyday driving, if you want to experience performance, Volvo AWD can give you perfect 50/50.

pg48477 · May 2004

I was wondering if system like that can be used with MT. Do you know if GT-R with ATTESA-ETS comes with MT?

ceric · May 2004

R34 GT-R comes with 5-speed manual only. Previous versions came with 4-speed manual. They only came with manual shift. To be exact, only GT-R V-Spec (with ATTESA-ETS Pro) has the "active LSD", which resembles SH-AWD. However, Nissan had it in 1999 already.

The only thing new I found is the little "accelerating device". It is the interesting part to me.

Note that even if SH-AWD is as good as GT-R V-Spec in handling, that is outrageous already for a luxury sports sedan.

jrock65 · May 2004

"According to Honda and Volvo. FWD set up is better for highway cruising"

In what way is it "better" exactly?

mbukukanyau · May 2004

They say FWD is better because they want you to buy their products. Cadillac tried that line with SLS and STS and it did not work. they are back to RWD now in full swing. Infiniti went RWD with G35 too.
MB, BMW, Audi, are all RWD.
Its only a matter of time before Acura bails to RWD. Ford can afford to Keep Volvo fight with FWD because they have Lincoln and Jaguar to go after the RWD boys. Honda has no option. The TL is already pushing the limits of FWD like the Deville and Buick. In this Game honda will have to decide if they want to go Buick or go after the big RWD boys.

shotgun · May 2004

Honda/Acura does indeed have an option and they've exercised it brilliantly by choosing SH-AWD! It's a no brainer mbukukanyau, everyone knows and has known for some time that FWD cannot compete with RWD when it comes to performance/handling and yes, everyone knows that the TL is at the limits with performance as far as FWD is concerned. However, Honda/Acura is addressing the problem by offering a solution that promises to exceed RWD performance/handling by offering SH-AWD. I dare say, before the game is over, the RWD boys will be scrambling to keep up with the SH-AWD men...

pg48477 · May 2004

I thought that SH-AWD is to complicated to be used with MT.

pg48477 · May 2004

You need to ask them

pg48477 · May 2004

How you figure that Audi is RWD? Just so you know all manufacturers are building AWD, Acura doing the same. FWD TL by pushing the limit outsold all competition in it's class, and outperform most of competition as well.

lexusguy · May 2004

You dont have to accept my opinions, but honestly FWD is good at absolutely nothing. Do you think that Mercedes Benz does not design its cars with highway crusing in mind? Every single M-B product has AUTOBHAN written all over its DNA, and none of them are FWD. The reason that FWD is used, is so that joe average can get away with using all season tires and they dont have to spend the money on fancy traction\stability computers. FWD is a cheap way to get adequate performance, and adequate bad weather traction. Thats it. There's absolutely no reason why it would be better than any other format on the highway, and several reasons why it would be worse (understeer, torque steer, etc).

Theres a roughly 275hp cap on FWD. The TL and Maxima have hit their limits, and they both have torque steer problems because of it. Not tear the wheel out of your hands Viggen torque steer, but significant torque steer nontheless. The RL is not going AWD because its the popular thing to do, its going AWD because it has to. I would expect the next Maxima and TL to get AWD as well. Thanks to advanced, lightweight electronic AWD systems, theres really no need for FWD anymore. Thats why its going the way of the dodo.

pg48477 · May 2004

I have to agree that FWD and RWD will be obsolete in 10years from now. But you going to far with an argument I was not comparing FWD with RWD. I was just stating the logic behind 95/5 AWD set up. Just so you know 10 years ago everybody thought the limit for FWD was 200Hp, now it's 275 in 5years it can as well be 350HP. Just so you know ,and I am sure you do, TL is one of the best handling vehicles in the class, yes it has some torque steer, but Tl was able to put very impressive numbers on the track.

lexusguy · May 2004

Yes it does pull very impressive numbers.. for FWD. It just comes down to plain physics though, I dont think you'll ever see a day with 350hp FWD cars. And as good as the TL's performance is, think of how good it could be with SH-AWD. The Lancer EVO MR pulls .98G on the skidpad. .98. No FWD Lancer, no matter the horsepower, could dream of that.

pg48477 · May 2004

No RWD Lancer can do it either. I don't think AWD TL will be available with MT, and my next car will be MT.

shotgun · May 2004

Exterior Colors: Desert Mist, Deep Blue, Meteor Silver, Ruby Royal Red, Medium Silver, Silver Metallic, Premium White, Graphite Pearl, Nighthawk Black.

Interior Colors: Black, Grey, Beige.

Available Accessories: All Season mats front and rear, trunk net and tray, wood steering wheel and shift knob, back up sensors, gold emblems, door visors, nose mask, color matched splash guards, rear deck lid spoiler, +1 chrome look wheels, and A-SPEC (wheels, tires +1, suspension, and deck lid spoiler).

pg48477 · May 2004

I had the same thing in my 93 Legend, it shifted hard from 1 to 2, and when pushed hard even span wheels from 1 to 2.

pg48477 · May 2004

Where did you get this data? Does it come with 6MT?

bartalk2 · May 2004

FWD was not introduced just so Joe Sixpack could use all-season tires. FWD was widely adopted in the '70s, after the oil embargo, when cars downsized and FWD offered more interior room (no driveshift [is that what it's called?] intruding into the floor of the interior).

lexusguy · May 2004

FWD has continued to be used because of the traction issue. A driveshaft does not take up that much room. Until the advent of traction and stability control, RWD was significantly worse in bad weather than FWD.

saugatak · May 2004

FWD has continued to be used because of the traction issue. A driveshaft does not take up that much room. Until the advent of traction and stability control, RWD was significantly worse in bad weather than FWD.

For midsized sedans and below, an extra driveshaft will make a noticeable difference in room. It may not be a lot, but there's a reason why Hondas feel so roomy on the inside. Small high revving engine, small transmissions, small FWD drivetrain means max. space.

As for FWD's main advantage being traction in rain and snow in all-seasons without having to do the tire switch, you'll get no argument from me. But let's face it, that is a pretty nice advantage. It's hard to enjoy the driving dynamics of a RWD when you are spinning out.

SH-AWD looks good, one thing I'm wondering about is how is the weight balance? The v6 FWD TL has a 62-38 weight balance, which is pretty bad. Will the SH-AWD bring the RL closer to 50-50?

No matter how great the traction is on SH-AWD, if the weight balance is not close to 50-50, I'd still prefer the driving dynamics of a perfectly balanceed RWD car (when not driving in snow and rain).

robertsmx · May 2004

I believe one difference between the Atessa system and SH-AWD is that SH-AWD can "continuously vary" torque split between front and rear (upto 70% of the torque can go to the rear wheels), and can "continuously vary" torque split between left and right rear wheels(upto 100% of the torque can go to outer rear wheel if it has traction), besides the accelerator device, of course.

Most other AWD system will send 0-100/100-0 or 50-50 split (front and rear, or side to side). But there is a subtle difference between Atessa AWD and SH-AWD (vtec.net had a decent write up on this).

Besides, I don't think Atessa is a pro-active system. SH-AWD is, in that it won't wait for wheels to lose traction.

robertsmx · May 2004

Rear biased AWD or not, to me is simply a marketing gimmick. I dont see why rear biased or front biased AWD system would be better, because the primary purpose of any AWD system is to maximize traction in a straight line or around a corner. Im not surprised that BMW and Mercedes sales/marketing will try to convince buyers that RWD bias is somehow better and that Audis Quattro is somehow an afterthought. Funny when you think that Quattro is more successful than Mercedes 4-matic and BMWs AWD system.

SH-AWD will have up to 70% rear bias, but I doubt it will be true during cruising. May be during heavy throttle, or in slick conditions when fronts lose traction. Cruising will likely be front biased (supposedly, more fuel economical). But I dont see why front or rear bias during cruising would matter, unless those BMW and Mercedes marketeers can explain it to me.

markcincinnati · May 2004

I think the answer is marketing, plain and simple. Even though there is some evidence that supports the efficacy of RWD in several circumstances.

One of the things that some of the AWD sytems "offer" is electronic control of the F/R distribution -- sometimes by an extension of the ABS/ESP systems. The brakes are applied -- and this is an oversimplification -- to wheels in order to provide the required torque shift. Quattro's torsen system actually shifts the torque to the wheels that need it -- instantly and without the aid of applying brake force to distribute torque.

From a marketing perspective, when all is said and done, it will be a requirement -- to "play in the game, as the game needs to be played today" -- to be either RWD or AWD (and AWD with virtually any RWD bias will be touted as superior). Indeed Audi is planning on changing their system so that they can MARKET the quattro system as starting off with a slight RWD bias.

The thing is, it is important to be able to show an AWD vehicle rounding a long sweeping curve at very high speeds with its tail stuck out (in classic oversteer stance). Although I have been to the Audi driving school in Austria 4 times and have made a quattro steer with its tail, the truth of the matter is that the quattro system is, shall we say, more reluctant to round corners with its tail out than, for instance, a BMW. Think marketing, don't think physics.

In other words, even though some of the above behavior is caused by weight distribution and some is caused by the quattro system, the thing that will stick is a "picture" a "test report" -- marketing information, that is.

The current perception is what I am speaking of, but I am also speaking of the phrase, "perception is reality!"

robertsmx · May 2004

Im not sure if you have seen video of the current Integra (RSX) Type-R running on a track with its tail hanging out (power oversteer), and that is a front driver with 60-40 front to rear weight split! I believe it was one of Best Motoring videos.

Im looking forward to seeing how SH-AWD improves upon the dynamics that Hondas superb 5-link rear suspension (Watt-link double wishbone) already offers. It was already designed to passively steer the tail out.

The RL will also be equipped with VSA, so understanding of how all the pieces of electronics work together under the skin will be very interesting.

lexusguy · May 2004

The foward biased TL will out slalom a "perfect balance" BMW.

chillenhonda · May 2004

I dont think the SH-AWD system is marketing ploy at all. I believe is uses some of the technology of the Prelude SH's ATTS system, altho applied to the rear wheels and combined with an all-whel drive system.

The Prelude's ATTS system "pulled" the car into the turn (I doubt I could explain how, but the system was highly praised on the track) nearly eliminating understeer in high performance situations. The Prelude platform really didnt have understeer to begin with, and is generally considered one of the best handling front-wheel drive cars ever made, especially since it had no torque steer (hardly any torque). I doubt Honda, known for their engineering achievements, would invest in this development and not make this system and it results pretty impressive.

robertsmx · May 2004

Simply for "marketing purpose", Honda could have simply used the VTM-4 as is. SH-AWD is a far more advanced version developed, so Acura/Honda does mean "business" with this RL.

lexusguy · May 2004

Absolutely. Its clear that Honda wants to put Acura in the same class as Lexus, Infiniti, Audi, and Mercedes-Benz. Half-assed efforts arent going to cut it.

saugatak · May 2004

The foward biased TL will out slalom a "perfect balance" BMW.

I think 270HP vs 225HP has something to do with that.

Look, I'm not knocking the TL, it's a great car and taking into account prices, I prefer it as an overall package to the BMW.

I'm sure with equal HP, the 50-50 weight balanced BMW would dust the TL.

In any case, that's not the purpose of this discussion. I just want to know if the RL is going to have better weight balance, b/c if it does, I'm holding off on a TL purchase.

markcincinnati · May 2004

Perhaps I have overstated "a" case for certain marketing efforts by car companies, such as Acura. I believe that Acura's efforts to engineer and bring to market an AWD system are not half measures. I believe that would be a mistake.

However, I also believe that the initial spark for the devlopment and adoption of this technology were market driven. And, that is as it should be.

This is not just marketing however -- yet, I'll wager that if Acura was known as a long time RWD company that there would have been less of a sense of urgency to bring out an AWD vehicle.

These same reasons perhaps have pushed Cadillac and Chrysler to offer RWD vehicles and evolve to offering AWD vehicles.

For reasons that we all can cite and probably some of them we all would agree with, the current market (here in the US at least) has come to believe that FWD is not to be continued in the Premium Market. Or, perhaps that one cannot remain in the Premium Market with FWD cars, states the case better.

Acura's efforts may indeed be not only the first SH AWD but also, for the time being, the best.

Rust never sleeps as they say.

One year the Chrsler 300M is in a certain class -- now to remain and have any chance of moving up in status or perception, RWD and/or AWD are "the price for entry."

Its always something.

lexusguy · May 2004

No, the horsepower does not come into it. If you look at the acceleration performance tests, the TL and the 330i automatic are almost identical.

saugatak · May 2004

OK lexusguy. You go on thinking that FWD TL can outhandle a BMW.

lexusguy · May 2004

2004 Acura TL. 0-60 in 6 seconds. 1\4 in 14 seconds. 60-0 braking in 115 ft. 68mph through the slalom.

2004 BMW 330i. 0-60 in 6 seconds. 1\4 mile in 14 seconds. 60-0 braking in 121 ft. 63mph through the slalom.

Hey whats that noise? Its your argument, going out the window. The TL pulls Porsche Boxster numbers going through the cones, and the BMW does not. The TL also out brakes the smaller, lighter BMW.

Acura RL

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles