Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Now, the GS430 starts at $49K, and has many of the items optional on GS300 as standard, except Navigation system and audio system ($3300). Upgrade from 16 inch to 17-inch rims is an option as well.
Acura will come standard with these features, plus AWD. Even if Acura RL goes for $49K, it would sit squarely between the two Lexus GS trims (unless Lexus can somehow trim the price tag).
On other grounds, if RL promises what it is said to, and if GS stays the kind of car it has been, I would go for the more athletic... RL.
No the Legacy doesn't compare to the TL, but it does compare to the TSX.
As to navigation, it will be available for MY06.
Bob <offering some very good AWD alternatives other than those found in European brands>
Speaking of turbo lag, on the 2.5 engine it's minimal. Yes there is some, but very little. Trust me, I've driven a number of them, 5EAT and manuals, it's not a problem.
Bob
As for the G35x, I love the drivetrain (and chassis). Not too sure about the rest of the car.
GS330 without AWD? At $39K, that would be a bargain. But I agree that the car is essentially all show, no go at that price point. I'd probably get a TL or G35 and keep the change.
I still dont like that RL trunk hump
The dark color one looks very nice to me.
They seem to have failed in getting rid of the roof-top antenna as the program manager has mentioned in interview.
The 20" wheels are still on them.
I noticed the CA license plates.
Do you know where those pictures were snapped?
I don't know... I guess it pays tribute to the BMW 7-series design, but shows that it can be well integrated into the lines of the car, rather than looking like they took a piece of plywood, painted it the same color as the car, and plopped it on top of the "real" trunk lid.
Well, back in my "true" talon95 days, when I drove an Eagle Talon TSi AWD, I had the manual. And I remember that the enthusiast magazines criticized the automatic versions of those turbocharged cars, because the shifting and the turbo kicking in never seemed to coordinate well. That phenomenon can be kept under control to a pretty good degree with the greater control of the manual.
Back then, well before the era of 255 hp. family/pseudo sports sedans, that car's 210 hp. was pretty much up there. And I remember that while the turbo coming on in an engine that powerful was quite the rush, the "indirectness" of the power flow sometimes make it feel like I didn't have much control over the acceleration. That's why I'm such a fan of the Accord V6... similar power with much smoother power delivery.
But then, with the Accords, I also made the transition from many years of driving only stick to an automatic. I was spending way too much time in stop and go traffic while commuting, and it got to the point where the degree to which the stick was a pain started to outweigh the degree to which it was fun.
Back when I bought an '87 saab 900s I was initially looking at the 900 turbo and after a couple of test drives, decided on the slower 16v 4 without the booster. It was not at all a fast car; one had to keep the revs high to move along. The handling and daily driving characteristics were much less of an adventure though. Today's turbos, particularly mated to diesels, don't have that sudden blast of power, that sometimes occurred when you weren't quite ready for it in the older turbos. Recall that the turbo on the 900 kicked in around 2500 to 3000 rpm. 0-20 pretty much stunk, 20 to 60 was a rocket ride!
For me, it's never been about the raw performance #'s, it's been more about how the car runs and performs over the daily experience. Having a bit extra on tap for those time we want to let loose, then absolutlely yes. For some reason, I've always been more attracted to lambish looks with a bit of the wolf underneath.
As for the hump on the rl, if it means more trunk space then great! I'm definitely a fan of the new looks and specs, will be interested to read about the 1st test drives.
Obviously, there are other reasons for offering manuals. I didn't mean to suggest that the choice is black or white.
I was speaking to the issue of spooling the turbo, which may happen faster in an automatic (assuming what I recall is still true of today's turbos). While things like hard launches, the driving experience, and drivetrain efficiency may be enough to compensate for the slower spooling, my understanding suggests that turbo lag is less significant with an automatic.
BMW 645Ci
BMW 745i
The only issue I have with those rear ends is the way trunk lid sits on the top. The gap distracts from the “flow”. (Similar issue with new 5-series).
Here is a side view of the 2005 RL’s rear end
In my experience, the "drive-line lash" of automatic transmissions (or the lash that CAN be part of an auto's characteristics) does not mitigate turbo lag, it exacerbates it.
The turbos that have the torque start low and stay for a long time are often virtually undetectable as being turbos and thus can be used with little fanfare with both autos and manuals.
Some cars have massive turbo lag and sloppy slush box auto transmissions -- mate these two traits and driving can be quite, shall we say, unnerving or as we used to say in college "a rush!" (but not in a positive way).
Bob
Spool it up using a tiny electric motor, until the exhaust catches up.
Coefficient of drag and down force dynamics are particularly significant, not to the box-on-wheels Hummer, but to cars like the BMW and new RL. I’m not an engineer, but I’ll bet that the deck lid that’s causing such gnashing of teeth is a result of thousands of hours of wind tunnel and computer testing. I believe that testing has shown that, without that particular shape, the car will lose massive amounts of loading. High-speed handling would become loose. Coefficient of drag would also increase unacceptably. Air dams and aprons do much the same thing at the other end.
I’m doin’ a lot of betting here, but I expect this RL will have a c/d of .29 or less and the butt will have plenty of loading at speed. If we know the advantages of something, I believe most of us will come to embrace it. These cars cannot be designed with disregard of technical requirements. Remember when Audi had to stick that little spoiler onto the deck lid of the TT a couple of years ago? The stylists found out that the thing wanted to go airborne! Does this diatribe make any sense?
To me, the RL looks alot more "substantial" in these real-world pics than in the promo stuff. I can't wait to see it in person!
Well, as I said a few months back, I think that the RL's side looks good but the trunk hump is just plain ugly, poorly styled, and derivative of BMW's newer 7 series. The intersection of the trunk lines with the side panels and tail lights simply do not flow together. Instead they are inexplicably juxtaposed and go off in disparate directions. To make matters worse, they me-too'd the roof antenna.
The front of the car looks ridiculous. It looks more like an animal or Japanese warrior. A three year old Camry on steroids.
All in all, to me it's an ugly car -- coming and going. What a disappointment this is for me.
In my opinion, Acura (Honda) has done it again -- style designed a car by committee, lifting other brands styling details, including incredibly, BMW's deservedly impugned trunk hump and misaligned tail lights. What they should have been doing is approach this with some leadership and innovation, but apparently Acura and Honda are too conservative and careful to take chances -- style wise -- with anything bold and new. Yeah, I know that mechanically they are leaders, but stylistically, they are laggers.
I spent a couple of days over at a Lexus dealership driving RX300s with my girlfriend, who is in the market for a CPO SUV. While there I asked about the new GS, due in March of '05. Based on what I see in the '05 RL photos, what I have seen of the new '05 GS, and the entirely upscale experience at the Lexus dealerships, I will likely be waiting for the new GS to debut before I plunk down upwards of 50 large.
Bummed out and disgusted.
So, who cares what is the coefficient of drag or the down force that is needed to stabilize you car when your car is beyond 150mph. After all, you will probably never reach beyond 200mph in 99% of the mass production vehicles, so spoiler you see on any car is only for show.
Speaking of spoiler, it is just a cheap way to make non-sporty cars look sporty.
Unfortunately, being aerodynamic is not a technical requirement, rather it is a marketing strategy to get your money.
Legendman, cant recommend the RX highly enough. It's no drivers car, but most SUVs arent. However, its extremely comfortable, quiet, and luxurious. It has a great center storage compartment (the wife loved that) and ours has recently passed the 50K mark with a spotless record. Its pulled my XK out of a snow bank on more than one occasion
The only thing I dont like about the new bmw 7 and the 5 is parts of the rear deck. Having test driven both a lot, i'm quite impressed enough to say that i'll easily overlook those flaws.
I also love the little mouse in the center stack of the beemers. Back in 1990, I remember, I was struggling to use a mouse and i'm thinking, wow, maybe i'm not made to use such toys... today even 90 year old alzeimer's patients use mouse & windows successfully.
Shame on us to keep complaining about technology. Like it or not, the tech waves just keep comming. Get up and learn to surf or get washed out, for good or for bad.
I am not particularly impressed with the design of the RL, but I'm guessing so what, i'll die soon and my kids might love it, plus at 10000's of thousands lower than a comparable 5 series, i'll take it, most likely.
ksso
As a person with engineering background, I completely attest to the stated view on engineering over design lately...
ksso
Unlike 2004 TL which I would call aggressive, the new RL's styling approach is understated, and thats been something that top end cars usually have. Of course, not everybody prefers understated looks as it can be "boring", perhaps a reason BMW stylists went from the understated elegance of this car...
to this...
Hard to figure out what people would like... especially, "eventually".
"I also love the little mouse in the center stack of the beemers. Back in 1990, I remember, I was struggling to use a mouse and i'm thinking, wow, maybe i'm not made to use such toys... today even 90 year old alzeimer's patients use mouse & windows successfully."
Right, so you're telling me that a 90 year old with alzeimers can figure out how to program a radio preset through iDrive? Sorry but thats just a plain bad design. You should not have to take a college course in "How to operate your BMW 101". Acura and Lexus have been showing them the proper way to do it for years and years, and the Germans just keep on ignoring them. :Frankenstein voice: Touch screen baaad! 800 confusing buttons or rediculous joystick control scheme goood!
IMHO, if you want to make comparisons, this is the car to look at...
Every time I read a review of how great BMW is, I have to laugh because invariably, in the middle of the review they'll talk about Idrive and the five steps to set a radio station, or the eight steps to do this, etc., etc. I don't care how great a car is otherwise, if I have to pull out an instruction manual just to figure out how to do the most basic things, I just won't buy it.
Lexusguy:
I agree, it's a great car. My folks have two, one in the Midwest and one in the Southwest, and all they've ever needed were oil changes and some new tires for the older RX. They are quiet, comfortable, capable and as far as SUVs go, a pleasure to drive.
Nonetheless, my girlfriend seems to keep coming back to wanting a brand new car -- which would be her first. Her tastes are fairly simple -- we even drove a Mazda MPV -- which owners seem to love, btw.
I should say that my one nit with the Lexus RX 300 (and one that Edmunds.com editors/reviewers also impugned) was Lexus' incorporating what is now a navi screen with the car radio and HVAC controls. To paraphrase the Edmunds editors/reviewers, I hate it. It really takes your eyes off the road in order to manage either function.
If we do get back to see the RX: To buy a CPO RX (2000, 2001) at or under $30,000 OTD (the budget) we have been seeing cars in the 35,000 to 40,000 +/- mile range. Do you think that's too much mileage for a used car?
2005 Acura RL
BMW 645Ci
BMW 745Li
Lexus SC430
Maybach 57
Maybach 62
Toyota Crown
If she wants something new, I would suggest considering the Honda Pilot, which the press adores, or possibly a Murano for something a little different, and theres always Highlander.
"we have been seeing cars in the 35,000 to 40,000 +/- mile range. Do you think that's too much mileage for a used car?"
Depends on what car. If it were say an A6 Avant Quattro, yes. An RX, 40K miles is nothing. I would expect it to hold up to 200K miles or more. BTW, the NAV screen control scheme isnt really as bad as it seems. There are dedicated controls for temp, seek, volume, etc, but presets, changing discs and the like are handled through the NAV screen. Granted its not perfect, the RX330 is much better in that respect, but it's not a huge deal, at least imo.
Anyhow, I do want to comment on a few things:
talon95--you said: "...expensive Altima" look... along with its "next generation Chevy Impala" inspired roofline, the Infiniti standard "mouth full of braces" grille and those really gawdawful taillights, this car doesn't grab me at all."
-The only resemblance I see to the Altima is the roofine. I don't think that the rest of the car looks like the Altima. If anything, I see more G35 coupe in the rear and FX in the front--although I'll admit that the tailights need to be reduced; I like the Fuga concept's rear more.
Also, as for the "downmarket roofline" comment you made in another post, well, by the same token, I guess I should dog on the A6 for having a roofline similar to the Passat. True?
Could you explain to me what "appliance-like instrument panel" is? I have a GE Profile fridge, and I certainly don't think M45 instrument panel when I look at it!
FWIW, I think that the RL's styling is okay--but nothing to write home about--for the segment, but I think it's too much of a hodge-podge of different vehicles thrown in a blender, and that was the end result. The TSX and TL have more of a common theme going on with the crisp edges, but the RL is just a bit bubbly, I can't help but think it'll probably look out of place, but that's just me. The interior is nice, but that center console is too cluttered, IMO.
Just my opinion...
Wow, this is almost like ancient history...
VW/Audi has done a great job of visually distinguishing the Passat from the A6, despite their shared chassis. I don't think they look that much alike anyway. But even if they do, it's a resemblence within a family of cars.
The Impala, on the other hand, has been much maligned by many for its styling, cheap design and other things. Hardly what I'd call an appropriate design inspiration for the flagship from a luxury division. And unlike the family resemblance in the case of Passat/A6, there's no such lineage between the M45 and the Impala. I just consider the resemblance to be unflattering for the M45.
As for the "appliance-like" comment, it has a lot to do with the massive overdose of brushed metal trim, and the jarring combination of the "meet George Jetson" design elements with the anachronistic analog clock. I realize that the clock is an Infiniti trademark, but it's a design element that never really worked for me.
Anyway, these are just gut reactions... there aren't exactly empirical measurements for how one reacts to styling. One person's "thing of beauty" is another person's eyesore. I don't have to justify or attempt to somehow "quantify" those reactions just because you don't react in the same way. You indicate that you don't care for the styling of the RL, and similarly, the styling of the M45, inside and out, does nothing for me at all.
Just my opinion.
Isn't that what the Altima and M45 are--the "family of cars" part? Maybe it's just me, but it seems to me that you think it's a crime that Nissan takes cues from its other vehicles--you did agee that that M45 is an "expensive Altima," after all. Do you just not like Nissan/Infiniti?
>>"The Impala, on the other hand, has been much maligned by many for its styling...Hardly what I'd call an appropriate design inspiration for the flagship from a luxury division."
Well, even though it's been a flop, the Q45 still remains the flagship of Infiniti, not the M45. Try again.
>>"As for the "appliance-like" comment, it has a lot to do with the massive overdose of brushed metal trim, and the jarring combination of the "meet George Jetson" design elements..."
There is an option for wood, but I'm sure you already knew that. ;-)
Also, why don't you lay off of your rather sophomoric cartoon character/anime descriptions for design. With those kind of descriptions, it's hard to take your posts seriously.
What will be more telling, though, is the driving experience, in which I think--based on other Infiniti products--the M will deliver in spades over the RL. Like I probably established, I'll take the "meet George Jetson" interior of the M45 over the cluttered dash of the RL anyday.
I could say (and prove) the same about just about any car, including Roll Royce and like. New RL’s front uses almost all design element from the current RL. Compare these two pictures if you would like to
Current RL
New RL
The new RL appears to have a sportier stance with a lower front end. The penta-grill still sinks into the bumper, the strong crease on the hood is carried over, except that it is not used to “cover up” the gap between it and the fenders. You still don’t see the wipers (as is typical of luxury cars) and the windhshield nozzles are now hidden. There are a few differences (different bumper and head lamps) but that has to be.
The rear end resembles the outgoing RL too! The middle part of the trunk conveys a feeling of the same shape. The difference is near the tail lamps. The shoulder line folding into the tail lamps is new, but Acura was using a similar theme in the later 90s. The tail lamps resemble CL more than they do the outgoing RL.
The TSX and TL have more of a common theme going on with the crisp edges, but the RL is just a bit bubbly
A look up close, between TSX, TL and RL will reveal a lot of crisp and similarities between the three as should be expected. The only rounded (bubbly?) part in RL’s overall styling is near the tail lamp. Even there, it is far from being “bubbly”. If you really want to see “bubbly”, check out the Infiniti (and Nissan) vehicles.
The interior is nice, but that center console is too cluttered, IMO.
I don’t think so. The brushed aluminum trim (and real one at that) increases the contrast, but cluttered console it is not. Clutter is when you have to stand up and move up close to read the buttons that aren’t laid out logically (but stylistically). Have you seen the RL’s center console upclose? If not, here it is
Well spaced, symmetrical and most importantly, “visible” from driver as well as passenger seat. Here it is in “macro mode”
Show me another console, with as many controls/features that have at least as much intuitiveness/user-friendliness built into it.
Plus, the resale value of the G and FX are terrific.
I'm hoping that the RL and M35 AWD w/ Tech Package are about $48,000 as well. It'd be great if the price is lower, but I'm not holding my breath.