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
From Sep 01, 2004:
“Overall gearing is impacted by overall axle ratio. Like S2000, Honda is using a primary (4.600:1) and a secondary (1.238) gear reduction, giving it an (overall) axle ratio of 5.695.”
I finally had a few minutes to look up some sources.
What I see from Road and Track, an ’04 TL brochure and the ’05 TL release is that the ’03 TL-S and ’04 / ’05 TL gearing (trans. and final) is identical.
The RL trans. gearing is similar, but not identical – except for 5th = 0.48 in all cases.
I do not see a ‘secondary gear’ ratio listed in the TL information I have – or can find on the ‘Net. Does it have one?
And the final drive of the TL is listed as 4.428 – where the RL is listed as 4.6.
If the secondary gear ratio is the same numerical ratio in the RL as in the TL, the difference in rpm at 60 would be less than 80 rpm (approx. 1750 for the TL and 1829 for the RL = approx. 4.5%). And this relatively low cruising engine speed would give some credence to the Highway MPG quoted. If the TL has no secondary gear reduction, the rpm at 60 would be something like 2265.
(Assuming comparable overall rolling radius for the 17” tires on all, etc.)
So – is the RL reduction gear a (significantly) different ratio than the TL?
If not, I would expect the these numbers to be accurate. . .
Thanks,
- Ray
More interested in cruising range than city MPG . . .
For what it may be worth, I own a Legend, and it has been plagued by ABS and brake problems. The master cylinder had to be replaced 3 times and the ABS unit once. After some research and a candid talk with the service manager, I learned that at least in the early 90s (and perhaps later?) Acura's brake system had a proclivity for becoming contaminated, often causing failures in that system.
I was able to get some "Customer Assistance" from Acura on the master cylinder and ABS replacements by working through the service manager who, at my request, contacted the local Acura district rep who authorized the "good will" replacement of the parts at their expense -- labor was on me.
What helped me immensely in these negotiations were my well documented service records, which reflected ongoing brake problems. The other ace in the hole was learning about all the technical service bulletins (TSBs) on the car from a web site called Alldata dot com. If you go to that website, ignore all banners to pay for entry and also ignore the banner that Acura has them put up trying to get you not to look at the TSBs. With perseverance you will find a page with ALL of the TSBs on the car, with an accompanying list of the related customer complaints associated with the TSB. (At the web site, look for TSBs on top, click that, then on the next screen go to the right side box and look for: "1982-2004 Vehicle Year TSBs and Recalls available in ALLDATA Products"; then select your year, and then your model.) By confronting Acura with your knowledge of a systemic problem, you may enhance your argumentas to why they should fix your out of warranty car.
As mentioned above, this web site was invaluable to me. It also helped identify an AC problem that went uncorrected for years by the dealer. Once I found that my complaint (AC blows warm air intermittantly) had a TSB and a fix for the problem, I notified the service manager -- who had known nothing about the existence of the TSB or the fix. Again, Acura then paid for the part and I paid for the labor.
Staying on topic, may I add that I certainly hope that the 2006 RL will leave all the brake system problems behind -- as surely there may be a few new kinks to work out, what with all the 'Flash Gordon' technology bestowed on Acura's latest and greatest technological achievement.
I had one problem with the "check engine" light staying on - defective oxygen sensor which was corrected under the extended warranty purchased by the previous owner.
It is almost a certainty that even if I succumb to buying the '05 RL now, the '96 will remain in my stable for quite some time. It has run almost flawlessly all this time and I doubt that I could find a better replacement car at its projected trade value. With two more drivers being added, I need the extra wheels to prevent being a perpetual "taxi driver."
http://www.globemegawheels.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20- 040902/WHACURA02/cars/
In it, among other things, they claim the following: "...and Canadian models come with bilingual voice-recognition and navigation systems, headlight washers and ventilated seats with both heating and cooling."
Now much rethoric has revolved around the notion of certain options not being available on the new 05' RL and the aforementioned article somewhat rankles me - not that I have to have or need every conceivable option, but if the Canadians are offered headlight washers and heated and ventilated seats, I should, at a minimum, have access to those options!
Speaking of options that I would be willing to pay for and which I think should be available on an automobile of this calibre - are the following:
1. Heated & Cooled, ventilated seats ( I live in the south).
2. Power adjustable front passenger headrests (essential to be able to adjust while driving).
3. Intelligent cruise control (Befitting any luxury car worth mentioning nowdays).
4. 20" wheels (Since they where showcased on the prototype).
5. Remote starting (Nice on cold, wintery days)
6. A few "ground effects" add on's.
What are your thoughts??
In the body of the article, on page 12, "This year, one aim of redesigning many vehicles is to be sportier and more fun to drive than previous versions. The Acura RL, Audi A6, Cadillac STS, Mercedes-Benz SLK350, and Subaru Legacy GT are examples of this trend."
In the box for the Acura RL:
"The company line. Acura says the RL, which goes on sale this October, will 'redefine the luxury-performance-sedan category' by featuring a 300-hp V6 engine and a new AWD system that sends all rear torque to the outer wheel when cornering for better handling."
"CR's take. Based on the excellent Rating of the Acura TL, the RL looks promising. It has many high-tech devices, such as front headlamps that turn to illuminate around corners and a navigation system that integrates real-time traffic reports to help plot the best route."
>1. Heated & Cooled, ventilated seats (I live in the south).<
I live in Southern California, which can get pretty toasty at times. Ventilated seats would be a god-send; I would be really peeved to find that Canadians get them and Americans do not. Hard to think why we wouldn't though. It certainly gets hotter here, south of their border.
>2. Power adjustable front passenger headrests (essential to be able to adjust while driving).<
Would be great! I concur wholeheartedly.
>3. Intelligent cruise control (Befitting any luxury car worth mentioning nowdays).<
I would like this as well, though I don't like the appearance of the little concentric circles that dot the rear bumpers of the cars that sport this feature. I wish they could figure out a more attractive way to accomplish this.
>4. 20" wheels (Since they where showcased on the prototype)<
I don't really see a real, workaday world plus for these. The replacement costs would be brutal as well. What about 18" wheels?
>5. Remote starting (Nice on cold, wintery days)<
I have a friend in Chicago and she loves this feature, which she added at the dealership. I would use it here in California with the air conditioning -- on those days when the inside of your car can feel like an inferno after 30 minutes in the hot sun.
Thanks for the link to the Canadian article. That was an interesting read.
However, the only two complains, I think, are first, the RL will not power-oversteer slide as the SHAWD will not allow it, and the second is "After a lots of track time, the RL's steering began to feel a bit light and its suspension too soft-there's certainly room for Acura to add a more stiffly sprung sport model down the line-but as the red mist receded and we headed back to the highway, the RL resumed being what it is, a comfortable luxury car."
From the point of the competing target of BMW 5 series, and MB E class, I think those complains are pointless as none of those cars has a "true" sports handling.
The price is estimated to be $48,000 fully loaded, which is going to be hard to beat.
0-60mph: 6.4s
Standing 1/4 miles: 15.0s
Curb weight: 4000lb
EPA city driving: 18 mpg
EPA highway driving: 25 mpg
I think this new RL is a keeper.
Now, I just hope they add a wood shift knob.....
0-60mph: 5.5s
Standing 1/4 miles: 14.1s
Crub weight: 4000lb
EPA city driving: 17mpg
C/D-obseved fuel economy: 16mpg
Price: $62,620
E320 /CDI as it performs better then E320
0-60mph: 7.1s
Standing 1/4 miles: 15.3s
Crub weight: 4002lb
EPA city driving: 27mpg
C/D-obseved fuel economy: 24mpg
Price: $52,000
TL A-spec
0-60mph: 5.6s
Standing 1/4 miles: 14.3s
Crub weight: 3543lb
EPA city driving: 19mpg
C/D-obseved fuel economy: 20mpg
Price: $40,895
My current '98 540iA can do
0-60 5.9s
1/4 miles: 14.7s
weight 3850lb
city EPA: 17
highway EPA: 23
I would have a hard time to convert to RL with 6.4s 0-60. Imagine I would also get less torque (310 vs 260). I would live with it at 6.0s. Anyway, can't wait to test drive one to see. I am #1 on my dealer's waiting list.
0-60mph: 4.5s
Standing 1/4 miles: 11.9s@137 mph
Curb weight: 3543lb
Engine: V8 iron block and aluminum heads
Power(C/D estimated): 800 bhp @8000 rpm
Torque (C/D estimated): 525 lb-ft @ 6500 rpm
Redline: 9500 rpm
Handling: 1.08g
Fuel economy: 5mpg
Price: $150,000
I look at 0-60 time, standing 1/4 mile time and speed, handling. It seems like there is not whole of difference to the mass production cars.
The 0-60 mile is only 3 second faster than most of the cars.
The standing 1/4 mile is in somewhat 4 second faster and the speed is probably 30 miles faster than most of the cars.
The handling is like 0.23g better than the most of the cars.
However, the price tag costs 6 times more and the fuel economy is like 5 times worse than most of the cars.
So, in that nature, I would pay more attention to the interior and feature of a car than performance of a car as most of the mass production cars do not different that much in its class.
And, that is why I say the new RL is a keeper.
I hope there will a A-Spec for RL, then the only other car that I am waiting for is 2008 Nissan Skyline.
Last time I checked, this is a public forum, and not a bully pulpit. Just because you are enthralled with the new design does not mean that the rest of us who have expressed opposing views and opinions are "chopped liver" solely because of your pronouncement and decree that Acura has produced "(finally") "a handsome new car". Hmmm, sounds like you were not too enthralled with previous designs as well.
>Some of you guys would NEVER be happy with anything Acura would come to market with<
Unless you know us all personally -- which you cannot and do not -- such a statement has no veracity. By the way, for what it's worth, I was darn happy with my first Acura, and the two Hondas I had before that, thank you very much. My loyalty to the company has kept me driving their cars, and, waiting for a styling change that I liked equally well.
In case of RL, besides the axle ratio (4.600) and gear ratio 0.48:1, there is another reduction of 1.238:1 which pushes the fifth gear overall drive ratio to about 2.75:1.
Aha.
Fascinating.
Thanks,
- Ray
Now very interested in experiencing what this particular acceleration and highway MPG compromise will feel lie - on the road . . .
Also, 300HP might be the max (in any case it's pretty close to the max) on a 3.5L engine. It's not like the 3.5L 260HP G35, where you KNEW there were more horses in that engine.
The HP and torque claims made by chip makers ARE real -- but substantial gains are made only to turbo-charged engines. The impact on such engines is often massive increases in torque.
For a normally aspirated engine such as the Acura's, the most significant steps that can be taken (for "sane" money) would include modifications that will improve the breathing of the engine: new exhaust system, air filter and the engine management chip combined might be good for about a 5% bump in "power" -- realize, too, that this bump in torque MAY take place at somewhat higher RPM's than the factory set up.
This may translate less into off the line capabilities and more to highway urge.
At the risk of suggesting something in-sane, I would tell you that a fairly big bang for perhaps double the cost of new pipes, would be a modest boost supercharger (someone, somewhere will probably make one or one already is out there that can be relatively easily adapted).
The performance of the new RL hardly seems to be a weakness -- even though the relatively low torque at a relatively high RPM would seem to point to an area that could be strengthened somewhat. But this engine is probably fairly conservatively tuned and perhaps will be tweaked in subsequent years to improve both the numbers and the associated performance.
This is darn near a first, the car isn't even out and folks want to tweak it. Oh well, more power to you (pun intended).
Thats about a 25% increase. Does this mean that the new US RL will be around $56,800. That is just way too high.
>>Thats about a 25% increase. Does this mean that the new US RL will be around $56,800. That is just way too high.
Actually, at current conversion rates, $69,500 Canadian, translates to $53,983 USD. However, that's still too high, in my opinion, even though I really like the new RL.
Nebraskaguy - We can't do a straight conversion with Canadian currency in the car market. Different markets lead to different prices. US CR-V owners hate the fact that Canadians get the good stuff long before we do. But (in the mass market arena), Honda has to offer extras to compete.
I realize that. However, it appeared that was what the original poster was trying to do and that is what I was responding to.
Canadian cars include headlight washers as well as ventilated front seats.
U. S. cars include XM Radio with the new traffic feature and perhaps Onstar.
This will differentiate to a small degree the pricing difference.
The issue remains, however, if $48,000 is "substantially" under $50K. Without regard to the debate of the meaning of the word in that context, an MSRP of $48K seems appropriate -- unless, as C/D mentions, this is expecting the car to be "instantly" transformed (by virture of this new model) from the mid-premium class to the premium class.
It is a tough call -- this car, if it is indeed $48K seems to be "reasonable." But, hey, I'm the guy that thought the Passat W8 for around $38K was also reasonable -- and the market and the lack of marketing conspired to prove me wrong.
The RL -- which has certainly never been ill thought of -- may not be able to compete at $48K, perhaps it needs to be at $46,900 for "psychological reasons" until it proves itself to be worthy of being included in the high zoot club.
This is in 5 series and the A6's price range (even though based on what I've seen it would take at least $3 or $4K more from the A6 to approximate the RL) -- and for the past few years the RL has been a runner up in this class.
Anyway, for $48K MSRP, I, for one, am willing to suggest that while NOT "substantially" below $50 large, it is enough of a value to at least be considered alongside other "like class" cars.
That exec who said "substantially below" is probably wishing he would have not uttered the "s" word in that context.
We'll see.
(SH-AWD) system. He writes " It uses pseudo rear diff with two electromagnetic clutches that control torque distribution on the orders of a computer that monitors front and rear g-forces, yaws,steering input, rpm, throttle position, gear ratio, and individual wheel speeds. As you cruise along the system pumps 70 % of the power to the front wheels. But as conditions change, it can reverse the balance to the rear wheels, pretty standard 4 wheel drive stuff. What's different is that with SH-AWD is it's ability to apportion torque-side to side on the rear axle. IN FACT, the system can route as much as 100% of the rear axle's power to just one rear wheel if necessary. The torque-shifting function is tied into the vehicle's stability-control system and is designed to give the RL agile yet foolproof handling.
All this power mongering is never apparent to the driver but it's effect is obvious. This we discovered in the course of running dozens of laps in several RL's around a tight little circuit at Summit Point Raceway in West Virginia."
There is more in this article that I like but this particular information dispels the notion that the RL is a cumbersome road car as acknowledged by a buddy when I showed interest in buying it months ago. (Was wondering though if 18 inch tires and wheels would enhance or hinder the handling?) Anyone care to speculate?
This is a pat of a new review posted today on edmunds. Just want to say on thing, I have no read any review for the past ten years stating that any vehicle handled batter than BMW, in respective class. Still don't know if BMW had sport package or RL had 18" rims, but still impressive.
I think the base price of $ 48,000 is still possible, but if Acura does come out A-Spec for RL as Acura has some kind of performance upgrade as I mentioned in another post, then the price would well be in $50,000 to $52,000 price range.
And, without a V8, I think the marketing target for Acura is to take on the V6 market only, which I think is not a such bad strategy as you do not want to broaden you target too much as you put so much technology into a brand new design. Also, if you look at the design philosophy of Lexus, it has had the reputation of "no fun to drive," yet their LS430 is the best in its class. I think Acura has been paying attention to that fact.
Again, if you want a "true" performance car, get a Lotus Elise, which hits 60 in 4.4s, and pulls 1.06g that is even better than Ferrari Enzo, and it costs around $40,000.
Heated seats in Canada make sense to me, but ventilated seats up North in Canada, as opposed to down South here in the good old USA (Texas, Florida, California, etc) makes NO sense to me.
Since both XM and OnStar want to get people hooked on their services, I doubt they charge Acura much, if anything for the initial service.
1. The car does look lovely in DARK colors, i still think its looks BLAH in light.
2. After reading all the first drive reviews, I think most people are kinda going gaga over the RL... whether that translates into actual sales for RL is to be seen.
3. There was a time when every Edmunds editor left drool marks on every BMW and basically, BMW could do no wrong... nowadays, Edmunds seems to be drooling over every Acura. If you read the past TSX, TL & now the first drive RL reports here, you'd think, they have had a change of religion from BMW to Acura
ksso
For the car owner, yes. The question was whether Acura has to pay for it or whether XM and OnStar give them a deal to get car owners hooked.
As I read the article, though, I found [based on my interpretation] the remarks comparing the Acura to the Audi and the BMW to be less than compelling. Indeed, although I am certain edmunds did not intend to present the article disingenuously, the article appears to be comparing the new RL to the '04 versions of the other brands mentioned.
Probably there were no 2005 A6's for example to compare the RL with -- and that is certainly no crime. However, to say anything about the 2005 RL in comparison to the 2004 models of "the other guys" seems either unintentionally misleading or intellectually dishonest.
In other words, while I appreciate the praise, analysis and facts pertaining to the RL, I find the comparison without merit or value.
I find this particularly disturbing since there was no clarification that the cars being compared were not identified as to model, equipment level, etc. At a price point of $48K for the Acura RL for 2005, the 2004 Audi A6 2.7T S-line would be the "closest" model -- er, close enough for jazz as the saying goes.
This statement [mine] does not diminish the overall impression (positive) that edmunds' ultimately reaches. Indeed, the RL for 2005 would, undoubtedly, "trump" the 2004 Audi 2.7T S-line.
But that is not the point.
I, for one, await a comparison (at the price point) of the 2005 A6 3.2 (and, to be inclusive the 2005 BMW 5 series) with options "equivalent" to the RL or at least optioned to the as close as possible price point -- and, to repeat, ditto the BMW.
Why do we have to wade through such reviews? I would have much preferred an overview and impressions of the new RL with a teaser that says, "we can't wait to compare the 2005 models from. . . ."
There's 10 minutes of my life I can never get back.
And that, my friend, is a very good thing!!!
As for looks, that's all subjective to taste that will never be reviewable unless the new entry is as freakshow ugly as a 7 series.
This fascination with ever larger wheels and tires escapes me. Would think at 18", the rl would be maxed out in terms of handling, ride quality ratio. I might prefer 17", or heaven help me, 16", for the ideal ratio of ride quality and handling. At 20", there is likely not enough air volume in the tire to derive any kind of road imperfection absorption. Suspensions are tuned to allow for the tire to take on a certain amount of punishment and that is done with air volume. Also, the wheel weight increases too much with more metal v more rubber. Do we want to tax the suspension more or less at point of impact? Do we want more weight or less at point of braking? Me, I want less. And if someone argues that the wheels can weigh less than the rubber, they will then be arguing for less tolerant metal that will greatly impact the wallet with un-waranteed wheel damage when whacking potholes. Particularly in the Northeast & upper Midwest, I would want 16-17" wheels with penty of rubber to silence and smooth out roads that were likely 1st built for wagon traffic.
Ksso, are you sure you like dark colors?