Luxury Performance Sedans

purplem46 · August 2006

If you ask me, $7K is an awful lot of money for AWD, a questionably better stereo (The TL's is one of the best in class) some Nav upgrades and a sunshade. Even BMW would give you more than that for $7K.

I'm not really a proponent of either the RL or TL, but I have driven both. The TL is a feisty car, but with front wheel drive (much the same as the maxima) torque steer is much more evident than in the AWD RL. That can be a real let down (buzz kill) when trying to drive aggresive in either straight line acceleration or in handling moves. Acura is still not competing with the handling cars of this class, but is more than enough for those that don't care to or have occasion to push. In my neck of the woods, TL's are the new Accords, the are everywhere.

lexusguy · August 2006

I'm not really a proponent of either the RL or TL, but I have driven both. The TL is a feisty car, but with front wheel drive (much the same as the maxima) torque steer is much more evident than in the AWD RL. That can be a real let down (buzz kill) when trying to drive aggresive in either straight line acceleration or in handling moves.

I agree that the TL definitely is not the perfect car. The problem with the RL is that a TL with AWD would render it pointless. This is not an issue with the 330xi\530xi, A4\A6 etc. The RL just doesn't bring enough to the table, and people literally aren't buying it.

sfcharlie · August 2006

"The RL just doesn't bring enough to the table, and people literally aren't buying it."

2001: For Acura, TL was up, selling 69,484 units. RL was down almost 28% from 2000.

2002: TL was down 12% from 2001,but is Acura's best-selling vehicle (60,764 sold). RL goes down another 12+% to 9,392.

2003: Acura finished 2003 with record December sales of 15,537 cars and light trucks, up 21 percent over last year on the strength of MDX, TSX and the all-new TL. Record Acura sales of 170,918 for the full calendar year topped the previous best of 170,469 set in 2001. BUT, the TL and and RL were both down. The TL sold 56,770 (-6.6% from 2002), while the RL sunk to 6,829 sold (-27% from 2002).

2004: Acura Division sales in 2004 rose 16.0 percent over last year's record to 198,919 cars and SUVs. Record December sales of TSX, TL, MDX and the all-new RL pushed Acura to new December record of 20,146 vehicles, up 24.9 percent over the previous December, making it the best month Acura's 14-year history. Acura TL sales were up 36.8 percent to 77,895 and RL sales were up too: the old RL had sold only 414 units in December of 2003. The new RL was up 357% for December 2004, selling 1,967 units. That raised the RL sales for the year to 8,753 (up 28% from 2003).

2005: With record sales of the RL, TL and TSX sedans, the Acura Division posted a new all-time record result for the full calendar year. Acura sales in 2005 rose 5.7 percent over last year's record to 209,610 cars and SUVs, breaking the 200,000-unit mark for the first time. Acura posted record December sales for TSX and TL. The year's percentage increase over 2004 for the TL, however was under 1% (78,218), while the new RL, in its first full year on the market, was up 101% (17,572).

2006: This year, however, the RL is down 31.5% (versus the first 7 months of last year) having sold only 6,932 units so far. The TL is down too, but only -5.4% compared to last year.

lexusguy · August 2006

2006: This year, however, the RL is down 31.5% (versus the first 7 months of last year) having sold only 6,932 units so far. The TL is down too, but only -5.4% compared to last year.

The RL's initial strength came from the fact that it beat the GS and M to market by almost a year. I think if the RL was released for '06 rather than '05, it would've been a dud pretty much immediately. In any case, it doesn't really matter, as it is still the second worst car in the class (better than only the S-type), and it will never sell 1,967 again.

The TL isn't going to fare much better in the next few years. They've already gone past the Accord architecture's reasonable limit for FWD power, and yet now they want to throw in 30 or so more horses in an effort to try and compete with the G35, IS350, and 335i. Not good.

sfcharlie · August 2006

2000: 39,703

2001: 40,005

2002: 40,842

2003: 46,964 [The BMW Group (BMW and MINI brands combined) ended its best year ever with robust twelve-month sales gain of 8 percent, reporting 276,869 vehicles over the 256,622 reported in 2002. It was the twelfth straight year that BMW posted sales increases. Sales for December were off 5 percent, at 24,915 vehicles compared to sales of 26,252 in December 2002.]

2004: 45,584

2005: 52,722 [The BMW Group in the U.S. (BMW and MINI brands combined) reported record sales for 2005, with an increase of 4 percent, to push the total over the 300,000 threshold for the first time.]

2006: Year-to-Date Sales of BMW Group Up 5.3 Percent; July sales off 12 Percent ... BUT 5-series sales are 31,309 so far this year, up 12.8% from 27,765 for the first seven months of last year ... down, however, for July, along with the rest of the BMW lineup (4,381 sold last July and only 3,474 in July 2006).

mbbrooks · August 2006

I decided to try to take advantage of August deals and went about looking for a new car to replace my 2003 Honda Accord V-6.

I was attracted initially to the BMW 5 series in the form of a 530i. The car looks good, gets out of its own way, rides well in the standard version, and you can get most of the bells and whistles. The problems were (1) that I'd have to order a car to get what I wanted (nav: with the iDrive you have to have the voice commands, sport package: love those seats - foldown rear seat, rear side airbags: why these are not standard I don't know, upgraded stereo: but no CD changer which takes up most of the glove box) (2) there are many 5's around here with the 525 being prevalent, and (3) a new 5 will be out in a year or so.
The dealer only had one car with Nav and it had nothing else but I was in love and would have leased it on the spot if they had given me what the website showed as the lease payment. They didn't get close and I was out of there.

I then spent two weeks looking around at other cars - I figured it could be a lot of fun and it was.

I first went to Accura since I loved my two Hondas. The TL is a nice car but it was too much like my Accord. The RL was very nice. It has a great voice command system and nav system. But the handling, acceleration, and mileage were real let downs.

I have no interest in Infiniti's for reasons that are not pertinent here so I did not look at them.

I looked at the new GS and IS Lexus. I liked them both but somehow they didn't reach out to me. There was a 530i parked outside the showroom and it seemed like a sign.

I went to look at Audis. I have a garage queen Porsche 993 and knew the dealership pretty well and liked them. While there were things I liked about the A6 there were things I did not like such as overall finish and materials and acceleration. I really did not feel that it was worth the money and the BMW 5 was still calling my name. While I was there I looked at Jags but was totally uninspired.

I was fortunate to have a friend who knew the sales manager of another BMW shop and he gave me a great quote. Armed with that quote, it was back up to the other BMW dealer to order the car. I knew what I wanted now more than ever.

On the way I thought I'd stop by the Mercedes-Benz dealer just to be able to say I saw everything. I have never seen myself as a MB kind of guy so I thought this would be a quick stop. Sure the cars looked and felt nice but a Benz? Pleeease. After some prompting the sales guy got me in a E350 to test drive it. It would be easier, and quicker just to be done with it and I knew that now my research would be truly complete.

The car I drove was a 2007 E350 with the Sport Package. It was one of the saleguy's car so I didn't hammer it too hard but I the handling was great as was the acceleration. The finish and materials were as good as I'd seen. While I have always disliked lots of buttons and dials on the dash, after 3 test drives in the BMW I was still being frustrated by the iDrive. The overall package overwhelmed the 530.

When they showed me a 2007 - MB has redone the front end and rear ends to some degree - E350 in Flint Grey with the Sport Package and Premium 1 and 2 packages - I was sold on the spot. Not that I admitted it of course and I negotiated hard on the deal and came out okay. The dealership has bent over backwards to make everything as pleasant as possible.

I have had the car for two weeks now and could not be more pleased. I really wonder why I didn't do this years ago.

Like I said, just my thoughts.

dhamilton · August 2006

Edmunds the RL was the fastest through the slalom when compared to the other cars in the class. Bimmer 5 series, Audi, and some others [can't remember. My point is, no one compares the G to the M? I don't quite get the point of the TL RL comparison. Because the TL has more rear seat leg room? The G handles better than the M. So what's the point
I need to dig up some handling numbers for both.

lexusguy · August 2006

Edmunds the RL was the fastest through the slalom when compared to the other cars in the class.

Again, untrue. You really need to some more research. Edmunds recorded two slalom tests for the RL, 60, and 63mph. The 5 and A6 have beaten those numbers by large margins.

My point is, no one compares the G to the M? I don't quite get the point of the TL RL comparison. Because the TL has more rear seat leg room? The G handles better than the M. So what's the point

The M is a genuinely larger car, with features you can't get on the G, a V8 for one. The point of the RL TL comparison was you claiming that the RL handles better. The other point is that unlike the M, and every other car in the class, the RL offers nothing over the TL other than AWD and a few minor tech tricks.

The A4 3.2 and A6 3.2, 330xi and 530xi, IS and GS AWD, G35x and M35x can all co-exist because the midsize cars actually offer something other than a different body style. If Acura made an AWD TL, RL sales would drop to zero.

merc1 · August 2006

And there it is, well put. For all the time I spend on cars it never really occured to be that the RL was even remotely based on the Accord platform. :confuse:

M

markcincinnati · August 2006

I often mistake the RL for an Accord, until I get within a certain range or perspective.

I always assumed the RL started life out in some respects as an Accord.

Takes all kinds. :surprise:

merc1 · August 2006

Do you realize what this means? :surprise: Every sedan Honda/Acura makes except for the Civic is more or less on the same platform or a variation thereof. Yikes! The only real difference is whether or not it is built on the European Accord platform or the U.S. one.

M

cdnpinhead · August 2006

Thanks for that.

In the smaller class, I added the C230 to my short list. The BMW 3 is #1 on the hit parade, but the C is right behind -- both are RWD & can be had with a manual.

That said, the (as always, anecdotal) reports of electrical/electronic & other troubles on the Mercedes "problems & solutions" boards are rather off-putting.

I'm hoping you'll post again in a few years telling us about your 50K+ miles of trouble-free Mercedes ownership. Good luck, and enjoy that new car.

jobie · August 2006

Interesting...I find myself in the same boat. I had a 2002 530i (old style) that I loved. The new style initially turned me off inside and out, not to mention the bump in price from mid-high $40K's for my last 530i to low-mid $50K's for the current model, which puts it even with the E350. I never looked twice at the E-class until lately - I think it's styling is great inside and out, and no I-drive. I just drove a 530xi last week - great driving car; I need to drive the '07 E350 to see how close MB has come to the 5's handling. I still don't like the stigma that will come with a MB, I got enough comments about driving a Bimmer.

dhamilton · August 2006

do some reading in the Edmunds comparo. RL fastest slalom. time. It loses 1 inch in rear seat legroom to I think the M. Other than that, everyone is within a tenth or so.
Again my source is the 6 cylinder all wheel drive luxury sedan comparos. That is what I referenced. Apples, to apples so to speak.

tayl0rd · August 2006

I'm guessing you're using some humoristic sarcasm. But Honda/Acura only has 3 platforms (4 if you count the NSX); the Accord, the Civic, and the S2000. The majority of their cars are based on some slight variation of the Accord platform.

breld · August 2006

I had posted a few weeks ago about my decision process. I had basically narrowed it down to Japanese vs. German, and eventually, M35x vs. 530xi. I had mentioned that the M35 made a lot of sense to me, with respect to price, reliability, reviews, etc., but that I simply felt more of a connection to the 530 - more of a gut feel than anything else.

Well, I sucked it up, decided to spend the extra few grand, and went with the heart. I just ordered a 530xi with the premium, sport and cold packages, along with the stereo upgrade and window shades. And, by far the most significant distinction the BMW offers among this class - a 6 speed manual. Resale be damned!

Once I started looking at this class of cars, I had resolved myself to giving up the manual trannie, just to open up the options and consider the Lexus, Infiniti, Acura, Audi, etc. I had, in fact, started embracing the idea of an automatic, but found that it was more "theoretical" than anything else. I reveled in the idea of a "more relaxing" commute and "push it and go" acceleration, but in practice, when I went on test drives, I was somewhat underwhelmed with the overall driving experience.

Having said that, I based my decision after driving all the cars in this class with an auto tranny, and when the 530 still won out my preference, I then decided to go ahead with the manual.

krzyss · August 2006

for manual ;-)

Krzys

markcincinnati · August 2006

Your performance and theoretically your mileage will be better, too.

According to my "manual or die" wife, you also will have more control (and I basically agree) and tons more fun.

According to my (our) BMW dealer, resale is HIGHER on the sticks -- when a stick is turned in at lease end, it has no time on the lot, it just sells, period.

Of course, according to this same dealer, NO stick shift new ones have any shelf life either, they usually sell before they are prepped.

While I'm at it, this same dealer says, "X" drive sales are inventory, NOT demand, constrained at about 40%. Apparently, 4 of 10 3's and 5's are now sold (here in River City) as x models.

A 530xi would they offer a real sport package rather than a sport appearence package with a stick shift and 18 or 19" wheels would be a brisk seller, methinks.

Just as I was about to post that I had entered manual shifters anonymous and that the program was starting to work. . .

Congrats!

breld · August 2006

I have to admit, had they offered a "real" sport package on the xi model, I probably would have passed on that option. A few years ago, I would never have passed it up, but I'm getting to a point where I do appreciate the comfort and luxury side of the equation as well.

In fact, one of the main factors in my decision was the balance the BMW offers. Many a Lexus salesperson pitched to me that a BMW, due to its sporty nature, can't match the GS for the luxurious ride quality. But, having a couple of test drives in each, I thought the 530xi, with standard wheels, matched the GS ride with regard to comfort, and clearly provided a sportier experience at the same time.

That's the balance that appealed to me. Add a sports suspension and larger wheels (w/RFT), and I imagine the Lexus salesperson could have a point.

lexusguy · August 2006

Again my source is the 6 cylinder all wheel drive luxury sedan comparos. That is what I referenced. Apples, to apples so to speak.

The LPS "class" though includes the A6 4.2 S-line and 550i, which both handily beat the RL through the slalom. In any case, slalom tests are only a minor part of the handling equation. You'll have a tough time convincing anyone that the RL handles subjectively better than any of the other V6\AWD cars, save perhaps the GS300 AWD.

dhamilton · August 2006

think you have to compare Apples to apples. When you start getting in to different engine choices, and suspension set-ups, then yes, the RL will lose ground. Steering feel is another subject, yes, I totally agree, so is the torque steer in the TL. That's why TO ME it's silly to compare a front drive car that torque steers quite a lot, to an all wheel drive luxury sedan. Especially when the same comparison isn't made to all the competition. As far as an all wheel drive TL rendering the RL useless, possibly. Have you ever heard the expression "If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle"? [Yes I know there are rumors, but please see quote about Aunts]
I realize that I'm in the minority with the RL. I still say it's a great car at 41-44k.
I think that some of it has to do with people wrapping their minds around a "50k Honda". I sort of get that, but that's how I am with Toyota/Lexus. Not worth it for a car that my mother would drive.

merc1 · August 2006

I understand what you're saying, but the other cars in the segment just offer more over their smaller siblings, that is all folks are saying here. Lexus doesn't share any of their platforms with Toyotas anymore past the ES model. Honda/Acura builds all of their sedans except the Civic on the same "global platform". The TL is going to need either AWD or RWD to compete with the 300hp+ hp rwd cars that are crowding that segment. The RL needs a V8 and rwd for people to take is seriously IMO. Even though V8 sales of the E/A6/GS/5-Series etc. are not as great as the 6-cylinder versions, having the V8 option sorta validates the car's position as a true mid-size luxury/sports sedan.

I think a lot of folks who follow cars know that the RL's awd system is just a band-aid for the car being bascially fwd. For all the effort Honda put into developing the RL's awd system they could have developed a rwd chassis that is flexible enough to support both the TL and a larger RL. I bet this is the route they go next time around.

The RL just doesn't offer any choice, every one of them are the same besides color and whether or not they have the nav package. Luxury car buyers start demanding more when you're talking about spending 50K, IMO.

M

mbbrooks · August 2006

I did not drive any of the all wheel drive models except for the RL so that is another part of the equation.

Your point about a "stigma" is interesting as well. In my case I was concerned that a MB was sending a less sporty more, well "older" message than a BMW. I have been provided unsolicited comments from several attractive women that the car is "hot" even though I am quite sure it is not stolen. I am also surprised how many people will take a double take on the car since here in SoFla there are a lot of nice cars.

Good luck with your decision.

lexusguy · August 2006

The RL just doesn't offer any choice, every one of them are the same besides color and whether or not they have the nav package. Luxury car buyers start demanding more when you're talking about spending 50K, IMO.

Exacly, though NAV is standard equipment on the RL. In its first year, it had no major options at all, just little details like a wood shift knob. This year you can get Acura's version of Pre-safe Brake as an option.

I definitely agree though that Acura's signature "one size fits all" pricing\options policy just doesn't work in the full on luxury arena. Take the seats, for example. Most of the competition offers at least one seat upgrade option, with 14-way+ adjustable seats for driver and passenger. The RL's on the other hand, are the same 8-way\4-way seats found in the TL and other cars at 1\2 of the RL's price tag. One of many examples of Acura cheaping out to keep the price down. It wouldnt be such a big deal if you could get higher tech seats as an option, but you cant. Rather pathetic on Acura's part considering that more adjustable seats have been in luxury cars for 15 years or more.

merc1 · August 2006

Yeah that non-adjustable for height passenger side seat was a curious ommission for years and years in Acuras. Every European and nearly all American luxury cars offered the same major adjustments for both driver and passenger.

I think that after this episode Honda will be forced to make some serious changes at "Acura". They can't be happy with the RL's sales performance in only the 2nd year out.

M

markcincinnati · August 2006

After reading this thread for a few messages, I would have to agree with several of the points made.

One that caught my eye though was "It is a lot of car for $41K" or words to that effect. I would think, assuming that is the recent/current buying experience, that the RL would be a very good value.

What technical reasons there may be for Acura's front biased AWD do escape me, since this seems to be -- in this class -- not the expected case. I wonder why not at least make the bias "neutral" (50 50) for the sake of marketing, or if one is making such a change, why not just go to 40 60 and start the bragging machine?

All the noise made about SH AWD seems to not have shouted out the FWD bias reality.

Funny, I test drove an RDX two days ago and I have the brochure. It says that "up to 45%" of the power can be sent to the rear wheels under hard acceleration. It also says that when you're cruising down the highway, that 90% of the power is sent to the front.

Now, for practical purposes, for most drivers, most of the time, I seriously doubt that this FWD "nature" is all that detrimental. But, I also think perception is reality.

Rather than fight the fight and come up with 5 letter acronyms (SH AWD) and technology, why not just bite the bullet and go neutral or RWD biased and be done with it?

Clearly "everyone else" is going RWD biased AWD or at least offering it -- sometimes being different is doing the wrong thing for the right reason.

Then, what's up with the one size fits all approach, too?

On the other hand, if this thing is currently offered up at $41K, it has to be a heck-of-a deal. :confuse:

lexusguy · August 2006

What technical reasons there may be for Acura's front biased AWD do escape me, since this seems to be -- in this class -- not the expected case. I wonder why not at least make the bias "neutral" (50 50) for the sake of marketing, or if one is making such a change, why not just go to 40 60 and start the bragging machine?

I have to wonder how much of a difference there would be other than on the sales material. The RL's architecture is inherently unbalanced and extremely nose heavy. Shifting more torque to the rear (it can already send 70%) is not suddenly going to turn it into a corner destroyer. For that, the car needs a diet, more torque, a sport suspension, and new architecture with proper weight balance. With the car as it is, all the AWD system can really do is eliminate torque steer, and help reduce (some) understeer.

At $41K its "not bad", but thats clearly not low enough to get sales back up to where they were in its first few months on the market. I'll take the M35x for a few thousand more.

tayl0rd · August 2006

The $41K selling price just might be enough to get a pulse from RL sales. The thing is, doesn't the MSRP sticker still show $49,995 plus dealer options? I haven't looked at a new RL sticker since they came out. A lot of people just don't feel like haggling with the dealer to get that $41K sales price. They probably take it for a drive, look at the sticker, and decide it's simply not worth it. Who knows? :confuse:

They'll never admit it, but it's got to sting for the folks who paid full retail for RLs when they came out. Some folks paid $51K new when they first hit, then barely a year later you could buy a new one for $41K. Imagine what that does to the trade-in value. That's on par (probably worse than) any American brand vehicle. You could buy a Chevy Aveo with the depreciation on the RL! :surprise:

markcincinnati · August 2006

Well, you all know I know that the Audis (all of 'em) also are nose heavy. In fact, had I a magic wand with but one ZAP in it, I'd bag the 40 60 torque split initiative and go for the weight balance first. . .

Acura, are you listening?

dhamilton · August 2006

to be sure. My brother-in-law is a tech/gadget nut. When the RL came out, it was the most advanced car in the class for the money. I have a fondness for Honda/Acura to be sure, and platform sharing be damned, they are more fun to drive than any offering from Toyota/Lexus [with maybe the exception of the IS]
Once again at 41-44k, the best deal out there IMO. I have to say that I would prefer that they do things with weight distribution as Mark has stated. I would wish the same for Audi's as well.
As stated before, I am surely in the minority when it comes to this car. I have the minority vote in my house with my wife and 4 dogs :sick: I can handle it :shades:

lexusguy · August 2006

The thing is, doesn't the MSRP sticker still show $49,995 plus dealer options? I haven't looked at a new RL sticker since they came out. A lot of people just don't feel like haggling with the dealer to get that $41K sales price. They probably take it for a drive, look at the sticker, and decide it's simply not worth it. Who knows?

They'll never admit it, but it's got to sting for the folks who paid full retail for RLs when they came out. Some folks paid $51K new when they first hit, then barely a year later you could buy a new one for $41K. Imagine what that does to the trade-in value. That's on par (probably worse than) any American brand vehicle. You could buy a Chevy Aveo with the depreciation on the RL!

$49,300 to be exact. I can't really say how hard it is to get the dealer down to $41, but considering the number of RLs sitting on the lot the last time I went by the local Acura shop, I can't imagine its terribly difficult.

I don't think "early adpoter" types are that concerned with resale, or less favorable lease terms. Blu-ray players are $1K to $2K. How much will they cost next year? Also, the RL has always been a dud, and has always had lousy residuals, so they cant really say they had no warning. That said, I don't think the RL can match certain domestic vehicles for depreciation. Nothing does more damage than fleet sales.

lexusguy · August 2006

Well, you all know I know that the Audis (all of 'em) also are nose heavy. In fact, had I a magic wand with but one ZAP in it, I'd bag the 40 60 torque split initiative and go for the weight balance first. . .

Well, MLP is supposed to solve all that. Acura will need similar dedicated front-mid engine architectire if they want to solve their problems.

For the record, the RL is slightly worse than the A6 3.2, 58\42 to 57\43. The GS is 55\45 as is the M35x. The 5 and E both have ideal balance.

markcincinnati · August 2006

Configure the Audi with S-Line, and it still belies its F/R distribution.

Is the Acura's suspension simply not up to the task? I mean, Audis, for years, have generally received decent to glowing reviews for handling.

You'd think the Acura engineers could figure out a way to at least improve things over what seems to be the feeling here. . . .

After I drove the Infiniti M35X, though, I must admit I was pretty impressed by the apparent lack of understeer, although the Audi did seem to have less "wallow."

exalteddragon1 · August 2006

They'll never admit it, but it's got to sting for the folks who paid full retail for RLs when they came out. Some folks paid $51K new when they first hit, then barely a year later you could buy a new one for $41K. Imagine what that does to the trade-in value. That's on par (probably worse than) any American brand vehicle. You could buy a Chevy Aveo with the depreciation on the RL!

I dunno about Ford, but i read that GM's average resale value is at 47% or something since they stopped the incentive war. Does anyone know what the real world residual on an STS is right about now?

markcincinnati · August 2006

I heard it this way:

STS residuals after one-year "a buck, three-eighty!"

Compelling case for leasing since GMAC cranked the residuals much higher than that, giving low mo pays.

Not a bad car -- even in 6 cylinder clothes.

houdini1 · August 2006

LG, do you know of a comprehensive list that would compare depreciation of different autos? Based on a selling price of $41,000 I can't think of any domestics that would match the RL for depreciation.

cstiles · August 2006

RLs selling for $41K is a myth. Most are selling for $43K to $45K, although at volumes well below Honda's projections in year 2. Bottom line, the RL is a fine car but suffers from the following issues...

1. Acura's lesser brand cache with high end customers. The RL is the first technologically advanced car in Acura's history. Earlier Legends/RLs were decent, bloated versions of the Accord. Acura may have been first, but Lexus cruised ahead. Consequently, Acura attracted an older, less discriminating customer. The RL did not appeal enough to Acura's existing customer base, and also could not conquer customers in the Lexus, BMW, or Audi folds.

2. Infiniti kicked Acura's tail with the 3-headed punch of the M45, M35, and M35x. The M won in a knockout, and the RL could not compete with its one size fits all Swiss Army knife car. I have no facts, but I believe Infiniti/Nissan has better appealed to African American consumers than has Acura/Honda. If you could get a demographic breakdown somehow, I believe more minorities have chosen Infinitis. Jaguar had this going for them for a while, but eventually facts rule out over brand image.

3. I believe a higher percentage of M's are leased, while a higher percentage of RLs are purchased. No facts, just a hunch.

4. The RL has 2 distinct shortcomings....small backseat and tire noise. The high rpm VTEC powerplant is also not what most luxo-customers seek. FWD architecture is a bit overstated, but is a factor, at least in terms of cache.

5. Acura has not marketed this car very aggressively, in fact, has chosen to sell it quietly. Lease deals have not been stellar and dealers have been content to sit back, since they can bank on TL, TSX, and MDX sales. Infiniti dealers need the M to sell to survive, since they don't have Acura's complementing high volume models.

6. The car has had more quality issues, IMO, due primarily to the unique "geek factor" that many owners can't relate to. People on this Edmunds board are unique....we actually THINK about cars. Most luxo-owners use 10% of their brains thinking about their cars, and the RL is not made for them.

Just my 2 cents, which is worth a smidgen more than a penny.

jrock65 · August 2006

Price for the 2007 GS350 remains unchanged from the 2006 GS300.

Technically, base price went up from $43,150 to $44,150, but since the moonroof ($1000) is now standard, price has remained the same.

303 hp, 274 lb/ft torque

EPA mpg is 21/29

cstiles · August 2006

Oh yeah, Acura is also taking a gamble by rolling out Michelin PAX tires with the 2006 RLs. Again, in spite of its obvious safety advancements, the PAX system poses a "geek factor" that will only confuse many luxo-owners. Mark my words, Honda will face a little hearburn with the PAX system. But I applaud them for pushing the envelope in the name of safety. Why not save a few lives.

shipo · August 2006

Depreciation is based upon MSRP not on "the deal". As for an American car that matches the RL, consider the following:

Year -- Car --------------------------- MSRP ---------- Edmunds TMV ------- Retained Value
2005 -- Acura RL ------------------ $49,100 ------- $35,076 - $37,367 ------- 71.4% - 76.1%
2005 -- Chrysler 300C AWD -- $34,455 ------- $25,797 - $27,839 ------- 74.9% - 80.8%

The two TMV values shown are Dealer Trade-In and Private Party Resale.

Best Regards,
Shipo

houdini1 · August 2006

Not true. Most depreciation scales that I have seen are based on MARKET PRICE!!

shipo · August 2006

Ummm, what the heck does a depreciation scale have to do with anything? The only value that means anything is the residual percentage of MSRP of any given car after a certain number of years and miles.

Looking at this from a different perspective; I leased a 2002 530i in April of 2002 with an MSRP of almost exactly $48,000. Even though I negotiated a ~$42,000 deal (via the ED program), the residual was still calculated to be 60% of the MSRP meaning $28,800. Had my residual been calculated based upon "the deal", it would have been $25,200, WAY below the street value of that car after three years.

To make this more interesting, my car resold last year from my local dealership and they got $36,000 for a three year old car. That equates to a retained value of 75% based on the MSRP, however, if we were to base it upon "the deal" once again, my car would have retained a whopping 85.7% of its original value. Not realistic and not true.

For any retained value calculation to be at all meaningful, it has to have a stable starting point, and that means MSRP.

Having said all of that, from the perspective of the IRS when you are depreciating a car for tax purposes, "the deal" is the actual starting point, however, those numbers mean nothing to anybody but the IRS and are not valid for comparison purposes.

Like it or not, a 2005 Chrysler 300C AWD retains its value far better than a 2005 Acura RL.

Best Regards,
Shipo

lexusguy · August 2006

Is the Acura's suspension simply not up to the task? I mean, Audis, for years, have generally received decent to glowing reviews for handling.

You'd think the Acura engineers could figure out a way to at least improve things over what seems to be the feeling here

I think that is the case, yes. The Legend, despite being FWD, was a genuinely fun car to drive. When it became the RL, all the fun was gone in favor of a cushy, wallowy "poor man's LS". The rest of the line up also evolved into bland Honda clones. Acura has obviously tried to make the new car more involving than the outgoing RL, but they definitely could've gone much farther.

Also, Audi has many years more experience using their AWD systems and tuning their suspensions to compensate for the nose heaviness, so there's a definite advantage there.

lexusguy · August 2006

I dunno about Ford, but i read that GM's average resale value is at 47% or something since they stopped the incentive war. Does anyone know what the real world residual on an STS is right about now?

Acura's average is probably also very good. The TL and MDX which represent the majority of their sales both hold their value very well. The STS on the other hand can't be too great. They are selling way under MSRP, and Cadillac has a 100+ day supply. Combine this with airport fleet sales...

lexusguy · August 2006

LG, do you know of a comprehensive list that would compare depreciation of different autos? Based on a selling price of $41,000 I can't think of any domestics that would match the RL for depreciation.

Are we talking just luxury brands here? Even so, I'm sure plenty of Lincoln models are worse than the Acura. Resale on the SRX, STS, and DTS has also been less than stellar. If we're including volume cars, the Sebring is worth about 89 cents the second its driven off the lot.

Nobody can match Jaguar, though, which depending on how you look at it, is sort of a domestic brand. Two year old XJs have lost the selling price of an RL in depreciation.

lexusguy · August 2006

The car has had more quality issues, IMO, due primarily to the unique "geek factor" that many owners can't relate to. People on this Edmunds board are unique....we actually THINK about cars. Most luxo-owners use 10% of their brains thinking about their cars, and the RL is not made for them.

The quality issues may have something to do with the RL's poor sales. I think that Acura buyers, like Lexus buyers, are much more likely to be concerned about things like CR data than Benz, BMW, or Audi buyers. The RL has not done well in CR surveys, and C&D's long term RL tester was riddled with electrical issues and was constantly at the dealer for service. If a Japanese car isn't reliable, it has very little going for it.

houdini1 · August 2006

Maybe you misread my post. I think the RL is better from a depreciation standpoint than most any domestic, not worse.

Kelly Blue Book says, "The 2006 RL is expected to have a higher than average residual value after 5 years. Less than the M35 but higher than the Audi A6 and the Cadillac STS". This is hardly the worst in class.

tayl0rd · August 2006

Here's your change: $.01

...the RL is a fine car but suffers from the following issues...

1. Acura's lesser brand cache with high end customers. The RL is the first technologically advanced car in Acura's history. Earlier Legends/RLs were decent, bloated versions of the Accord. Acura may have been first, but Lexus cruised ahead. Consequently, Acura attracted an older, less discriminating customer. The RL did not appeal enough to Acura's existing customer base, and also could not conquer customers in the Lexus, BMW, or Audi folds.

Wasn't the current TL "technologically advanced" when it was released? This RL is still considered to be a bloated, gadget-laden Accord. I've never seen an "old" person driving an Acura. Lexus is the brand that has attracted older, less discriminating folks. That fact is argued on these boards daily. Acura has always gone after the younger, more "performance" oriented consumer. The RL simply didn't offer enough against its competition; then add in the fact that some dealers/salesmen were actually saying that the RL was a competitor to the 7-series and S-class. :surprise: (It was actually said to me at an Acura dealership. I nearly laughed in his face!)

2. ... I believe Infiniti/Nissan has better appealed to African American consumers than has Acura/Honda. If you could get a demographic breakdown somehow, I believe more minorities have chosen Infinitis. Jaguar had this going for them for a while, but eventually facts rule out over brand image.

Huh?? :confuse: What does this have to do with the price of tea in China? When you think about it, that has zero logic to it whatsoever. For one, how many minorities are going to have the stash to pay for an M, lease or not? Even if that nonsense had just a little bit of truth to it, that would mean that almost nobody likes Acuras. If Acuras appeal more to Whites (which is what I'm guessing you're alluding to), why aren't the RL's sales where the M's sales are and vice versa? I'm sensing a bit of elitism skating near biggotry in your statements there so I won't go further with this one.

3. I believe a higher percentage of M's are leased, while a higher percentage of RLs are purchased. No facts, just a hunch.

See my last statement above. But this "hunch" of yours would put the M right along with Es, 5s, and A6s. What's your point? Besides, since you can get an RL so cheap, why not buy it? And hasn't Acura had crappy lease deals on the RL?

4. The RL has 2 distinct shortcomings....small backseat and tire noise. The high rpm VTEC powerplant is also not what most luxo-customers seek. FWD architecture is a bit overstated, but is a factor, at least in terms of cache.

Make that five. Small trunk, nondescript exterior styling, and slim-to-no factory options.

5. Acura has not marketed this car very aggressively, in fact, has chosen to sell it quietly. Lease deals have not been stellar and dealers have been content to sit back, since they can bank on TL, TSX, and MDX sales. Infiniti dealers need the M to sell to survive, since they don't have Acura's complementing high volume models.

Agreed to a point. Don't all companies "need" their products to sell to survive?? I guess you've forgotten or ignored how well Infiniti's G and FX vehicles are selling.

6. The car has had more quality issues, IMO, due primarily to the unique "geek factor" that many owners can't relate to. People on this Edmunds board are unique....we actually THINK about cars. Most luxo-owners use 10% of their brains thinking about their cars, and the RL is not made for them.

What does the "geek factor" have to do with the quality? Either it works or it doesn't. How well the owner can relate to it is irrelevant. "Thinking" about the cars is also irrelevant. The 5-series with its controversial i-drive outsells the RL by leaps and bounds. And it has been said so many times that the RL's telemetrics are much easier to navigate than i-drive. So why isn't the RL outselling the 5?

lexusguy · August 2006

Agreed to a point. Don't all companies "need" their products to sell to survive?? I guess you've forgotten or ignored how well Infiniti's G and FX vehicles are selling.

The G and FX do pretty well, but Infiniti still depends much more on M sales than Acura does on RL sales, 25% of Infinitis sold are Ms, vs. about 5% for the RL.

What does the "geek factor" have to do with the quality? Either it works or it doesn't. How well the owner can relate to it is irrelevant. "Thinking" about the cars is also irrelevant. The 5-series with its controversial i-drive outsells the RL by leaps and bounds. And it has been said so many times that the RL's telemetrics are much easier to navigate than i-drive. So why isn't the RL outselling the 5?

I agree on that one. Its not that RL owners don't "get" their cars, its that their cars are prone to electrical failures and are frequent service department guests.

tayl0rd · August 2006

I still have to disagree that Infiniti "needs" the M sales to survive. Don't forget that the G pretty much singlehandedly pulled Infiniti from the brink (actually, the FM platform pulled Nissan as a whole away from the tunnel of light). They were doing alright before this M. Its sales are mostly icing on the cake. The only things Infiniti is missing now are a proper flagship and a halo car(s). Some NISMO Gs and Ms would be grand, but that's a whole other subject.

Luxury Performance Sedans

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles