Acura TL 2006+

bodble2 · May 2005

I don't think you'd see another coupe anytime soon. The market just doesn't seem to have sufficient appetite for a coupe, especially the type of coupes that Honda puts out, which are more 2-dr. sedans than pure sports coupe ala G35 Coupe.

On a separate note, I know with high gas prices, SUV ownership could be painful, but I think an SUV plus a sedan is a nice family combo. I had to haul a couple of small trees in planters home last weekend in my TL, and it wasn't much fun, for me nor for the car! :sick:

jpenn · May 2005

I know what you mean about the hauling ability of my MDX, I was in a similar situation last weekend at the local Home Depot and I was thankful I had the cargo space of the MDX. That was NOT the case with the RX300, by the way.

But back to the original question, do we know, with any degree of certainty, that Acura will put AWD in the TL next year or as an early '07?

P.S. I realize that my fantasy of an AWD Coupe is just that in today's market.

bodble2 · May 2005

No, unfortunately, I can't say that with any degree of certainty. It is strictly a guesstimate on my part. Honda is typically so tight-lipped about new products that I'm not even sure sales people know any more than us folks.

BTW, you could get an AWD coupe. Porsche still sells an AWD version of the 911 Carrera, do they not?

jd55 · May 2005

Go to any auto forum regardless of the car or make, and you will find folks who have had problems. They usually represent a disproportionate number of people when compared to the entire population of that particular car. I wouldn't be particularly discouraged. I've had a new Mercedes and a new Lexus and have had varying degrees of problems with both. (More so with the Mercedes!) I drove the TL and I know that this will be my next car. It really is a great car for the money!

tawneycat · May 2005

I imagine since I just bought a 05, Acura will make slight styling changes, loose the Bridgestones, add VCM and a few horsepower. It would explain the near invoice pricing found on the 05's right now.

raharris1 · May 2005

...I would consider trading for an '06 with AWD. I had an old Eagle Talon with turbo and AWD and loved it. The only thing I don't like about my '04 TL is the FWD. My most recent car prior to the TL was a '96 328, and I have to admit I miss the handling of the Bimmer. I hope at least a portion of that is due to the TL's FWD.

drcohen · May 2005

If you follow the Honda Mfg. cycle, there should be a few "cosmetic changes", perhaps in the front fascia and maybe slight taillight look. Color is also a maybe, one or two new. A gain in HP by 10-15, AWD could be in the cards, possible. I wanted so see (like the TSX) the turn signal in the RWM enclosure and it may happen in 06.
But keeping with Honda and the previous TL cycle, that should be about it.

You think?

David

anythngbutgm · May 2005

With the G35 at 290hp right now, I would expect Honda to follow up with maybe another 10 for the TL through better breathing, timing adjustments, etc. but not too much to overshadow the RL in power (Not that the overall package doesn't come close to overshadowing already). As for AWD, I'm thinking '07 personally, since the RDX will be out so soon showcasing the SH-AWD for '06 model year (Along with the RL of course).

I would like to see a more creative wheel design with the TL revisions as well as 1 or 2 new color choices. Just not the Electric Blue, Please. I absolutely love the Redondo Red on the TL!

bodble2 · May 2005

I love the current wheel design! :shades:

I fact, overall, I hope they don't tweak the styling too much, if at all.

I think if they up the HP, it will be done in conjunction with AWD. The current FWD is doing all it can to handle the 270 HP.

anythngbutgm · May 2005

Well at least with the current wheel design, they are easy to clean. I don't hate the 5-spoke design, but it reminds me to much of an old IROC Camaro, if that makes any sense... :confuse: I love the A-spec wheels and if I were going to buy a TL, I would opt for those instead. I would actually opt for the A-spec package if I could get it without the body kit...

- Waiting for an SH-AWD TL 6-spd with A-spec kit (sans the skirts) in Redondo red with Camel interior and Nav... :shades:

bodble2 · May 2005

Old IROC, or Z28... yeah, maybe a bit. You're right about them being easy to clean though. The front ones get completely covered in brake dust in no time. But one wipe and the dust comes off!

billyperks · May 2005

for the upgrades to the TL-I think I said it before but what the heck-

Change the front grill-make it similar to the RL
Add colors to the tail light (the all red is kind of dangerous)
Move the fog lights back where they belong (under the headlights)
Turn signal on the outside mirrors
More HP along with SH AWD
Rear Sun Shade

I know this is coming, if not I will go else where.

terryl · May 2005

In light of the date of this and lack of recent discussion, I am guessing the source was not very credible?

Terry

http://subscribers.wardsauto.com/microsites/newsarticle.asp?newsarticleid=2732484&siteid=2- - 6&magazineid=1004&instanceid=5121&pageid=824&srid=10088

terryl · May 2005

http://subscribers.wardsauto.com/microsites/newsarticle.asp?newsarticleid=2732484&siteid=2- 6&magazineid=1004&instanceid=5121&pageid=824&srid=10088

k2h · May 2005

This car is ok, but if I going to spend the money on a car like this, I would get the Infiniti G35 Sedan w/ 6-Speed. For the improvement part, they should dump the Front Wheel Drive, and go to Rear Wheel Drive, make the SH-AWD optional, put the fog lights below the headlights not in the headlights, add auto on/off headlights, add all one touch open/close window, power rear sunshade, power adjustable tilt-telesopic steering wheel, keyless ignition start or push button start, add a 10-way power passenger seat(not 4-way), brembo brakes at the rear of the wheels, and bump up the power in the engine a little.

ljwalters1 · June 2005

RWD is not gonna happen - I think it's against their philosophy, except for their top-of-the-line super-serious sportcars (NSX and S2000). Re AWD, certainly a possibility, but most don't think this year. Having 2 auto-up/-down windows seems like enough for me, and I think a power-adjustable stearing wheel is pretty unimportant, as long as you can adjust it in and out, and up and down.

I've seen a lot of posters comment about the fog lights. What's the big deal? From the driver's seat they seem to work just fine.

bodble2 · June 2005

SH-AWD would be on the top of my wish list. Push button start would be cool, but it seems they are having some teething problems with it on the RL. Fully automatic headlights would be desireable. Aside from that, I wish they would just improve on some of the little things --- doors that are less springy, a less flimsy moonroof interior shade, a bit more "feel" to the steering, an adjustable volume for the keyless "beep", adjustable lumbar support on the passenger seat.

Tire pressure monitor system, and oil-level indicator would also be very useful.

Another thing that's not on your list, which I would really want, but not likely to be offered at this price point, is power opening and closing trunk. I'm tired of trying to lift the trunk with my chin or knee with an arm-full of groceries!

billyperks · June 2005

Fog lights would do cosmetic justice to the car if they were placed under the headlights not in the head lights.

kominsky · June 2005

"I've seen a lot of posters comment about the fog lights. What's the big deal? From the driver's seat they seem to work just fine."

Not sure if this is the reason for so many posts or not, but it is my experience. I test drove a Jetta GLX back in 2000 that had the fogs in the headlight cluster. During the drive, I turned them on along with the low-beams. A rough guess, about 15-20% of the cars I passed flashed their high-beams at me. When I got back to the dealership, I got out to see if maybe a headlight was poorly aimed. They were fine but it dawned on me that people, seeing 4 lights coming at them from the headlight cluster, just assume you have your high-beams on whether they are being blinded or not. :confuse:
That was when I personally decided this wasn't the best design practice.

dalls223 · June 2005

Very good point. However, here is my take. I have several issues with this newer TL, and I am not saying it because I own a 2002 TL-S. The first thing that I noticed, that is the topic of recent discussion was the location of the fog lights. I knew Acura wouldn't subtract features from newer models. It took me about six months to a year to realize that they were in the headlight cluster. The combined beams could be misconstrued for high beams, especially those drivers that complain about the blinding brightness of xenon lights. However, I think it is a bad idea to have the fog lights located where they are because it gives the impression that the car doesn't have xenon lights due to them being masked by the halogen fog lights that correspond to the headlights. That is the one feature that I really enjoy at night, and they are standard, where on most cars they are $1000+ options. Why is Acura doing this to the TL, hiding them with fog lights that are on the inside of the headlamps?

Other issues: 1) Only a 10 hp/6 ft. lbs torque gain over the 2002-2003 Type-S, which results in a modest 0.1 second improvement in the popular 0-60 category.
2) No Type-S variant 3) What are those red things on the back of the TL that light up on the sides, and why don't they blink when the turn signal is on? 4) What is the deal with trunk openings that get smaller? I guess if we can afford a TL, we can afford a plasma TV so it doesn't have to accomodate larger objects. 5) It's own identity (too much in common with the TSX). 6) Parktronic and sunshades coming standard on all TLs. 7) AWD to compete with European and other Japanese rivals.

2006 had better bring AWD and a lot more guts (like 300+ horsepower) to the field, or it will not have the advantage that it had when I bought my 2002 TL. When I bought it in late 2001, I had the fastest sports sedan on the market. There were no CTS's, G35's, and the C320 and 330i were slower off the line than the TL-S. RIght here at edmunds.com, it beat out the 330i because it offered value and beat it off the line. Those days have to return for the 2006 TL. SH-AWD, and at least 310-315 hp. For you RL fans, it's not the first time the RL would have less horsepower than the TL. Sorry for the long reply, but these things need to be said. Acura has always stood for luxury with value. Let's get serious again.

bodble2 · June 2005

Well, I had an '01 CL-S and I'd always thought the fog lights on that (and the TL-S) were pretty useless. They didn't really do much, and actually looked silly next to the much brighter HID headlights. I guess that's why Acura deleted them a couple of years later when the the 6-sp version came out.

ae5555 · June 2005

I wish they would get rid of the silly tape deck and made the audio system play mp3's instead. What good is DVD audio when disks are rare and overpriced?

They should at least put a mini jack input for devices such as ipod (i hate using cassette adapter), or even better do iPod integration like BMW did. I am sure it would not cost more then a DVD-A support.

mth2 · June 2005

I owned an 01 CL-S and an 02 TL-S.

I think I know why they changed up the foglights - at least this was my experience. I noticed that when I parked too far into a parking space that had a concrete bumper, it would push under my front air dam, and that would "squish" the foglights, and they would crack. When I realized it would cost me about $170 to replace one foglight, it fixed my compulsion to park too far into a parking space.

I liked the fog lights - I never really had to drive through fog, they just illuminated the road just in front and to the side of the car and helped with the overall lighting.

Besides, true fog lights are amber, and nobody wants amber fog lights on the front of their car anymore.

dalls223 · June 2005

Well, Lexus comes pretty darn close to amber, with their bright yellow fog lamps, and Lexus owners probably don't have a problem with that, because the bright florescent colors cut through fog better than white. I live in the San Francisco area, and there is fog all over the place over here. My question to all of you is, "Why are street lamps amber?" The answer is that they have a better ability to illuminate in foggy conditions. So there is nothing scientifically wrong with amber fog lights.

Question for mth2: Did you have the sport kit on your car? Because if you did, then you would have less front ground clearance, which might explain why your car couldn't clear the concrete bumper. In my almost four years with my 2002 TL-S I have never had any concrete bumper clearance issues. That sucks about the $170 repair though. My seat heater on the driver side just went out, and my dealer wants to charge me $125 just to look at it. What a pain.

mth2 · June 2005

No, no sports kit - but I do an awful lot of driving in the Central Texas area, and there are gravel trucks everywhere. The fog lights were pretty low to the road, and if a rock hit the fog lamp just right, well...$170.

You're right - I forgot about Lexus and their amber lights - true fog lights are amber anyway. The clear lights just look sharp.

No, someone decided I had had enough time driving my 02 TL-S last December and pushed my car onto a boulder with their car - I can tell you that the airbags work great, and tend to leave a souvenir or two behind for you to remember them by!

Waiting to buy an 06 or 07 TL. I tested an A-SPEC, it was like riding in a horse driven buggy. The car moved up and down more than forward. Would like the A-SPEC styling with different tires, if possible. Enjoyed the regular TL 6M.

dalls223 · June 2005

I have read the few posts that mentioned the torque steer associated with fwd vehicles. In the 2004 remodel of the TL, it became more athletic and European looking, with more aggressive styling for a company (Honda) that is usually very conservative. The one thing that I absolutely love about Acura, is their reluctance to offer options in addition to the sticker price. The only one currently offered is the navi option, and that has been incorporated into the model offerings to make it appear that no options are available for the vehicle. When you look at the big picture, the top models (ridiculous engine models aside) from Mercedes, BMW, Audi, Jaguar, Infiniti, and even Lexus top out in the 65-85K range. That being said, Acura's TL 33K, and RL 49K could sustain a 10-15% increase and still sell very well, if they are given the upgrades that are available that they are not using.

One is quality control. I have heard the raddle complaints in the new TL and I can only imagine that the same could be in store for the new RL. You aren't hearing about that from European models, at least not with the same frequency. Secondly, ventilated seats are not offered for either the TL or RL. The new Lexus ES330 has this, one of the TL's competitors. Shoot, there is a commercial for it too. And it isn't even offered for the RL. Thirdly, heated rear seats. A lot of the aforementioned companies offer this as an option. Fourth, laser cruise control. Acura may be the last luxury company to not offer this. Lastly, DVD entertainment systems are not offered. With DVD watching becoming more common inside of automobiles that are not even considered "luxury" cars, then why not make this enhancement to the TL and RL. At this point, Acura is about the equal of the lower tier luxury car companies such as Volvo, Lincoln, Cadillac and Saab, whose best models can all be had at under 60K. Charging customers 35-40K for the TL and 52-55K for the RL are not so outlandish if the above improvements are made. I understand that not all of these options could be offered to the TL to justify the price difference, but there is a lot that Acura is forgetting to include.

In conclusion, for 2006 the TL should include some of these ideas in addition to the power increases that made it the fastest sports sedan under 40K in 2002. Acura has always been able to make the excuse that its V6's can compete with the V8's from Europe, but now they are threatening to fall behind many V6's. Mercedes just released the E350 which cranks out 268 hp, Audi's A4/A6 cranks out 255hp, and the new 330i churns out 255hp. All of these models that I just mentioned are either as fast or faster than the TL or RL, with slightly less horsepower. Many of the competition have torque numbers that are better than the TL and they are lighter, so they move quicker. Maybe Acura isn't competing in the HP war, but buyers nowadays are looking for fun when they drive. How else could you explain all of the WRX's you see on the road? And quite frankly it irritates me when I see a wagon WRX and know that I can't beat soccer mom off the line. Not only could the new TL's and RL's use a few technological enhancements, but the thing under the hood should be it's biggest priority. For my next car purchase I may go to another make, because it gives me all that I need in performance. Those needs are increasing everywhere, and so are expectations. Acura has done well throughout the past five years, renewing their brand, and raising expectations, but I think they can put one on the rest of the automotive world if they make some if not all of the improvements that I have mentioned to their 3 top models, TL, RL, and MDX. Of course can they do it without using a V8? That is the most important question of all.

bodble2 · June 2005

"And quite frankly it irritates me when I see a wagon WRX and know that I can't beat soccer mom off the line."

Yeah, but you'll look way more cool in your TL than her in her dorky-looking hatch/wagon.

Another thing. You sure E350 and A4, A6 are faster than TL or RL?

dalls223 · June 2005

You do have a point on the looking cool factor, but there is a difference between looking cool and being cool. Besides, there is a little something called reputation. If a dorky wagon and a cool TL decide to race one another and the wheels are squeeling once the light turns green, and the dorky wagon beats the cool looking TL, then who is the one feeling stupid. By now the secret is out about the nature of the WRX beast. They have a reputation of being a pocket rocket. The acceleration difference between a WRX and a TL is like half a second in the 0-60 run, which is enough of a difference to bring humiliation to any proud TL owner in event that a race were to take place between these two vehicles. However, if you go out on the highway, there should be a different result because the TL has significantly more horsepower (270 vs. 227), and should win the top speed race.

In regards to the other question you had on speed:

Acura TL (0-60 time): 6.5 secs.
Acura RL: 6.5 secs.
Mercedes E350: 6.5 secs.
Audi A4 3.2: 6.6 secs.

Yeah these numbers look pretty even. But once you take the inherent wheelspin from the fwd of the TL into consideration, and if you are not careful on the takeoff you would do somewhere in the high 6's or low 7's. The RL is the only car that can hang evenly with the two aforementioned German rivals on a consistent basis, but it is a heavier car, which could make a difference depending on the road conditions. My point of that discussion was to prove that the V6 that was in the TL-S three years ago was competitive to a lot of 8 cylinder engines from Germany. For instance a 290hp 540i did the 0-60 in a tad over 6 seconds. The 275hp E430 made the 0-60 run in 6.3. With the last generation 260hp TL-S doing it in 6.6, that was pretty competitive considering you were comparing apples to oranges. The apples to apples comparison, well there was none. The 6 cylinders from Germany (530i and E320) did the sprint in a tad over 7 seconds, well short of that of the TL-S. Here is something even more remarkable that not too many people realized. The last generation Audi S4 (stock 250hp), was two tenths of a second slower than the TL-S in this category. All I am saying is that the gap has closed, and the 06 TL needs to be aiming for low 6's or high 5's if they are going to compete with the 545i's and E500's of the world that do the run in the mid to high 5's. That would at least allow the TL to once again be competitive with the G35 in performance. Even the 2005 Nissan Altima 3.5 SE-R can do the 0-60 sprint in 5.9 according to Nissan. This is why the TSX needs way more power. But that is another topic.

gogglespiasano · June 2005

Dalls223,

I agree with the points being made about the next generation TL. I have a 2002 TL-S and it has been a great car. Not the best at handling but acceleration, ride, space are great. I was looking forward to buying the new RL but it is a major disappointment in my view, and I reached the conclusion that the TL (particularly if it gets AWD and a few other enhancements) would be a better solution.

I think the new Infiniti M is interesting. Fuel economy is below average and can't get AWD in the M45 but other than that, the M has the performance, handling, braking and interior space and features that a performance/luxury car should have.

The new BMW 3 has been expanded a bit and performance credentials (6.1 sec 0-60) are quite strong. Once the 5 series gets a minor rework like the 7 seriers just received, it will be quite strong. Both 3 and 5 series avaliable in AWD in next few months.

In my view, the new TL (and frankly the RL) need something close to (or preferably below) 6 second 0-60 and quarter mile around 14 seconds. More important, they have to have braking and handling characteristics at least closer to the M and BMW's and this means SH-AWD. The interior and trunk space in the TL is currently adequate but they should not make the mistake they made with the RL and essentially give the buyer less space in rear seat, trunk, below average brakes and acceleration and expect the car to sell well vs. BMW and M. The bar has been raised and I agree Acura seems to have lost its edge in building serious performance cars. I have never been a BMW fan and Infiniti offerings/styling has been quite uneven until recently, but to see what they have done with the 3 series and M in terms of performance means I will be driving one of them if the new Acura is not AWD and improved in handling and performance

danny1878 · June 2005

You prolly got the auto numbers. here's the link :
http://www.ssmoparmuscle.com/speedcomp.htm?NORDERBY=make&OORDERBY=quarter&OORDERDIR=ASC

But thats probably the best 0-60 TL has ever got, with the A-spec 5.6 secs.
And again each test varies, imho humidity play a big factor in tests especially with ULEV2 cars . My suggestion is to compare best numbers vs best numbers.

dalls223 · June 2005

Yeah, that is what I am talking about gogglespiasano. Good point about the space of the last generation TL. I can tailgate at the 49ers games because my 02 TL-S can fit a Weber Q, a table, a suppies box, food, a table and up to three chairs inside the trunk. Since we drive the same vehicle you can see too how the performance bar has raised over the past few years. You also make a good point about the handling. Not the best, but still pretty stable. This is something that should be much improved given the SH-AWD enhancement everyone is hoping for in the 06 TL.

Regarding the RL: I saw it at the 2004 International Auto Show and the interior space seemed to be adequate, front seat and back. However I am 6'5" and the only car that I can honestly say that I enjoy being in the back seat of is my father's town car. But I can see what you are saying though; it could be larger. I found the same thing when I was sitting inside of the new Audi A6. Adequate room but not nearly as much as the A8. If the RL is the top-of-the-line Acura, it should have the interior space of a Lexus LS, Mercedes S-Class, BMW 7-Series, etc. You know where I am going with this. Acura's vehicle sizes are a little bit obscure when you look at it. I will compare with BMW. The TSX compares with the 3-Series in size, while the TL compares with it in price and performance (Motorsport models not included, obviously). Subsequently, the TL compares with the 5-Series in size, while the RL compares with the 5 Series in price, and is just slightly larger than it in size, and cannot compete with it in performance. There is nothing that Acura offers that is as large and as the 7-Series. Why is there such a minimal difference in size between the TL (189 inches) and the RL (193 inches)? The RL has the technology advantage, but it needs more size (somewhere closer to 200 inches). In fact I would have liked to see the TL take on more of what the RL became. The TL got shorter by about three inches (from 192 to 189), which made it more agile, but also more cramped. You can have an agile car at 190+ inches. Look at the 5-Series (191 inches) and the E-Class (190 inches). I know this cannot be addressed until the next redesign for both the TL and the RL. But interior space as well as trunk space is being compromised because of the timidness of Acura to add another 6-8 inches to the length of the RL. That is why it cannot compare with the large sedans from Europe. Well, that and the fact that Acura needs to bring a V8 to the RL eventually.

The real problem between the TSX, the TL, and the RL is there is only a $20K and a minimal 10 inch length difference between the TSX (183 inches) and the RL (193). That is perhaps the biggest mistake that Acura made. Look at BMW whose 3-Series is around 178 inches long, while the 7-Series goes 204 inches for the Li. That is more than two and a half times the dispersion between Acura's three sedan models. Many auto folks compare the TSX with the Accord. Well wasn't the last generation TL built on the same platform as the last generation Accord? :confuse:

In regards to the Infiniti M: I really like that car too. The styling is just a bit wierd though, especially in the back. The tail looks downright ridiculous. But I am sure the drivers of M45's are more satisfied with what they get inside than their RL friends do. Unless they are stuck in traffic that is.

Didn't they used to refer to the 2003 M45 as the car with brains? Well Infiniti sure has used its collective brains bringing the technology to the table, as well as offering the performance that enthusiasts crave. Acura eventually must follow suit.

dalls223 · June 2005

Well that may be, BUT WITH HELP. When I am discussing 0-60 times, I am talking about stock vehicles. The stock TL has 270hp, with 238ft lbs of torque, and it goes 0-60 in roughly 6.5 secs. Now I know that these things can vary. I once read that my 02 TL-S went from 0-60 in 6.1 seconds. I will tell you first hand that it doesn't, at least not mine. The fastest 0-60 run I have ever had was 6.4 secs, and I cannot get it to do that every time. Most times it ranges between 6.5 and 6.8, whenever I get on an open road and say what they heck. I don't think that the A-Spec can give a sub-6 second 0-60 time. If it does then maybe I am wrong. But even still, who knows the road conditions, and the way that it was timed. What are the hp/torque numbers for the A-Spec Danny?

dalls223 · June 2005

danny1878:

After looking at the link that you provided, I will not take these numbers seriously for one major reason, they are off by a lot on almost every car. Don't tell me that my TL-S goes from 0-60 in 7.6 seconds, when it clearly does it in about a full second less than that. In fact this link showed that a 1999 base TL did the sprint in a two tenths of a second quicker than the 2003 TL Type-S. Give me a break. No chance. On a bad day, and with a head start, a Type-S (2002-03) will beat a base TL (1999-2003). Also, a Corolla XRS 6-speed is not faster than a TL Type-S. Very sporadic source. Given these obvious mistakes by those testing the cars, I doubt that a A-spec TL is as fast as they are quoting.

merc1 · June 2005

Very interesting posts about Acura.

"In conclusion, for 2006 the TL should include some of these ideas in addition to the power increases that made it the fastest sports sedan under 40K in 2002. Acura has always been able to make the excuse that its V6's can compete with the V8's from Europe, but now they are threatening to fall behind many V6's. Mercedes just released the E350 which cranks out 268 hp, Audi's A4/A6 cranks out 255hp, and the new 330i churns out 255hp. All of these models that I just mentioned are either as fast or faster than the TL or RL, with slightly less horsepower. Many of the competition have torque numbers that are better than the TL and they are lighter, so they move quicker."

While I agree that V6s in the previous TL-S and current TL are competitive with some V8s, the V6 in the RL has never been, at least until now. The previous RL was a 225hp slug that couldn't even compete with other V6s late in its life.

Adding more hp to Acura's V6s isn't going to cure the main problem, torque and more importantly the generation of it. Acura's tendency to make you rev to get the torque is a big reason why a less powerful E350 is faster (see the May issue of C&D). Others develop more torque at lower rpm and Acura is a gear or two short on most of the other cars in the class now. From everything I've seen and experienced Acura doesn't particularly excel at automatic transmissions either. I remember driving the previous CL-S and it had a pronounced hesitation if you mashed it. Not linear at all. The RL when I drove it just doesn't seem to put the really put the power down like a 300hp car should.

As far as the RL competiting with the S-Class and 7-Series, it will never happen. I think the current Accord platform is already stretched to its limits. Plus that class demands a V8. I too know people that thought the RL should compete at the full size level, but I've never understood that. The RL and last Legend before it were always E/5/GS/A6 competitors.

M

danny1878 · June 2005

Unfortunately it is a stock vehicle.
ACURA TL 04
5.7 secs -> Car and driver Jan 2004
5.8 secs -> when tested again in March 2004

This is the spec when tested against G35 and 330i. Same place/road condition for all competing cars.
G35 stock 0.2 secs slower
330i stock trailing the G by 0.5 sec

ACURA TL
Price as tested: $35,195 (no modification)
Price and option breakdown: base Acura TL (includes $545 freight), $33,195; navigation system, $2000
Major standard accessories: power windows, seats, locks, and sunroof; remote locking; A/C; cruise control; tilting and telescoping steering wheel; rear defroster
Sound system: Acura/ELS AM/FM/satellite radio/cassette/CD/ DVD changer, 8 speakers

regarding the A-spec, imho it does nothing to Hp.

Honestly I cant tell the difference between 0.1 sec and 0.2 secs, without an equipment. I cant even tell how fast the car is going just like when I drove a civic @90mph, it felt like 130mph. I drove a holden once @90 mph and it felt like 50mph. So which car was faster, a heavy holden or a lighter civic according to one's feeling?
:confuse:
From my experience as the car gets more mileage, the slower it runs (especially when its been poorly maintained).

danny1878 · June 2005

About the link, those are just numbers quoted from various sources, like Car and driver etc.

Here's the quote from Car and driver may 2004

TL with A-spec 5.6 secs (there is no way to tell the difference)
Price as tested: $40,895 (base price: $38,895)
Power (SAE net): 270 bhp @ 6200 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 238 lb-ft @ 5000 rpm
Zero to 60 mph: 5.6 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 14.5 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 28.4 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 6.2 sec
Standing 1/4-mile: 14.3 sec @ 99 mph
Top speed (drag limited): 152 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 174 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.90 g
EPA fuel economy, city driving: 19 mpg
C/D-observed fuel economy: 20 mpg

mth2 · June 2005

When I test drove the A-SPEC, my (limited) understanding was that the only difference between it and the standard TL is that the A-SPEC's suspension was lowered, larger wheels, and some styling cues. If that drops 0-60 times by one seconds, that would be pretty amazing to me! :surprise:

dalls223 · June 2005

merc1,

"As far as the RL competiting with the S-Class and 7-Series, it will never happen. I think the current Accord platform is already stretched to its limits. Plus that class demands a V8. I too know people that thought the RL should compete at the full size level, but I've never understood that. The RL and last Legend before it were always E/5/GS/A6 competitors"

I hate to sound like the Hertz commercial, but not exactly. For 2006 Mercedes just released the S350, which is a V6. Given the nature of this 268hp engine, it should perform near the level of the barely more powerful S430. I don't know what Mercedes is doing with all of these engine choices for the S-class? This isn't the first time that Mercedes has done this. They did this with the S320 during the mid to late 90's. My point is that it can be done, even though performance is about on par with my dad's town car. If they decided to enlarge the RL someday, but not change the engine, then it wouldn't be the first time the performance wasn't stellar for this car. However to be competitive with the other large luxury sedans they would have to offer it with either a choice of a V6 or V8, or just a V8 like Lexus and Infiniti do with their large models. Or to be completely unrealistic, offer it with a supercharged V6. Yeah right! That will be the day.

dalls223 · June 2005

Yeah, tell me about it. Weight, torque, and how the car is geared play the biggest role in determining accelleration. I don't believe this source because there were no modifications to the engine going by the numbers, and Acura runs a pretty fat power band on its rev meter, somewhere around 7000 RPM before redline (peak torque usually between 3000 and 6500 RPM). I guess you have to drive it to know for sure. Maybe I should head down to my Acura dealership and test drive the one I saw in the showroom the other day, and pretend like I am interested in buying.

I think the difference between it and my TL-S would be noticable, but not tremendous. But that is just one man's opinion. I think it would do 0-60 in the low 6's. No way would it be faster than a BMW 545i or Mercedes E500.

merc1 · June 2005

I honestly don't see where the S-Class comparo comes from. BTW, the just introduced S350 uses the old SOHC 18-valve 241hp V6, not the new DOHC 24V 268hp V6. Besides that the RL doesn't compete with the S-Class any way. The RL is a E-Class competitior in size and price. Just because Acura has three class of sedan doesn't mean they stack up to everyone else's 3. Even if the RL did compete with the S-Class, the "S-Class" offers 2 more V8s and then some.

This "new" S350 is just a placeholder and/or test to see if they should bring the next generation (268hp) S350 here for the 2007 model year.

The RL doesn't compete with the S-Class/7-Series cars.

M

dalls223 · June 2005

merc1,

Sorry about the misinformation about the output of the S350's engine. You are right. It is the 241hp SOHC, not the 268hp DOHC. Wow, that car must be brutally slow. I sometimes get myself into trouble when I think about the model numbers for companies like Mercedes. It is easy just to think that every 240, 320, 350, 500, 600, is the same engine for all classes. They will throw a curve ball every now and then. I usually check my information when I am sourcing comparisons. It hadn't been ingrained into my memory because I had only been to mbusa.com once since the release of the S350. I was shocked to see that Mercedes was coming back with a V6 in their S-Class. Thanks for the correction though.

However, I am not comparing the RL to the S-Class, or other luxury models like it. I would like to if it were: a) a few inches longer in body size, b) filled with most of the super large sedan's optional features as standard (an Acura habit). That saves $10-20K off the sticker price right there. My initial post on this topic was aimed at getting Acura to realize that it could compete with cars in this segment with the right approach. They probably don't want to compete with it though, as you were dancing around with in your three sedan comparison amongst car companies. They really don't have to stack up to everyone else's three sedan offerings because Acura is successful selling a ton of cars and racking up the automotive awards by selling cars of immense value.

I think that they would be even more successful if they used the RL in their next redesign as a car that could compete with S-Class-like models, and henceforth the TL with E-Class-like models, and the TSX with C-Class-like models. Yes they need to incorporate a V8, but this would increase their image in the luxury automotive industry. They could never compete with the engines from Mercedes, BMW, and Audi, because it would be a cold day in hell before Acura releases a V12. They are losing out on the buyers that want the tricked out lux sedan, like your Lexus LS and your Infiniti Q for their Japanese competitors. Let's not forget that Acura was the 1st Japanese luxury car company. I feel like it would be justice if they were able to offer customers the option of buying a super large lux sedan from Acura. Given the fact that redesigns across models vary quite a bit, maybe the most logical move is to just create an entirely new model all of its own. We'll call it a ZL. :shades:

merc1 · June 2005

I understand what you're saying, but just enlarging the RL isn't going to cut it for the RL to compete with the S/7/LS type of car. I fully expect the next generation LSxxx to move out of the 56K starting range to about 60K+. For Acura to compete here not only would they need a V8, they'd need a whole new platform. Honda just isn't going to do that for what they see as such a low-volume segment. They already have trouble keeping the RL current. All of the RL's competitors, especially the German ones will be redesigned before Acura does a new RL. The previous car went 9 years! This is basically the same reason why the NSX has been neglected for over a decade.

I think the current RL is a fine car, but at 50K I think its a tough sell for two types of buyers 1) a person looking at a M35, and 2) a person that says "for 50K you might as well get a Lexus, BMW or whatever". The current RL would be a much better buy at 45K than 50K, all IMO of course. This RL I predict will drop off in sales just like the last one did as the segment continues to evolve and outpace it.

True, Acura was the first Japanese luxury brand, but Honda isn't enough to take on Toyota's Lexus and now Nissan's Infiniti when it comes to their upper range cars. I too always said that Acura should compete at a higher level, but as you point out they're doing just fine by specializing entry-level luxury/sport sedans while not truly offering a full-on luxury car like an S-Class or LS430.

There was a thread hear about Acura's "dilemma", but I'm not sure even they even have one because we all were assuming they want to compete with MB,Lexus and BMW at the high end, but I don't think they do.

M

frisconick · June 2005

Here in the SF Bay Area, Acura dealers are telling me that the RL is not selling very good because it looks so much like an Accord. The TL, on the other hand, is selling great ever since the redisign in 2004.

billyperks · June 2005

The TL always sells well even before the re-desing, the 1st and 2nd generation TL were always great sellers- Its Acura's bread and butter.

frisconick · June 2005

I wish the TL had a light metallic blue, I think it would look fantastic.

tmaxx · June 2005

I would trade my TL for an 06 with SHAWD in a second, the only catch would be that the premium would have to be resonable. I believe the G35 is around $1800 more. That's a very resonable upgrade.

fdcapt2 · June 2005

I came here to see if anyone had some input on the new TL. All I got was a bunch of crap about who has the best 0-60 times. I really wish that people would stay on the topic, considering the fact that this forum was about any news on what we can expect, or what we might like to see in the next model year. I got nothing from the past bunch of posts except finding out that people are more interested in times, and not what we'd like to see in the new cars.

bodble2 · June 2005

Yup, I agree. For me, if the price premium is around $2500 CDN, then I would think seriously about it. That's pretty well in line with your figure of $1800 USD.

Because if it is significantly more, then I'm thinking....BMW X3, or the upcoming 330xi?

dalls223 · June 2005

Hey fdcapt2, let me ask you this. What classification is the Acura TL? *SPORT SEDAN* How the TL becomes more fun to drive is quite relevant here, and I think I speak for most of us. I clearly stated what I'd like to see in the 06 TL;more fricken power. 0-60 times are perhaps the greatest measuring stick as to what we are talking about here, PERFORMANCE... That is why we are even talking about SH-AWD, because it would improve the handling, which is directly related to PERFORMANCE. It is no secret that the current TL has fallen behind its main competitor, the G35. I am sick and tired of hearing people talking about how people who buy the G35 want more sportiness, and the people who buy TL's want more luxury. If Acura can address the lack of umph to the competition then they might be able to claim both of those categories. I have already addressed the history of how Acura was ahead all sub-$40K sport sedans in the area of PERFORMANCE a few years ago. I have seen it change before my very eyes, with the likes of the G35 from Infiniti, which now offers 298hp, and Chrysler with their 300 Hemi-C, which churns out 340hp, even though it weighs over two tons. I don't know if that is even more embarrassing. A 4100 pound tank can out hustle a TL. Let's face it, both of these cars have the TL's number on the street, where PERFORMANCE counts. And what's worse? Infiniti's cheap cousin, the Infiniti SE-R can outscoot a TL. This has to change. So let's see Acura in 2006 address the PERFORMANCE issue, because it wasn't addressed well enough in 2004 when they redesigned it. Ten horsepower and six ft/lbs. I don't care what anyone says about their performance numbers for the newer TL. It is only a few tenths of a second faster than the last generation TL, A-Spec or not. The Germans don't mess around when they do a remodel. Look at the upcoming M5. They are going to increase the previous 394hp V8 with a 500hp V10. That's a 106hp increase, which is a manly increase of steroid like proportions (baseball crack). I know this is an extreme example, and I know we are not comparing the same things here, but at least it shows that when BMW is under the PERFORMANCE gun by their competitors, they come right back shooting. So when I talk 0-60 times, believe me, it is very PERFORMANCE related, and it is something that everyone in this discussion should be somewhat concerned with when Acura goes to the drawing board for the 06 TL model.

merc1 · June 2005

Very passionate post. I think you're going to be let down if you expect Acura to increase power on the TL for 2006. If anything they'll add the SH-AWD as an option and maybe 10hp or so, but I don't think ever let the TL outpower the RL again. Think about it, if the TL has the same awd system and 300+ hp, there is no point in buying an RL. The TL in its current form is very competitive with the G35 and 330i, at least in a straight line.

I don't think Acura cares if a 300C or Sentra SE-R V-Spec is faster because neither of those cars in quite in the same category. Acura probably regards the 300C is a American pig type car.

M

Acura TL 2006+

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles