Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
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
As for Acura, I agree they need to be themselves.
Also agree with the TSX lack of power. It needs something
Of course 300 HP will be hard to fit into the current TSX but I do see the next one to grow bigger in size though. TL is actually already one of the largest entries in the entry level luxury performance sedan category. Couple more inches and 50 more HP plus SH-AWD for the next gen model would make it a fierce competitor to BMW's 5-series and Audi's A6.
The V8 Lexus puts on their IS-F is reported to put out 400+ HP and 360+ lb/ft.
The V10 that goes into the LF-A is reported to have 500+ HP.
The difference between G35 and 335i is smaller than you think. Actually it is more comparable between the G and 3er than A4 and 3er. I would agree that BMW is the benchmark in this segment but the A4 was never a strong competitor. Excellent handling? Yes. However, still pretty weak on the powertrain's part and overpriced.
Take a look at the "Entry Level Luxury Performance Sedan" forum, nobody is talking about the A4 over there. It's like the car doesn't exist.
Let's take a look at the current entry level luxury performance sedans price breakdown:
BMW 335i: base MSRP at $39K, tops off at $53K
BMW 328i: base MSRP at $33K, tops off at $49K
Cadillac CTS 2.8: base MSRP at $31K, tops off at $41K
Cadillac CTS 3.6: base MSRP at $34K, tops off at $43K
Infiniti G35 Sport: base MSRP at $34K, tops off at $42K
Lexus IS250: base MSRP at $32K, tops off at $40K
Lexus IS350: base MSRP at $36K, tops off at $45K
Based on the competitors' prices I'd say that a TSX with 300 HP V6, SH-AWD and loaded with Navi at $35K isn't a bad value at all.
All I am proposing is for TSX to take over TL's place in Acura's lineup so it and RL can move upmarket. This case Acura will have a complete sedan lineup without introducing another model.
If a loaded 3-series fighter from Acura at around $35K isn't realistic then I don't know what is... :confuse:
Nothing is........................
Acura has offered multiple engines too.
1996-98 TL had 2.5/I5 (170 HP) and 3.2/V6 (210 HP)
1996-00 CL had 2.2-2.3/I4 (145-150 HP) and 3.0/V6 (200 HP)
2007 TL is being offered with 3.2/V6 (258 HP) and 3.5/V6 (286 HP).
In addition, Acura has offered multiple outputs from similar displacement in the past as well (Legend had 210 HP and 230 HP versions of 3.2/V6; Integra was offered with 140, 170 and 190 HP versions of 1.8-liter engines; second generation TL and CL got 225 HP and 260 HP versions of 3.2/V6).
In case of next TSX, Acura offering 2.3-turbo similar to one being used in RDX is highly anticipated. I suspect the normally aspirated 2.4/I-4 will continue for base, and should.
Speaking of 300 HP, even that is possible in the world of turbos. The only question would be, does Acura want to go there with TSX? They could if necessary, but perhaps will settle for 260 HP or may be 280 HP at the most.
Allowing a sport packaged TSX doesn't really need to affect base TL (except that I hope it moves to a RWD platform along with RL). TL could still start around $35K and top out in low 40s with power and SH-AWD. And let "full sized" RL take things from there. But at this point, this is something I hope from Acura.
Sure, Lexus and BMW (among those that you listed) benefit from perception (of status), but Audi and especially Infiniti make for an interesting list in that entry. Audi's best seller (A4) barely outsells Acura's TSX. G35 has been playing catchup with TL for a long time. Even in case of Lexus, it is ES350 and RX350 that carry the sales load (like TL and MDX do for Acura).
Speaking of spending, based on reports, BMW has the most incentives of any automaker in the market today, and not surprising to see that it is in the form of lease deals. It is how people seem to drive home BMWs. A person like me who prefers to buy (and chooses to pay more per month to "own the car") would prefer to go for Acura. So, the definition of ability to "spend" can vary based on circumstances.
Yep- to me. I put value last in my laundry list. The TL offered every imaginable luxury feature in this segment all in one package and at one price point. Technology wise- same story- DVD audio, bluetooth, voice activated navi, etc.... I bought my TL (05)- did not lease it. That said, I intend on keeping it for at least 5 years and after dealing with a prior 3er (e46)- (wife's old car) and all the horror stories of the 3 after warranty had expired, I wanted a vehicle I know that will keep me away from the dealer's service department for a long time.
For a FWD vehicle- it offers "enough" performance for me.
IMHO Acura needs to move away from being known as the "value" luxury or near luxury vehicle and step up to the plate.
35k is not a hetfy price in this segment if the TSX can keep its current driving dynamics and enrich it by adding more hp and AWD.
RWD in the TL? A nice thought but the SH-AWD will most likely be the way they go.
RL needs a V-8. period!
An ELLPS does not need a 6 cyl to be a competitor. The RDX turbo will do just fine.
The G35x has a MSRP right around 38-39k. A loaded TSX in the 35k range fits.
I owned several Acura TL's, 2002, 2004, 2006. And all were great cars. I also owned two BMW's, 2004, 2006. Also great cars. Price aside my experience goes to BMW only due to the quality of build, structure etc. Not to say Acura is not good, It is rather good and even great at it's pricepoint. Again: Value. Don't kid yourself here, if your TL were another 10 grand you'd take a look elswhere.
:surprise: Not even going there....
Glad to see you have had postive experiences with BMW. I, on the other hand along with my wife, family and a couple of friends dreaded every single problem we had with ours. They were all great "driving" machines but service nightmares.
Acura needs to be a luxury automaker not a near luxury automaker and stay away from being labeled "value." In order to do so, Acura needs to step up to the plate with all of its offerings.
RL's weakness is not in the engine, it is in the transmission, size and styling. If it were just a RWD car, perhaps the impact of transmission would not be as big since then it would be about 250 lb lighter and the tallishness of the gear ratios would not be as pronounced.
I vote for RWD platform for TL (and RL) for good reasons... cost and weight that SH-AWD adds. With RWD platform, both can be avoided to a good extent.
The other point was, Audi and Infiniti don't have the prestige factor either. In my experience, people tend to recognize MB, BMW, Lexus and Jaguar far more than any of the other brands. Among US brands, Cadillac gets the nod. Lincoln is lost.
1. The cars are actually cheaper to build rather than a la carte(all cars come with leather, xenon,heated seats, etc.)
2. cheaper to build means cheaper for us(we like all the gizmo's)
3. resale is more uniform(you won't get caught if you load up on options, none to load up on) except nav.
this makes Acura a great "value" not a value car like a sentra, a value car like an Acura which gives you a great product for a great price
Too bad you had issues with your old BMW, I have not had an issue but am aware of the media.
And lease is a huge part of success especially in the premium brands. If I had to guess, most of the sales in $30K to $60K might be just that... leases.
I am a fan of Acura and own two - 2004 TL6-speed and 2005 MDX.
But if I were advising the company from a strategic planning and marketing standpoint, I would agree with those here that have suggested they need to move the RL up the scale and create more meaningful model distinctions. As evidence, look at how narrow Acura's price ranges are compared to BMW and Lexus (approximate MSRP's):
Acura:
TSX - $28k - $31k
TL/TL-S - $34k - $39k
RL - $46k - $52k
Lexus:
ES - $33.5k
GS - $44k - $55k
LS - $61k - $71k
BMW
3 - $32k - $48k (n/i M3)
5 - $45k - $65k (n/i M5)
7 - $75k - $120k
In the case of Acura, their "flagship" RL thanks to heavy price discounts, is barely 25% more expensive than their TL, which is only a few thousand more than the TSX.
BMW and Lexus aren't affraid to sell "premium" cars 2-3 times the price of their entry level cars.
IMHO, expressed numerous times in other forums, everybody has their wannabe 3-series fighter, but no one really has a car that competes with the 550i sport for the enthusiast. Period. I agree with those that believe this represents one of the better market opportunites for Acura to revise it's RL towards. V8 option, RWD (lighter) option, Sport suspension (or better yet, adjustable PASM type) option, 6 speed manual and 6-speed DSG transmission options. Plus, put those exceptional Honda S2000 engineers to work in upgrading the driving dynamics.
And yes, danilo, I do think Acura could charge $55-$60k for that car, predicated on it having the same luxury and build quality of the current model, but performance and driving dynamics that gives serious competition to the 550i 6-speed. For which, right now, there isn't any. And it's right at $65k fully equiped.
BMW has more price variation in their 5 series alone than Acura has in it's entire sedan model line-up. The TSX is the entry level and should remain there. The TL is the mide level, and is fairly well positioned, but the RL is a lost cause of a flagship.
Wannabe 3 Series fighter? The Infinti G35 beat the 3 Series in a car and drive comparo a few years ago along with some other cars including the TL. The current generation TL finbished 3rd to the G35 and 3 Series. I think the comparo was in a 2004 or 2005 issue of car and drivier. I know the G35 was a 4-5 year old newer than the 3 Series at the time of the comparo but the G35 still beat the 3 Series.
As for for the 5 Series one magazine didn't like it and placed it 3rd in a comparo behind the Acura RL which finished 2nd in that comparo.
I'm not hating on BMW its just that the I-Drive is just not liked and the G-35 caught up with the 3 Series in terms of drivability.
I thought Honda was looking(from what I read a while ago) at putting out the current RL with a lower trim version for the US market. Whatever happened to that idea? As for the RL"s current value maybe if Honda priced at 45K when it first came out I think it would have sold better. Even as a honda fan I was saying to myself 50K for an RL when it first saw the articles on the internet for its release. I was thinking that car should be priced around maybe 42K-45K.
Wait... which Acura should they charge 55-60K for the TL or the RL?
Ditto what you say about the NSX nameplate. I think the ASC may work as a brand new halo car for Acura, but should not be linked with the NSX. That said, I understand that Acura PR people have nothing else to draw on.
"I am wondering if it ties in anyway to any of Honda’s major racing efforts (F1, IRL and now, ALMS)."
Well... now you're getting us into murky waters. Should "Acura" be associated with the racing efforts of "Honda"? I mean, here they are spending lots of time and money trying to convince people that Acuras are something more than gussied up Hondas. Does it make sense to then link the two companies at the halo car level?
Also, what does a MR car with a V10 engine have in common with the Acura line-up? Nothing. All their cars are FF with V6s. With the NSX, they were able to usher awareness of VTEC. With this GT, they can promote SH-AWD.
"NSX may not have broken sales record, but that wasn’t the point of the car. It had a mission and came out in flying colors."
Yes and no. A halo car doesn't need to set sales records, but it does need to be seen on the street every now and then. I remember each time I've seen a Lambo, Ferrari, and NSX. I haven't seen an NSX on the street since 1998, or so. The more cars you have on the street, the more chances it has to create those memories. You can fell the biggest tree in the forest, but if there's nobody there to hear it...
And, lastly, I agree. I doubt we'll see both a super GT and a full-blown exotic in the Acura stable.
I just don't think you can use magazine rankings as support for an argument unless they are consistent on the matter. Even when they are consistent, it takes a while for public perception to catch up.
Kudos to Acura, Infiniti and Lexus but no cigars yet.
Sure, Acura execs would love to have that plaque on the wall. They probably dream about having BMW's reputation.
On the other hand, you can bet the boys at BMW stay awake at night wondering about Acura. I mean, BMW offers engine options, coupes, convertibles, wagons, faux leather, real leather, RWD, AWD, optional tires, sport packages, and super-duper M variants. They work hard for the plaque. Meanwhile, the TL calmly matches BMW "best car ever" sale for sale with a car that's FWD and comes with one option. And it looks easy.
Some years, the 3 series sells more than the TL. Other years, the TL sells more copies than the 3. For the past several years, the two have been a fair match.
Acura’s first racing effort, after all, is powered by a 3.4-liter V8 developed by “Honda” Performance Development for ALMS. A mid engine performance car with a V8 would have represented that effort in ALMS better than the AASC would representing the rest of the Acura lineup (or the racing effort) as it stands now. Unless, the new Acura lineup involves technology and performance criteria set by the GT coupe. Besides, a mid-engine performance coupe - the next NSX would have helped Acura grow on an established foundation.
While most may be unaware of NSX, enthusiasts did take notice. I am reminded of a reference to NSX (by Car and Driver? from 3-4 years ago). During their review of Mosler MT900, of all the cars and there has to be a good reason for it, the reviewers commented on how the car reminded them of the NSX (in a very good way). Well, THAT is an accomplishment. Regardless of whether a person reading it is aware of NSX or not, can afford it or not, it does make an impression. The reviewers could have as well mentioned F360 Modena, but they chose NSX.
NSX was special. Too bad it was left virtually as is for 15 years. Well, even though Accord was the best selling car in America in 1991, I don’t think Honda would be selling very many of those 15 years later without major update. They just forgot the NSX for that long!
I go agree on the potential GT coupe as being a candidate for promoting SH-AWD, but I don't think it was necessary. Acura could have done that with an all-out performance oriented RL, instead of preparing a candidate for "Battle of the Heavyweights" (and I mean that literally). I just hope the luxury "sports car" from Acura doesn't tip the scale at about 4000 lb like the Ferrari Scaglietti or the Aston Martin do.
The earlier poster was mistaken. Both the base TL and TSX have a 61/39 weight distribution... Give or take a fraction of a percent.
Frankly, there are many engineering decisions which factor into any given car's performance. Spec racing them will only get you so far. You're better off comparing the results than the details.
"Besides, a mid-engine performance coupe - the next NSX would have helped Acura grow on an established foundation."
In the words of a respected designer... "I never look back, darling. It detracts from the now."
To my recollection, the NSX got kicked off the island by a GT with a V10 engine mounted up front and a nameplate spelling "Viper".
Some would argue that the S2000 was upstaged by a hefty, GT-like coupe with a torquey V6 up front and a Nissan badge.
Personally, I wouldn't blame Acura if they took a page from that book. The ASC looks like a car that reflects their design direction and competes in a market where they have a chance of winning. How many times would you have them toss money at purist sports cars when those never seem to work out?
Rocky
That doesn't make sense to me at all. This could even imply that the designer doesn't want to learn from the mistakes of the past.
If that were to be true, we couldn't relate Honda S2000 to Honda S500/S600/S800, and we all know better.
Some would argue that the S2000 was upstaged by a hefty, GT-like coupe with a torquey V6 up front and a Nissan badge.
Personally, I wouldn't blame Acura if they took a page from that book. The ASC looks like a car that reflects their design direction and competes in a market where they have a chance of winning. How many times would you have them toss money at purist sports cars when those never seem to work out?"
Sorry, I have to disagree with you. I do agree that Acura let the NSX die a rather undignified death by not revising and refining it over the years. But it was the ONLY Japanese sports car that would have ever made someone shopping Ferrari and Porsche give it consideration. I didn't have that alternative to consider when I bought a 911S in 2005, but the Viper wouldn't have been of interest had Dodge priced it competitively with the S2000.
As for the S2000, when I bought a 2002 in November 2001, the Edmunds "TMV" was $36,800. That's $4,000 over MSRP a full 2 years after the car was introduced. The ONLY cars that have sold at a premium to MSRP longer than the S2000 are Ferrari's. Yes, over the last couple of years, the S2000 has faded the way of the NSX. It's still a better roadster than the base Boxster at $50k, but Honda has done nothing to promote or refine it. But, the 350Z is a spare parts project that could be bought at near invoice within 12 months of introduction.
"Purist" sports cars do work out. Just as nothing from Japan competes with the 550i 6-speed, nothing from Japan currently competes with Porsche or Ferrari. And thier profitability per car is just a tad higher than Chryslers or Nissans. IMO, Acura has the technology and engineering know how to take on these market opportunities. Whether it chooses to do so, will be seen. But I sure as hell hope they don't ever look at the Viper or 350Z as something to aspire towards. That would be a giant step backwards. A cop out to the NASCAR beer-gut mass market when they could be gaining the respect and loyalty of the Formula One demographic.