Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Where is Honda taking Acura?

1…78101213…22

Comments

  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    "Are current/recent buyers of TL criticizing FWD setup? Does anybody know if significant amount of potential buyers were lost because of FWD?"

    Count me as #2.

    I don't regret having bought a 2004 TL 6-speed for $32k almost 3 years ago. But now, in order to get a manual transmission, I'd have to go to the $38k+ TL-S. And as you head towards and above $40k, the 2007 335i is a huge upgrade to the 330i that I considered in 2004.

    As for the TL's capabilities in snow, do you have any first hand experience? From mine, it is pretty bad. 17" low profile tires take away a lot of the FWD advantage. My former 1995 Nissan Maxima SE, with 15" wheels and tires, would run circles around the TL in the snow. Even my 911 feels more stable in a moderate to heavy rain at highway speeds than my TL.

    As for dry weather handling being "excellent", I'm not sure what your metric is. I'll give Acura engineers due credit for doing the best they can within the laws of physics. But a 60/40 front weight bias and torque steer are evident as soon as you attempt to drive the car like a sport sedan. The 3 series doesn't just "feel" better, it is vastly superior.

    Mind you, I did not buy our TL with any false pretensions that it is a serious sport sedan. I bought it as a well balanced, "sporty" sedan with desireable amenities and the ability to carry my family comfortably. But if anyone is consdering it as a serious sport sedan - which the TL-S seems to be falsely advertising itself as - the FWD setup is a very very serious impediment. The next time around, I will buy a 335i or 550i, unless Acura does soemthing to significantly improve the TL and/or RL from a performance perspective.

    P.S. Robertmax, I think the weight issue is even more dramatic than you realize. According to Edmunds:

    TL (automatic) - 3,623 lbs
    TL-S (manual) - 3,563 lbs.
    RL - 4,074 lbs
    530i (manual) - 3,472 lbs
    M5 (V10, 500 hp) - 4,012 lbs

    So the TL weighs 150 lbs more than a 530i, the RL weighs over a quarter ton more than a 530i and 60 lbs more than a 500 hp M5. This is precisely why Acura needs to get off their subborn horse and develop an RWD platform. Adding SH-AWD to the TL will produce nothing more than a grossly overweight mid size sedan. Or they can just hand that whole market to Lexus, Mercedes and BMW and just make gussied up Honda Accords. But I hope not.
  • ggesqggesq Member Posts: 701
    "Does anybody know if significant amount of potential buyers were lost because of FWD?"

    Just today I was reading someone's post in the TL v. G35 forum where the person was waivering between the two. If I remember correctly- the main hangup was the FWD platform.

    Who says the TL has to get bigger (if going RWD) to have the same interior volume as the current FWD? I say- Make the TL a true sport sedan not an "also ran."
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Yep. Even if Acura sells 70K units of TL regardless of going RWD or sticking with FWD, the difference will be in perception of Acura as a contender in the luxury segment. FWD layout puts a limit while also creating a handicap for Accord at the lower end of the spectrum. It also limits TL's growth.

    Acura engineers have indeed pushed the limit to keep TL have competitive power and refinement but how long can it go? SH-AWD is far from being a good answer. If it were relatively inexpensive, and didn’t add anything but just a few pounds or introduce inefficiencies in the drive train, I won’t be averse for a status quo with the AWD system coming to rescue. It cannot be seen as a long term solution to carry sales of a car much less a brand. RL has already proven that.

    FR platform on TL will open a lot of possibilities for Acura. It could potentially contend even in mid-40s and close the gap with RL which can take things from there. And let TSX handle the entry level duties.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    "Does anybody know if significant amount of potential buyers were lost because of FWD?"

    Apparently, not many.

    The heart of the issue is something Habitat mentioned. He bought his TL as a sportEE car, not a real sports car. That is exactly what the VAST majority of the market is looking to purchase.

    There's more to building a successful car than track performance. Building the TL on the Accord assembly lines allows Acura to address all the other things that make the TL a best-seller.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    "too bad the RL was not named the TL."

    Actually, the design of the RL is rumored to one of the contenders for the TL in 2004. The US design team presented a design like what we got. The Japanese design team presented something like the RL. Apparently, they decided to go the US design for the TL.

    Later on, they revisited the Japanese concept for the TL and transformed it into the RL.

    Just a rumor, but one that comes from several reliable sources.
  • ggesqggesq Member Posts: 701
    "Apparently, not many."

    Can you imagine how many G owners might have been swayed to buy the TL if it was RWD? The reason I bought my TL is because it is an excellent balance between performance, luxury, technology and value. I don't expect it to perform superbly on a track and I had that understanding before I bought it.However, imagine if it had RWD? How would the G stand a chance? The driving dynamics of the current FWD TL are better than the IS350 and if it had RWD it would blow it out of the water.
    I don't think RWD would sway many 3er fans to buy the TL because of its price point and quite simply- it's snob appeal. Same goes for the IS350. The TL "could" at least have a fighting chance in dethroning the 3er as the benchmark in this class. If it did- I guarantee it would be the best-seller in the market based on marketing hype alone.
    Building the TL on the Accord assembly lines allows Honda to have a solid product in the Accord. It limits the potential of what the TL can and should be- a true entry level sport sedan offering from Acura.
    BTW- the 3er is the best seller in the ELLPS class.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    IMO, TL also puts a limit on what Accord could be. While there are pros to platform sharing, let us not ignore the cons, Varmint. Accord must continue to play to be the bland cousin to TL. It must continue to be less refined and less of a performer or else, how exactly would Acura be able to justify a $6K premium? That’s a bad situation to put one self into and while it hasn’t hurt as much so far, future may end up being different especially with a downward slide on sales of the Accord.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Member Posts: 3,062
    The driving dynamics of the current FWD TL are better than the IS350 and if it had RWD it would blow it out of the water.

    We can only speculate how a RWD TL would do. But, Honda has already proven what they can do with RWD with the S2000. Does that car not compare favorably with the BMW equivalent roadster, maybe even beating it?

    Would be great to see a RWD TL "just" to have it beat the BMW 3 series in all measures: actual handling/performance data, "feel", price, interior, style, etc. What would the BMW snobs then say? Tsk, tsk - TL was not designed by European engineers. Waiting for day that BMW 3 series is built in east European country to save costs.

    TL already beats 3 series on price, interior, style and reliability.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    "Can you imagine how many G owners might have been swayed to buy the TL if it was RWD?"

    I like the G35 very much. Especially the new one with the revised interior. But let's not make it out to be something it isn't. Look at the business case, not the magazine headlines.

    The G35 has been selling at a pace of about 35K units each year. The old FWD I30 sold at a pace of about 30K units each year. Acura's 4 cyl FWD TSX sells about 25K units and could sell more if they could assemble more of them. Acura's FWD TL sells roughly 74K each year.

    "BTW- the 3er is the best seller in the ELLPS class."

    I believe I wrote "a" best-seller, not "the" best-seller. Sorry for the confusion.

    Regardless, in 2004 and 2005, the TL was THE best-seller. Granted the TL was brand new and the 3 series was due for an FMC. But in a little while the TL will be new again and the 3 will be old. I suspect they will continue to swap the lead position.

    Looking at the market from a different perspective...

    How many cars are there in the $30-40K market with a focus on luxury above all else? One, the ES350. Maybe the Volvo S60 as a second.

    How many cars are there in the $30-40K market with a focus on sportiness above all else? At least four viable ones, plus a few who don't seem to compete well.

    How many cars take a balanced approach to market? One, the TL. Maybe two if you want to include the S60 in this class.

    If you're a company with a car that's earned a top selling position using a strategy with either zero or others directly challenging it, why start taking the approach where four other companies are already fighting with each other?
  • danilodanilo Member Posts: 69
    Interesting how you say "BMW snobs" Owned three and I'll say three TL's before becoming a BMW snob. BMW out performs Acura PERIOD Yes TL is cheaper... Uh yeah; And Style and interior are indeed subjective so we'll leave that alone. Funny how you have a "need" to compare the inferior TL to the Superior 3 series. BMW does not compare themselves to the TL. No comparison. Owned both and by owning both I can say the BMW kicks the TL's butt. Acura needs to just be Acura. They will never be BMW so why bother.
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    "Owned both and by owning both I can say the BMW kicks the TL's butt. Acura needs to just be Acura. They will never be BMW so why bother."

    I am a big fan of BMW, but I have to say, the S2000 "kicked the butt" of the Z3/Z4. By a huge margin. And it did so by employing ground up world class, race car inspired engineering. So it's not inconcievable for me to think that Acura engineers, if they really put their minds to it, of coming up with something to give the 550i 6-speed a run for it's money. Or potentially designing a TL that would really compete with the 3 series. Hasn't happened yet, but it's not as inconcievable to me, given that I can still recommend a 7 year old S2000 design over the current Z4 as a "Superior" roadster. And my current ownership of a 911 doesn't deter me from giving it the same credit over the base Boxster. Although I would put the base Boxster well ahead of the Z4.

    If you think BMW is inherently superior and doesn't need to worry about competition from the likes of Acura, I can only say let's hope BMW engineers and management don't get so egotistical. They have done a great job of continuing to up the ante on the 3 series and deserve the reputation they have earned. But overconfidence and reliance upon snob appeal would be just as detrimental to them as it was for Mercedes vis a vis Lexus.
  • danilodanilo Member Posts: 69
    The S2000 is indeed a fine machine. To be totally honest here I do not think that BMW can just sit around and not worry but it seems every year they come up with a winner. Not to say Acura is not ever going to be in the running but Acura simply focusses on their goals and BMW on theirs.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Member Posts: 3,062
    Owned both and by owning both I can say the BMW kicks the TL's butt.

    That's kid talk.

    Perhaps some "actual test data", not opinions, could be furnished to show the differences in performance between the TL and 3 series. Just where and by how much does the vaunted 3 series beat the TL?

    Don't know if there are any measured tests of these cars in snow, ice, rain, dirt or gravel, but I would guess that 3 series could not hold a candle to the TL on these real world surfaces. Oh, but wait. Maybe the 3 series owners are afraid to get snow/salt, dirt or gravel dust on their cars and don't drive on these surfaces anyway.

    I have no doubt that Honda/Acura could far surpass BMW in all attributes if they chose to build a RWD sedan. With Honda's excellent engine reliability in the IRL race series, perhaps more of features of these engines could be adapted to a street RWD performance sedan.
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    "Don't know if there are any measured tests of these cars in snow, ice, rain, dirt or gravel, but I would guess that 3 series could not hold a candle to the TL on these real world surfaces."

    I hate to keep playing devils advocate, but with the 2-3 inches of freezing snow and muck we got in DC this past week, both my 911 and TL sat idle. I borrowed my wife's MDX. You can't claim the TL (at least not with low profile Z rated tires) has much if any advantage over a RWD with traction control. The tires are at least as important as the drive wheels in muck. But on dry pavement, RWD will always be an advantage over FWD.

    "perhaps more of features of these engines could be adapted to a street RWD performance sedan."

    And the sooner the better.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    I like the G35 very much. Especially the new one with the revised interior. But let's not make it out to be something it isn't. Look at the business case, not the magazine headlines.

    The G35 has been selling at a pace of about 35K units each year. The old FWD I30 sold at a pace of about 30K units each year. Acura's 4 cyl FWD TSX sells about 25K units and could sell more if they could assemble more of them. Acura's FWD TL sells roughly 74K each year.

    A business case has to be more than just sales. Otherwise, Acura would be perfectly fine selling 65K units of Integra each year instead of 35K units of TSX. While TL may not benefit considerably in terms of sales by going RWD, it will benefit Acura as a brand. It will help RL at the upper end, not unlike Infiniti M benefiting from G. Let me ask you, what do you think makes Infiniti M a seller compared to RL?

    TL may have outsold G35 in the past, but progressive companies should never rest their laurels on the past. With continuous improvements as we’re seeing from Infiniti, I won’t be a bit surprised to see G35 outselling TL. Wait, it already has, two months in a row (and I am not counting the G35 Coupe). TL sales are down, G35 sales are drastically up. I am afraid, 35K units/year sales for G35 may be history. How is Infiniti doing it? Start with a platform that can define success in the market, and address minor issues.

    How many cars are there in the $30-40K market with a focus on luxury above all else? One, the ES350. Maybe the Volvo S60 as a second.

    Do we want TL to be one of them? Not a good idea. Acura has to have learnt that lesson from 1996 RL debacle. Acura needs to be Acura. When they emphasize “racing heritage” in their commercials, they better stick to it.

    How many cars are there in the $30-40K market with a focus on sportiness above all else?

    Therein lies the problem. If you think going RWD is all about “sportiness”, you’re starting on a wrong premise. Why isn’t Lexus LS460 a front driver? After all, sportiness is the last thing that one would associate with that car (and many others like it).

    TL doesn’t need to focus on all-out sport by default (although, a Type-S trim should). RWD platform would allow a far greater flexibility in orienting the car’s regular trims as well as offer sport version. It would also allow a better RL. It would open another opportunity for a luxury coupe. Sticking with global front drive platform and throwing in SH-AWD as a patchwork is simply not going to work.
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    Amen.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Member Posts: 3,062
    I hate to keep playing devils advocate, but with the 2-3 inches of freezing snow and muck we got in DC this past week, both my 911 and TL sat idle. I borrowed my wife's MDX. You can't claim the TL (at least not with low profile Z rated tires) has much if any advantage over a RWD with traction control.

    Have used snow tires at all 4 wheels on many of my cars (RWD and FWD) over the years. Have had RWDs with Posi type diff and while this is better than not having, RWD still does not have the traction nor control of a FWD. Remember, on a RWD and snowy pavement, the front tires tend to tobaggan and ride up on snow while FWD front tires can bite down and grip and steer. They have torque.

    Have 50 series Dunlop snows on 04 TL and 2-3 inches of snow/muck is no problem. Don't recall any RWD vehicle that can leave from traffic signal (in snow, ice, muck) easier/faster (mind you I don't race) than my TL or other front drivers that I have had. I just drive away from the traffic signal, no racing, and leave the rear drivers behind.

    But on dry pavement, RWD will always be an advantage over FWD.

    Think that a Mini Cooper S could give your old S2000 a good run in a slalom or in the twisties?
  • danilodanilo Member Posts: 69
    Well, by owning both and driving both and actually feeling the difference is an opinion. But it is also your opinion the "Honda/Acura" has the ability to surpass BMW in all attributes. Too bad they have not done so to date. The TL is horrible in snow and rain, Oh and I guess owning one and experiencing it first hand is an opinion. Also the BMW that I currently own "kicks theTL's butt" Kids talk I know. But also an experience oh and another first hand one. Remember you are comparing the TL to the 3 series which is BMW's entry model. A model which ranges from 32 to over 50 grand and that is the total range of the Acura line... Uh what about the 5 or 7 or the new Z9? No doubt? I guess ignorance is bliss...............
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    "Think that a Mini Cooper S could give your old S2000 a good run in a slalom or in the twisties?"

    Not a chance. The Mini Cooper, with it's tiny dimensions and good suspension is certainly a fun car to toss around in tight quarters, but make no mistake, it's not a serious sports car. Even if it was RWD, it wouldn't be. Just look at the dimensions: nearly 1 1/2 feet shorter than an S2000, over 2 feet shorter than a Boxster, but several inches narrower in track width than either and a nearly a half foot TALLER. Where do you think it's center of gravity is, compared to an S2000 or Boxster.

    No, the Mini may be good competition for a VW GTI, but try keeping up with an S2000 or Boxster in serious handling maneuvers and you will likely end up with its cute underbelly pointing skyward.
  • autoboy16autoboy16 Member Posts: 992
    After I actually dropped my jaw (NO JOKE)at how close GM is to actually getting the CTS right (All I'm waiting for is the 1st drive & full test), I thought about Acuras future vs others competetive cars that acura can take on better with a few changes.

    For the honda-holics like myself out there, I hope acura makes a RWD sedan. They need it but the TL isn't the right one for RWD. Neither is the Tsx. The only sedan that is slow, slow selling, and slow to make a second glance at is the RL.

    Tsx can stay FWD as its a great handling car. Good for the Cadillac Bls, Is250, & 328i. It needs more power and i think the Turbo is the best way for it to go. IMO, T.s.x. stand for "Touring Sports Crossover" which fits the Tsx perfectly.

    The TL i still say FWD. A standard Limited Slip Differential, 3.5l v6 and a Button/Knob to switch between Sport and Comfort settings makes perfect es350 and s80 competor. I see Infiniti Bringing out the I35 again. I see TL as True Luxury or Touring Luxury.

    Rl Should be RWD and SH-AWD option. GS430(50 in future?), 535i/550i, & E-class. Would Acura be stepping on their own toes if I said it should be renamed SLX for "Sports Luxury Crossover". Using a 4.8l w8 (Two 2.4l I4 180hp + 180hp = 360hp), RWD or RWD biased Sh-awd option IMO fills the Void left by the two and only Acura Legend(s :confuse: ?).

    -Cj
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Member Posts: 3,062
    The TL is horrible in snow and rain,

    Maybe depends on driver. TL works fine for me in snow, ice, rain, slush.

    With equivalent tires on TL and a RWD (snows or all season), FWD will still be better than RWD. This is a no-brainer.

    Also the BMW that I currently own "kicks theTL's butt" Kids talk I know.

    Everybody knows that BMW RWD has excellent "feel" as reported by "professional" testers. But, in actual measured data that can be found on Edmunds or R&T, TL and BMW 3 are close. TL beats 3 in some test parts, 3 is better in others per Edmunds test of 2006 BWM 3 and test of 2004 TL. Edmunds tester Karl Brauer said about TL: "Technically, it may not be as 'fun' as a BMW 3 Series, but it obviously goes through the slalom just as rapidly."

    Opinions about "kicking" are subjective and colorful, but actual measured data trumps these.

    It will be interesting to see if new 2007 TL Type S is tested by Edmunds and how it fares to 2004 base model and BMW 3 sedan.

    If Honda does make a RWD sport/lux sedan in near future, there is no doubt that it will surpass BMW and G35 right out of the box on their first try. They would obviously be targetting the BMW. They know how to do it and have proven that a FWD primarily company can build an excellent RWD. They did so with S2000.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Why would you prefer TL to be FWD? It can, now, no longer compete in price, features and performance. Looks can only take a car so far and for so long (while also hurting the lesser siblings, like current TL is doing to Accord).

    A RWD "platform" makes sense only if it is shared, unless it were for an exotic or a sports car (even then, very few automakers choose the route for good reasons). TL would be the perfect mate to RL, while also benefitting from it. SH-AWD can remain an option on TL (with high performance V6) as well as RL (with high performance V8).

    It will be a bad idea for Acura to bring next TL with FWD and compete in $35K-$40K price class (it already is a $34K-$39K car).
  • danilodanilo Member Posts: 69
    If honda does make a RWD sport/lux sedan in the near future, there is no doubt that it will surpass BMW and G35 right out of the box on their first try.

    Keep dreaming.....

    Ignorance is bliss ....
  • autoboy16autoboy16 Member Posts: 992
    If honda makes a rwd model, It should be for the RL, MDX, and Ridgeline. The TL is just fine with FWD. "It may not be as fun drive as the bmws but it goes through just as quickly".

    If The RL and TL share anything, the TL is automatically the better buy. Its making honda step on its own toes. The only thing separating the RL and TL now is price, awd, minor interior features, mpg, weight, and 4 hp(tl-type-s vs rl).

    The Rls interior is a pinch bigger than the TLs and the price is a punch higher. Nearly 10k.

    33k will get you into a 3.2lv6 TL (w/258hp & 233 lb ft of torque). 3k more gets you Nav/nav traffic. 2k more gives you a sport suspension and 3.5l v6 (286hp & 256lb ft of torque.).

    45k gets you an rl with sh-awd a 3.5l v6 (290hp & 256lb ft of torque). 4k more gives you the tecnology.

    Here is edmund's comparison

    A rwd tl is great but will cost more as honda needs $$$ to pay for it. A fwd tl is great and is a nice step up from the accord or tsx. The Rl is like a step down from tl.

    The Rl needs to be different from the tl to sell. People may see it like "Why pay 10k for awd and some minor interior things that i may never use" or "bmw, here i come!"

    A RWD TL and FWD RL is like cadillacs RWD cts & sts and FWD DTS. It just doesn't make sense to me. :confuse:

    -Cj
  • autoboy16autoboy16 Member Posts: 992
    And to answer your question, I would prefer a FWD tl because even as it is now, The torque steer is vanishing every year, Its a great Mix of Sport and luxury, its 35k price point is great and the looks of it are to die for...

    "Good evening for channel 7 news, Charles has crashed into a light post today. What was his excuse?" [Rolls tape]

    "The Tl I saw driving past me was sooo beautiful! Its drivers must be in love! I just cant wait to have one of my own so other people stare at me in it other than glance at my accord..." :blush:

    -Cj :blush:;) :shades:
  • ggesqggesq Member Posts: 701
    "I would prefer a FWD tl because even as it is now, The torque steer is vanishing every year,"

    cj, when did the laws of physics change? There's a current hp war going on in the ELLPS class and if Acura wants to remain competetive, they have to up the ante to at least 300hp. 300hp in a FWD sedan does not make sense. SH-AWD is only a temporary solution. It will add weight undoubtedly. AWD should be an option on the TL.

    I say - spend the money on R & D to make the TL RWD. The TL should not end up being a boulevard cruiser like the ES and the Volvo. Rather, it should be a solid sport sedan in the class.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,295
    unofficial report from my kid is the tl and gti drivers at school were complaining about driving in the snow we just had.
    maybe acura needs to make some commercials like bmw demonstrating the ability of their vehicle to handle snow.
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • vibsrvibsr Member Posts: 47
    The BMW commercials are advertising their all-wheel-drive option. Rear-wheel-drive BMWs are horrible in the snow without the right tires and a very patient driver.

    Half-worn 50/55-series tires won't grip too well in the heavy cool whip. Twenty years ago, the majority of the FWD cars on the road had nothing wider than a 70-series tire. These days, wheel diameters have increased considerably, and tire profiles have decreased considerably. A wide low-profile tire doesn't have the bite that a narrower tire would have. If you couple that with a rev-happy engine in a FWD layout, driving can be rather difficult.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,295
    the new bmw commericals tout their awd. other than that i agree with you. those old fwd cars had no torque, current ones have a lot of it.
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • autoboy16autoboy16 Member Posts: 992
    If the Tl got 300hp and RWD, then it'd carry a starting price of $40k. I don't at all mind the TL and accord sharing parts to keep the price in the mid 30s. Then it would me no reason at all to get the slightly bigger, more expensive, somewhat slower RL.

    The Tl gets all the best things from the accord and then taken a bit further. The accords 244hp engine gets pumped to 258hp in the standard Tl whilst keeping the same great fuel efficiency.

    The Accord (and all hondas for that matter) all deliver great handling for Fwd. The Tl should remain unchanged as very little is wrong with it.

    The only changes I see taking place in the base TL is a standard LSD, and a bigger trunk. The TL IMO is the perfect car under $35k for a family as the tsx is for under $30k. Maybe a button to switch between comfort and sport settings. Heck if honda could make Sh-awd rear biased, that would be great!

    The TL does everything so well. Read about the Long-term TL! Hopefully we get to see a Long term Tl-S ;) .

    Wow this is my 700th post!!

    -Cj
  • ontopontop Member Posts: 279
    Snow? What's that? I could care less how my TL handles in the snow since it rarely snows in the South. And judging from how many Northerners and Midwesterners are moving here I'm sure they don't care either. German engineering has to deal with snow in the Alps. Southern engineering has to deal with engineering a strong AC system along with the performance requests.
  • autoboy16autoboy16 Member Posts: 992
    Down south, we also deal with things like rain which equals the spinning out of a RWD sedan unless a skilled driver is in control. A skilled driver in the south is hard to come by too...

    Advantage AWD.
    With FWD, you dont have to worry much about a tail spin. And with acuras FWD having 60% weigh over the front tires, Hydro planing isn't as easy to do either.

    Sadly, I do agree about the AC vs snow thing. It is actually 47º in miami now and I'm freezing!! This is however good for the high electric bills...

    -Cj
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    You're clearly not thinking platform sharing. The last thing RL needs is a platform shared with MDX and Ridgeline. Honda isn't going to create two RWD platform (one for light trucks and another exclusively for RL). Heck, just one platform would do!

    RL and TL do not need to share everything. They can just share the platform, and the engine (base RL). This is not a unique concept. You say RL won't be a better buy? Well, apply the logic you have used between TL and Accord. Which of the two is a better buy? TL is actually a pinch smaller than Accord. But, TL sells quite well (or at least has, since MY1999) and thats because it has maintained an edge in performance, refinement, features and style.

    What is the next step do you think Acura could take to improve or at least sustain 70-75K unit sales for TL? Should Acura look for ways to improve sales, or status quo is good?

    RWD TL shouldn't cost $40K if Acura does things right and shares engines and platform across its mid-upper range cars (TL, CL and RL). Infiniti is managing to sell G35 in $32K-42K price class, and it has managed to put itself in that position! Acura with status quo will only handicap itself, with a narrow price range for TL and not so inexpensive either. Had Acura started RL in low 40s to start the game, it would have helped sales. A patchwork that they applied doesn't help the cause much (besides some other poor decisions that went with it).

    We keep talking about Acura trying to differentiate itself from Honda brand. Well, that won't happen if its best seller continues to rely on (and also hurt) Honda's best seller.

    TSX is fine, sharing bits and pieces with Accord, and it should, at entry level. But once you get past $35K price cap, competition isn't sitting still.

    If Acura continues to be stubborn, they will dig another hole for themselves, and struggle to get out of it. First of all, Acura needs to figure out what it wants to be. Does it want to chase Lexus or does it want to challenge likes of BMW. And if they go with former, I hope they stop advertising "racing heritage".
  • meateatermeateater Member Posts: 123
    Down south, we also deal with things like rain

    I think it rains in other areas of the country too bro.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    The TL you saw may have been my silver 2006 TL. :p

    It is a beautiful car, inside and out, with arguably the best six-cylinder engine in its class in terms of NVH if not all out power output. Its got virtually every feature I want and use everyday. But there is just one thing that pushes the car away from perfection and that is its limiting drive train layout. The car handles well, and corners relatively flat.

    There isn’t much torque steer either but that’s probably where Acura’s DBW is playing a role, taking away some of the grunt if the steering wheel is at an angle. This is simply based on my driving style thru a few corners, the same ones I take in my 1998 Accord which despite of greater body roll and far less power, goes faster (or at least pretends to). I sense a bit of power being taken away in the TL in those situations. Sometimes, that makes more power mute.

    But, I won’t complain about lack of power. 258 HP in a 3600 lb sedan in more than enough, although more HP has become a necessary evil when it comes to marketing and Acura realizes that. But, at the same time, Acura has handicapped itself with limitations of FWD. It can’t go more aggressive with drive train (even adoption of a short and wide spanned 6AT that competitors are wooing audience with).

    Acura could address the issue with couple of approaches if it wants to stick to FWD platform. The first of these is obvious: SH-AWD. The problems: Cost, weight and reduced drive train efficiency (especially from a company that emphasizes performance AND fuel economy). The second is to take a more subtle route as seen in TL Type-S, but given the price tag of that car, clearly, there is a premium to be paid while performance is still limiting.

    And, IMO, another major drawback with sticking to FWD platform relates to development and marketing potential of Honda’s best seller: Accord. It cannot be allowed to look nearly as good as the more expensive sibling. It cannot be nearly as refined and performer even if Honda could do it for less (we see that with the Civic Si compared to RSX Type-S, I don’t know about you but IMO the Civic is more car for less money). And it hurts Accord. It helps Accord’s competition. Acura is stomping on Honda’s foot. And that should NEVER happen.

    Giving TL a different personality will help avoid the collision. Accord can still look as good as TL while acquiring the freedom to be as good as it can be. Seriously, if 2006 Accord sedan looked like the 2008 Accord coupe concept, I won’t be driving TL today, unless TL offered more than just better looks and a few additional features for a few thousand dollars.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    If the Tl got 300hp and RWD, then it'd carry a starting price of $40k.

    I will leave the economics up to Acura, but if competitors can offer RWD with similar or better power, performance and features for about the same price as the current FWD TL, why can’t Acura? In fact, buyers like me, and likely many who haven’t been looking at Acura, would pay a small premium over most of the competition. Honda has already seen that happening with S2000. It wasn’t just Honda’s existing customer base that was buying S2000 left and right while paying a hefty premium for it.

    With evolutionary styling and improvements but RWD platform, the TL could strike a cord to expand Acura’s customer base while managing to retain existing ones. Here is a great recipe that couldn’t be any simpler:
    The Regular TL: 3.5/V6, 300 HP, 6AT, RWD and a $35K base price. Navigation could remain an option. Offer a “Sport Package” with optional 6MT, and the regular TL could top out at $40K.
    The Type-S: 350 HP version of the V6, SMG-like transmission with SH-AWD and Sport Package at about $45K.

    What about RL? Make it stylish, larger (even large midsize would do), and offer more flavors.
    The Base RL: 3.5/V6, 300 HP, 6AT, RWD, Active Damper System (like MDX) and
    $45K base price. Navigation could remain an option, as could features like CMBS etc with price topping at about $50K.
    The Premium RL: 4.5/V6 350 HP engine instead of the V6 with similar options/features and price ranging from $50K to $55K.
    The Type-S: 400 HP version of the V8, SMG-like transmission with SH-AWD and Sport Package at about $60K.

    At the lower end, TSX could continue to be the entry-level performance luxury sedan that continues to share platform with Accord. Again, with more flavors for increased appeal (hence sales).
    The Regular TSX: 2.4/I-4, 210 HP, 6AT/6MT, FWD and a $28K base price with navigation as an option.
    The Type-S: 280 HP turbo charged version of the I-4, SMG-like transmission with SH-AWD and Sport Package at about $35K.

    Note that I used a common formula for Type-S models. It simplifies understanding of the moniker as well as requires only one type of transmission to be mated to SH-AWD. With this kind of recipe, Acura will create an appeal to a wide variety of buyers, ranging from $28K to $60K. Then one could throw in a CL coupe/convertible based off TL and RL. Acura could eventually add a large luxury sedan above RL and a super car (could even use the same 4.5/V8 but with 450-500 HP) to top things off. And there would be room to grow even below TSX! Things can’t get any simpler for Acura to make a statement and announce its presence, and continue to grow.
  • ggesqggesq Member Posts: 701
    I like your recipe. The only thing I would add (selfishly) is a 6MT option for RL at the base and premium level thereby not forcing people to spend the extra cheddar just for SMG.

    ACURA please hire robertsmx :D
  • autoboy16autoboy16 Member Posts: 992
    So basically my old formula I posted in an accord room a while back would work?

    The Accord
    2.4l I4 170hp and 3.2l V6 260-270hp
    6speed Automanual & Manual
    Pricing $19k for a DX with the VP's features to $32k for a 3.2l v6 and 6automanual or manual and current EXV6w/nav features

    The TSX
    2.4l I$ 210hp and 2.4l TC I4 with 260hp
    6 automanual and 6 speed manual
    $25k for a base and $32k for the Turbo and GPS

    The Tl
    3.2l v6 and 260hp and optional 3.7l v6 with 300hp
    6automanual or manual heated/cooled seats and all the current bases standard features
    $36k for the base $45k for a AWD(I'll explain at bottom), GPS, and button to switch between comfort and sport settings

    The RL
    3.7lv6 300hp RWD and optional 4.8lw8 with 380hp awd only.
    6autos and manuals
    $45k entry up to $55k with Everything luxury related or sport related

    The Cl
    Hardtop convertible
    2.4l I4 200hp or 3.5l v6 300hp
    all the above transmissions
    $30k base up to $45k with everything

    Wouldn't it be neat if honda made an AWD system that let you pick the Bias? FWD in comfort and RWD for sport or AWD for bad weather!! I call it D.s.D.W Driver selects driven wheels
    -Cj
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    As much as many would like to have the option of 6MT, I have a feeling MT will die in anything but mainstream entry level cars. In my Acura dream lineup, that customer base would have TL sport package available with the same V6.
  • autoboy16autoboy16 Member Posts: 992
    sadly, i agree. I want to learn how to drive a manual, but i gotta wait to find one. I like the automanuals as a simple substitute. DSG is the best sub for a manual. WHAT THE HECK IS UP WITH CVTS??!!! I hope acura doesn't market them unless its in a hybrid.

    -Cj
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    If that's the case (no manual transmission) then, as far as I'm concerned, Acura can forget the rest. I'll be buy and drive $50k 335i or $65k+ 550i 6-speed before I'd take a free TL or RL slushbox from Acura, RWD notwithstanding. And SMG is not a substitute for me, nor apparantly for M5 buyers who have forced BMW to offer a 6-speed manual alternative to the 7-speed SMG they were trying to force feed US buyers.

    IMO, Acura should go beyond Infiniti and Lexus towards taking on BMW for the serious enthusaist market. And failing to offer a manual transmission would kill that potential opportunity. And be a shame, since the gearbox in the S2000 (and even my 2004 TL) is arguably one of the best on the market.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Well, today 6MT is offered because there is some demand for it. The future, however, may be different. Whether it is BMW or Acura or Infiniti or Lexus, 6MT may give way to clutchless manuals. Just look at proliferation of DSG/SMG-like transmissions in the market. The Japanese automakers haven't caught the tide yet, perhaps waiting for an opportune time.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Member Posts: 3,062
    IMO, Acura should go beyond Infiniti and Lexus towards taking on BMW for the serious enthusaist market. And failing to offer a manual transmission would kill that potential opportunity.

    Agree. Acura should have a car(s) with a manual trans that is a total package, well integrated. Example of past was RSX having a manual vs automatic. Another from Honda currently is the Civic SI coupe. As of last Autumn, could not even get an SI with automatic.

    Got to think that a RWD Acura, with manual, aimed directly at BMW 3 series in size/weight/liters would be highly successful. One thing about Honda/Acura is that if they don't get it right on first try, such as Ody van, they will keep working on it until they get it right and it beats all competition. And, it does not take them long to do it. But, then again, sometimes they have floundered such as the Del Sol. Some would say that RL may be floundering. But on balance, they have had far more successes than not.

    On a side note, test drove the SI last Autumn, and found the shifter very smooth. (Commentary on youth of today - early 20's Honda sales guy that went with me for test drive confessed that he did not know how to drive a manual trans but wants to learn some day. He took me to car on lot, put on rear license plate and had me drive it out of its parking slot.)

    Honda is renowned for its fine manual trans. Many years ago, had a 5-speed Prelude and it was excellent and fun to drive - twisties and back roads, not daily commute in stop-and-go. Remember test driving a Prelude with automatic and the car was totally out of character without a manual.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Honda does get it right in the first attempt if the company is focused on delivering a product. S2000, diesel engine, CRV, MDX in the cross over world are a few examples. First generation Odyssey was, however, a patchwork for the American market, as was implementation of V6 in 1994(?) Accord.

    With Acura, Honda started well, it just didn’t continue to build upon initial success in the early 90s, eventually faltered in the late 90s. MY1999 TL brought back some promise and turned that car into a winner. MDX was an instant success too. RSX was a step in the right direction, but not right enough to bode with the direction Acura was taking. The next logical step for Acura is to stick to a philosophy instead of trying to figure out what it wants to be.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Member Posts: 3,062
    First generation Odyssey was, however, a patchwork for the American market, as was implementation of V6 in 1994(?) Accord.

    The V6 first appeared on Accord in 1995. I test drove both the 4 and V6 and ended up with the V6 even though the Accord with the 4 handled better. I think my real mistake was not spending a few thou more and getting a 95 Maxima SE which I had test drove. But, the 95 Accord was trouble-free and kept it until the 98 VTEC V6 came out. Traded in on 98 LX V6 and that was a fine car - engine and trans.

    That 95 V6 I believe was from an earlier vintage Acura and was a stop-gap to try to market match V6 offering by Camry. The trans on the 95 was not quite right, never failed though in about 77K. The 98 Accord V6 and trans were worlds apart from the 95.

    Still have a 97 Max SE V6 and had this side by side with 98 Accord V6 for a couple of years and could comparison drive. The Nissan Max V6 was clearly superior in performance to the Accord IMO.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Yep, thats my point. On occasions, Honda (and Acura) has applied patchwork just to keep up with Joneses and the 1995 Accord V6 was one such example (they had to stretch the car a bit to fit the old Acura 2.7 V6 in there so the Accord V6 was actually longer than the I-4).
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    I'm sorry, but every time I read your suggestion about saving costs by having the TL and RL share a platform, I wince. You're just stealing from Peter to pay Paul. Yes, the RL and TL gain a wee bit from platform sharing. But you lose far more by moving the TL off the Accord platform.

    All that for the 10% of the market who cares.

    It's not that moving the TL to a RWD platform would be a bad thing. I just rank it about 6th on the list of the things Acura needs to be working on today. (For reference, #5 is a convertible coupe based on a FWD TL.) There are far more important things Acura could be doing.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    There are far more important things Acura could be doing

    Lets see your list. And if Accord platform helps in cutting costs, explain why RL costs at least as much, if not more, than comparably equipped competition (Lexus GS, Infiniti M, Audi A6). Shouldn't it cost a lot less?
  • autoboy16autoboy16 Member Posts: 992
    It goes a bit further than just that!! The hood is heavier, the engine is much smoother, and the car over all is sportier. With SAE, i guess it would be rated at 150hp... Its still great!

    Too bad honda doesn't have any old engines to drop into some random car... They could use the old I-5 in the Acura CSX to make it more different from the civic. That puts honda Face to face with Volvo's I-5.

    Or that same engine could be dropped into the Tl again for a less powerful model. Personally, thats my biggest turnoff about the TL. I don't NEED 258hp. I have 170hp now and the TSX's 205hp seems more logical to me. Plus I get a folding rear seat and the same great looks!!

    -Cj
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    "...if Accord platform helps in cutting costs, explain why RL costs at least as much, if not more, than comparably equipped competition (Lexus GS, Infiniti M, Audi A6). Shouldn't it cost a lot less?"

    First of all, I'm talking about sharing with the TL, not the RL. Based on pricing, it's pretty clear that the TL has price/value as one of it's prime virtues.

    Second, it's very difficult to say (with any car) exactly how the cost-cutting works out. For all we know, the fact that the RL shares a platform with the Accord/TL may mean that profit margins are near $10K, while the profit margins for the others you mention are only 6 or 7K.

    Third, the RL does cost less than comparably equipped competitors if you're using published pricing.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles