The problem with Accord: exterior styling. The solution: More aggressive/sporty styling. The downside to the solution: What would be the incentive to buy a TL if Accord looked just as good? Not enough to justify the premium.
Thats how Acura and Honda shoot at each others' foot. Accord's being decapitated to make room for TSX/TL sales. In terms of performance, we saw that happen to Civic. Finally, RSX went away and here came Si.
Soon, someone will chime in about RWD tl and forget the current TLS advantages over the TL.
There are many reasons to by the TL other than styling. It offers Power advantages over the Accord, technology that is yet to seep into the accord -Nav Traffic for example-, and its position as a FWD ELLPS.
The accords sales aren't down because of the TL/TSX as their sales are down now also. All are aging designs(Accord since 2003 and TL/TSX since 2004) and are due for a refresh/redesign/MMC.
All of said cars offer Something different and are in different places in the market. Someone Looking to buy a Cadillac CTS is not going to look at the Accord. Someone looking to buy the Altima is not going to look at the TL.
The TSX OTOH is in a special market place. It offers accord buyers a step into acura but being a much sportier car than the accord(The turbo will make more hp/torque than the v6 accord). The TSX competes with cars from the 328i to the Volvo s40. An OPTIONAL AWD TSX could compete with the AWD version of said cars or even cars like the Mazdaspeed6 or Subaru Legacy.
-Cj A RWD TL is a good IDEA but it is much too soon to be implemented. Maybe in 2014 if cars dont fly the TL can be RWD.
"You must have horrible eyesight to mistake the TL for the accord! RL for the accord I could understand..."
No, I don;t mistake the 03+ Accord for the 04+ TL or vice versa but to clearly more explain my point buyers want Acura's and Honda's to look different on the outside and not be confused for each other(like they do now.) I don't even confuse an 03+ Accord with the 05+ RL.
"Maybe in 2014 if cars dont fly the TL can be RWD."
I hope you folks that continue to defend the FWD platform aren't crying rivers when the TL fades to oblivion long, long before 2014.
I have a very good friend who owns an Acura and Mercedes dealership in Pennsylvania. He sold his Saab franchise a few years ago when their product line - which had never been huge in sales volume but had a faithfull following - lost further market share and loyalty. He has expressed grave concerns over the current Acura line-up. He has sold approximately three (3) Mercedes S classes at an average price of $90,000 for each RL he has sold at below invoice. The TL, which did well in 2004/5 has become "stagnant" in 2007. If not for the new MDX, he'd have few people coming into the Acura showroom.
He would have given my nephew a spectacular deal on a TL-S 6-speed, but as soon as he heard he was considering the 335i and knew he wanted something that had serious performance, he advised him to get the 335i "at any price" over the TL-S. This is a guy who loves cars - and he is embarassed that Acura is milking a FWD platform for its "sport sedan" and has an obesely overweight and underpowered AWD platform for its "flagship". By the way, he is located in an area that received 120+ inches of snow this year (so far). And RWD Mercedes still outsell the AWD RL by a large margin.
His assessment is blunt: When Acura redesigned the TL in 2004 and offered a sport suspensioned 6-speed model, they took a positive step in the right direction vs. the previous, lame duck model. But they have since taken a big step backward (forcing one to buy an overpriced TL-S to get the so-called "sport" version and, in the meantime, the competition has taken two steps forward. The TL needs to be RWD or, simply, permanantly removed from any and all comparisons to other ELLPS that take the "performance" attribute seriously.
I am glad to see someone being realistic. Acura needs to do something or it will keep sliding. BMW has stepped way up with the 335i and an AWD version soon to be on the way. I have heard their AWD will add only 195lbs. Not bad if this is true. TL-S has been a disappointment for most but Acura can do something if they choose. Time will tell...
"I am glad to see someone being realistic. Acura needs to do something or it will keep sliding. BMW has stepped way up with the 335i and an AWD version soon to be on the way. I have heard their AWD will add only 195lbs. Not bad if this is true. I am glad to see someone being realistic. Acura needs to do something or it will keep sliding. BMW has stepped way up with the 335i and an AWD version soon to be on the way. I have heard their AWD will add only 195lbs. Not bad if this is true."I am glad to see someone being realistic. Acura needs to do something or it will keep sliding. BMW has stepped way up with the 335i and an AWD version soon to be on the way. I have heard their AWD will add only 195lbs. Not bad if this is true. TL-S has been a disappointment for most but Acura can do something if they choose. Time will tell..."
Well I see some 07 TL-S's around New Jersey where I live so I don;t think the TL-S is a total flop.
More than TL, its the RL that is of concern at the moment. Although, the rather early downward turn in TL sales isn't something to sneeze at either. RL would benefit immensely from a new platform, and TL could use it too, not only to help add volume used by the platform but also in terms of prestige and allowing room for growth. With current set up, it is not helping RL, it isn't sustaining its sales either (being in fourth year can't be used as an excuse since 2002 TL went thru the same phase without showing as much dip... which showed up in the fifth year and very likely the bad rep on transmission didn't help the case that year either).
If Acura does put TL on a new platform (along with RL), and still doesn't sell at the volumes that it has in 2004 and 2005, TSX gets to play a bigger role than it can right now, picking up customers. From that point on, TL becomes a car that has room to grow and would be competitive in more than couple of areas. Lets say TL sales drop to 50K units/year from 70K, with additional (more powerful/equipped) features I bet TSX can pick up another 20K-25K customers every year.
Besides, quantity versus quality... which way should Acura go?
"I have a very good friend who owns an Acura and Mercedes dealership in Pennsylvania."
Wow Acura and Mercedes share the same dealership because where I live in New Jersey both Acura and Mercedes have mostly stand-alone dealerships that don;t share dealers with any other car brands.
"This is a guy who loves cars - and he is embarassed that Acura is milking a FWD platform for its "sport sedan" and has an obesely overweight and underpowered AWD platform for its "flagship".
Reponding to your statement Acura is milking a FWD platform for its sports sedan: I don't understand but what do you expect Acura to do too switch the TL to RWD or AWD in the middle of its current model cycle? However they could have made the 07 TL-S AWD.
"His assessment is blunt: When Acura redesigned the TL in 2004 and offered a sport suspensioned 6-speed model, they took a positive step in the right direction vs. the previous, lame duck model."
Ok I agree with your statement although the old model's TL and CL were good cars for the value and $$$ that you paid for them.
"But they have since taken a big step backward (forcing one to buy an overpriced TL-S to get the so-called "sport" version and, in the meantime, the competition has taken two steps forward."
The competition all has newer cars out though than the TL.
For the record I think the 09 TL should AWD and the next RL should be RWD.
As for the RL there is more thing wrong with it than the current model RL not offering RWD.
I think the concern is for the future, not necessarily the present. If a model gets “old” after three years, it has to be a concern especially since Acura plans on five year cycles. So, competition that doesn’t shy away from updating its cars frequently is always going to have an edge unless Acura changes its ways.
Besides, the way I see it, Acura is going to have difficulty selling FWD cars with $35K plus price tag. At $38K, no matter how good TL-S can perform (“for a front driver”), it is no longer considered a value. The amount of engineering Acura has applied to make high powered FWD car competitive can go a long way to creating bench mark cars. And that’s something I expect from Acura. I won’t mind SH-AWD as a standard feature if TL continues to weigh 3600 lb, deliver 23-24 mpg in city, and doesn’t cost $3K too much just because of the fancy AWD system. Perception matters in this price class, a lot more than the effect “value” does especially since most buyers seem to lease vehicles above $35K.
The future has to be a concern. It would be a stretch to expect Acura change TL drastically before 2009 model arrives, but the concern really relates to what they bring with 2009 (or whenever redesign happens). And to get there, they better be working on something that outdoes the 2004 TL launch. That’s not going to be easy with the current formula especially given that Acura wants to sell performance (not “Lexus”). Even Lexus knows how to market performance, just look at IS and GS duo. The former may be 3-series wannabe largely due to “Lexus issues” but it is selling reasonably well alongside GS whose sales we definitely don’t want to compare to RL’s.
This is not to suggest that I want to see TL compete with IS. That should be left to TSX which has a similar orientation and size. But TL can certainly be a real Legend with RL being something more that Acura has not dared to be serious about.
AWD is a decent fix but it won’t take Acura anywhere. Look at Audi. Its not a brand Acura should look up to. The result is in heavy cars that cast a shadow on otherwise superb potential from the drive train. And AWD doesn’t come free either and has potential for added maintenance.
Are you defending the FWD platform of the TL? I thought at one time, long, long ago, you claimed that even though you admittedly were not a driving "enthusiast", you could easily tell the difference in handling between FWD and RWD?
I continue to learn the downsides of FWD - like the difficulty in getting the car to track straight and vibrations from the drive wheels. I am taking my TL back after having the wheels balanced because the dealer thinks it must be the alignment. My Acura service manager said essentially the same thing as the dealer spiritinthesky mentioned. Namely, that Acura needs to "cut the crap and make "premium" platforms for premium cars rather than keep borrowing from the Honda Accord". He used to work for Lexus and BMW.
So here I own a FWD TL 6-speed and advocating change, while you own a RWD IS350 and appear to be defending the status quo. Funny.
"This is not to suggest that I want to see TL compete with IS. That should be left to TSX which has a similar orientation and size. "
you caught my drift... The TSX an TL should not be competing against the same cars. Same with the RL and TL. The RL should be with the big boys:BMW7, LS460, and A8 for example. That something that confused me when the RL got smaller. Thats where a Full Size Luxury sedan comes into play. And the V8 engine.
My Proposed 4.8l W8 was not well received either. A 360hp w8 (180hp+180hp). As a temporary fix for a v8 engine. Honda could put 2 2.5l I4's together for the 4.8l W8. It something to attract buyers who want v8 power now.
BTW, Hyundai is building a car to go against the BMW 7... I hope Acura gets there 1st!
Could honda make their own 6/8 speed automatic by combining 2 3/4 speed automatics? by theory, it should offer DSG like Automanual shifting and many gears for better fuel economy. Soon, HONDA/acura too may use CVTS only since they havent made an effort to make a bigger transmission.
NO, I am not defending the FWD TL. I think for TL to be a legitimate sports sedan, it should come with RWD or AT LEAST AWD. Me as the Honda/Acura faithful would love to see TL comes with RWD so some of the so call "enthusiasts" could give the FWD bashing a rest.
On the other hand, from Honda/Acura's perspective, if the FWD TL could generate more sales/profit than going RWD/AWD then I won't fault them for keep it original. Ultimately, Honda is out to make money, to satisfy the enthusiasts at a cost I believe isn't even on their top 10 to-do list. If you have paid attention to all my posts that was actually one of the reasons I rally for Lexus, because they know whom are their targeted buyers and they make darn good products for them.
autoboy, 2 "I's" don't make it a "W". 2 "V's", however, does. I've heard about W12 before but never a W8. Also, don't recall there is any V4s out there either.
Then I guess we at least partially agree - for the TL to be competitive in the ELLPS in the future, it needs to be something other than FWD. I would vote for RWD, since SH-AWD is pushing the expense and the weight of a V6 powered "sport sedan". I think the current TL-S engine, if it were powering the rear wheels of a 3,400 lb TL, would be a very viable ELLPS competitor.
The issue that many seem to disagree on is what it would cost Honda to develop a RWD platform and marekt a truly different model. Personally, I think Honda and Acura have interlaced and bunched up their FWD product offerings to the point that there is internal cannibalization. By making the TL a RWD vehicle, the Accord line would be free to go after the FWD lower end market and the TL would likely win share from the ELLPS market that won't accept a FWD setup. I'd bet a dollar or two that combined total sales of the two models would increase due to the broader appeal.
Then I guess we at least partially agree - for the TL to be competitive in the ELLPS in the future, it needs to be something other than FWD. I would vote for RWD, since SH-AWD is pushing the expense and the weight of a V6 powered "sport sedan". I think the current TL-S engine, if it were powering the rear wheels of a 3,400 lb TL, would be a very viable ELLPS competitor.
The issue that many seem to disagree on is what it would cost Honda to develop a RWD platform and marekt a truly different model. Personally, I think Honda and Acura have interlaced and bunched up their FWD product offerings to the point that there is internal cannibalization. By making the TL a RWD vehicle, the Accord line would be free to go after the FWD lower end market and the TL would likely win share from the ELLPS market that won't accept a FWD setup. I'd bet a dollar or two that combined total sales of the two models would increase significantly due to the broader appeal. I'm also pretty sure that Infiniti would not be happy with such a move by Acura, since the G35, good as it is, still lacks Acura refinement. Take away the TL's FWD disadvantage and the G35 (sedan) would have a tough time competing, IMO.
Accord alone is not going to take over all those left-over FWD TL crowds because Honda just doesn't have that "upscale" appeal to most luxury (or near luxury) brand buyers.
I think the ideal solution for Acura is: - keep TSX FWD with optional SH-AWD and boost its size up just a little to attract low-end luxury buyers whom want to step up from their midsize sedans. - Give TL RWD with optional SH-AWD to satisfy the not-too-regular Joes.
I guess I am suggesting a duel-entry for Acura's entry level lineup. Oh well...
Ever hear of the Passat W8 with AWD? It uses 2 I-4s connected to 1 starter. The same with the Bugatti Veyron 16.4's W16 quad turbo engines. Its 2 Twin Turbo V8s combined. They sit parallel if you havent noticed.
To me, the W is a more practical choice for larger engines as they literally can shut off half the cylinders for better MPG when performance is not needed.
Ever hear of the Passat W8 with AWD? It uses 2 I-4s connected to 1 starter. The same with the Bugatti Veyron 16.4's W16 quad turbo engines. Its 2 Twin Turbo V8s combined. They sit parallel if you havent noticed.
To me, the W is a more practical choice for larger engines as they literally can shut off half the cylinders for better MPG when performance is not needed.
No, I hadn't noticed. But my goodness, better MPG would be very comforting for the person who just dished out $1.2 million for a 1001 hp Bugatti. :surprise:
I don't mind a RWD TL. I'm just saying for now, a FWD TL is best as honda has NO V8 or RWD platform to put the tl.
Honda has too many priorities now. -V8 -NSX -Sales -RWD -Fixing Recalled Vehicles -Slow selling RL -Decreased TL sales (Could be fixed if a 6speed manual is offered in the base model like before ) -Redoing the TSX - Marketing the CSX - Diesel engines and probably more...
However, since Honda currently doesn't have any V4 in their inventory (at least that I am not aware of) so it is pointless for them to go with a W8. A nice V8/V10 (or both) would be a much better option.
Why does the RWD TL need a V8 is beyond me. A nice high performance V6 with 300-350 HP would do just fine.
As for the priority list, a nice RWD platform should take care of the TL/RL issue. TSX is bundled with the new Accord (at least the Euro/Japan version) and the development of the NSX shouldn't take priority over their mainstream products such as TL, TSX or even RL in this case. To me, the priority list for Acura/Honda should be:
To me, the priority list for Acura/Honda should be:
RWD V8/V10 NSX Coupe
Holy cow - we agree on something else. Exact order I would have picked. I guess people that drive automatics aren't from a different planet after all! :surprise:
If RL were to be able to compete in $50K price class, Acura has to worry about ensuring that it is a logical step up from another car in its lineup and that car is TL. The price gap between the two needs to be addressed along side the need to address the gap (or lack of) in terms of size. And there is no better way to do it than put those two on a common platform which is designed from scratch to host midsize (TL) to full size (RL) cars as opposed to the current formula that starts with a compact sedan (TSX).
Let us look at and address the arguments made against this platform. -Honda doesn’t have manufacturing facility: True. But it has got to start somewhere like they did for Odyssey in 1998 which paved the way for an immensely successful light truck platform. It’s a part of doing business (well) that companies take some risk to improve their lineup. -RWD is not acceptable for people who deal with snow: Well, that hasn’t stopped other automakers from having (exclusively) RWD cars which are also successful. Besides, just like SH-AWD applied to FWD platform, Acura could still offer SH-AWD on RWD cars and the difference would be that now SH-AWD won’t need to be a standard feature. It can be optional if people see value in it. -New platform will cost more: Initially yes. But that was also true in 1998 for the light truck platform. And a company like Honda shouldn’t be scared of that aspect, if they want to be taken seriously outside of the mainstream segment. If they are happy with status quo, then they might as well scrap any plans to offer cars beyond $40K mark. Dump “Acura” badge and sell everything under the Honda banner. -RWD platform is not space efficient: This is a political statement, especially considering the fact that people are complaining about interior (and trunk) size in RL but not in, say, GS, 5-series, M and E-class. -RWD platform is not fuel efficient: Again, it is Honda who claims the benefits of longitudinally mounted engine in its motorcycles as being the efficient way compared to transverse. So, how does that idea change in automobiles? Could it be another political statement? Besides, using SH-AWD as a fix is not exactly about improving efficiency. In fact, it not only hurts by way of increased drive train losses but also by way of added weight.
I agree with your ideal solution. It is something I want to see myself. Single platform philosophy for everything for Accord, TSX, TL and RL has not really worked in Honda’s favor. It is hard to make up for a loss of 44K units in just three years (Accord sales down from 398K in 2003 to 354K in 2006) while TSX grew from 19K to 38K (+19K) and TL had its moment for couple of years selling in record numbers (2004 & 2005) but has gone down since and currently on pace to be in low 50s this year (down almost 25K units from 2004). We don’t even want to talk about RL. It is a nice car, but numbers don’t stack up in its favor, not since Acura continues to play the “value” game.
First of all, Honda needs to reconsider its approach with Accord. It is the single most important car in the lineup. And that will require forgetting about cars above it (TSX and TL) and give it the best Honda can, in terms of power train, features and styling.
Then consider TSX. Honda takes middle of the road approach in tuning the Accord sedan and that works in the Acura’s favor. It gets to have its own niche. Obviously, there is no harm in it sharing platform with Accord. With a little more power (especially low end) or at least a wide span 6-speed automatic, which should be offered in every Acura at the minimum, it can sustain its sales in near $30K price class well and that I think could be around 40K units per year. Not too shabby.
This is the cut off point that Honda needs to consider. What should be the TL? Having pushed itself to the limits with Accord, TL should have its own identity. It does not need to be a car that has to have a base price in low 30s. Starting at $35K, and going up to $40K, should still garner 50K-60K units/year sales if not better. Now some may say, but it is fewer than the FWD TL Acura sold in 2004 and 2005. True. But that is history, and if we must rely on it TL, over last nine years or so, has sold at an average of about 65K (estimated). So, 5-10K fewer units with room to grow in terms of prestige and sales isn’t something to be bothered about.
And that takes us back to TSX. If TL can be so different, it allows TSX to grow beyond what it can be. Combined with more powerful engine and SH-AWD, it can fill that low-30s void left by TL and here Acura may get those sales that they might lose on TL. It will also address the needs of those who believe RWD sucks in snow, so give them FWD or AWD. Well, now people can have all three choices. They could pick TSX as FWD or AWD, or TL with RWD.
And why not offer TL with AWD as well? With a performance trim to top things off (the Type-S), a 325-350 HP V6 and SH-AWD could do the trick. BMW, Lexus and Infiniti will have reason to be worried. Not only will this allow TL to satisfy $35K-$45K price class (if Accord can span $10K in terms of pricing, so can TL) it will also close the gap with the RL, the next step up.
RL grows from where TL leaves, a larger, more luxurious flagship that can be offered with V8 and SH-AWD as option and actually could compete with virtually any car under $60K instead of getting bogged down at $50K.
This should be Honda’s vision for the global Acura. At this point, we may be talking about the same sales as in Acura’s best years, but with this scenario, there is plenty of room to grow with a possible CL which can be Acura’s coupe/hard top convertible sharing pieces with TL and RL and sitting between them. Even RDX could use the same platform and drive train combinations.
A car like NSX on top would just seal the deal. And not only Acura would have the potential to grow at the top and in the middle, it could also make a move at lower end with a revived CSX (which should NEVER be simply a rebadged Civic, a differentiation like that between Accord and TL/TSX makes more sense).
With this approach, Acura should be able to beat 250K units/year sales while delivering cars that people expect a premium badge should.
I like this idea! ! thing would be the RDX's turbo engine. I think this should be in the TSX to give it a different flavor than the accord and TL. The TL will have a great powerful v6 and the Accord will have a v6 optional. Most likely the TLs current 3.2lv6 allowing the TL to start out with the 3.5 or 3.7l v6.
A 210hp TSX or a 250hp/260lb ft of torque turbo engine. Its Sporty, it should cost less than the 33k RDX with SH-AWD. I like it.
I don't think anyone here is defending FWD. There are several of us defending AWD.
Why do we do that? Because it provides a realistic option for Acura in the near future. Going RWD with the TL is unrealistic today, and probably cannot be managed for another 4-6 years.
I'm not quite sure why people are applauding BMW's AWD for weight savings. At 195 lbs, it's only 10 lbs lighter than conservative estimates for SH-AWD. Furthermore, I've read articles which cite the weight of SH-AWD at 176 lbs.
In a direct comparison of AWD systems, I can understand the need to make a point. At this point, I think SH-AWD is arguably the benchmark and its only in its first generation.
That said, BMWs don't NEED AWD. That company has the fundamentals right. It can offer cars for $2K-$3K less, while being lighter on the weighing machine too. AWD should never be seen as the savior, at least not by a company of Honda's pedigree and focus on efficiency.
Acura does, in fact, need SH-AWD to retain any semblance of sport for the next few years. (Unless you think they can accomplish that with FWD?) So, yes, AWD is the savior of the moment. It solves more problems than it creates.
Then Honda isn't taking Acura anywhere. For Acura to continue playing "value" card, it must ensure that SH-AWD as a patch isn't looked upon as an overpriced, unnecessary gadgetry that also adds weight.
Nobody is talking about tomorrow, but this is something Acura has to consider when planning its future, and there is no better time than to coincide it with the JDM Acura launch, also coinciding with next generation of TSX and TL (and RL needs big time help too). If not now, its going to be a long ride with the next generation of these vehicles.
And if Acura hasn't considered these, then good luck to them. I won't be surprised a bit to see their "competitive edge" that they have tried to build over last 7-8 years, disappear.
SH-AWD allows Acura to take their cars up the performance ladder. With it, they can add more power and better handling. They aren't going to get much better with FWD. AWD is definitely an improvement.
Frankly, the RDX and MDX come closer to matching BMW levels of performance than any other Acura since the NSX.
What you want is not possible. SH-AWD allows Acura to continue until such a time that they can achieve Acura-specific platforms.
Furthermore, I expect there's big potential for Acura to convert the lessons learned with SH-AWD into something better than RWD. As discussed in other threads, SH-RWD would provide the performance balance of a RWD platform and the lateral torque-vectoring capability that makes Acura's AWD unique.
SH-AWD is not an issue in SUVs. AWD system is expected and is the norm in that class of vehicles. The challenge comes when trying to sell it in cars. It serves no other real purpose than as a patchwork to address short comings of the platform.
It’s not about whether they can deliver an Acura specific platform tomorrow, but that they better have one in the works so it can come out as soon as possible. Giving another try for evaluation purposes will only bring disappointment.
Its all about meeting expectations that people have in certain class of vehicles. Acura better be working on it. And they could still use SH-AWD on top, to exceed them.
"Why do we do that? Because it provides a realistic option for Acura in the near future. Going RWD with the TL is unrealistic today, and probably cannot be managed for another 4-6 years."
Are you kidding me? Up to six years to turn the TL around from a FWD to RWD car? I hope that's just a pitiful statment, otherwise it's a pitiful state of affairs for Acura.
Historical Perspective:In September of 1962 the President delivered a speech at Rice University in which he pledged the U.S. would put a man on the moon "before the end of this decade." Seven years later, July of 1969, Astronaut Neil Armstrong sets foot on the moon.
Acura should be able to develop a RWD platform and produce RWD TL's inside of two years - in time for the 2009 model year. I've seen what they can do in two years of development with microjets, first hand. Ability is not lacking at Honda. Motivation may be.
Six year to go from FWD to RWD. :confuse: It took about 120 days for GM to convert from cars to jeeps and airplanes in World War II.
"For Acura to continue playing "value" card, it must ensure that SH-AWD as a patch isn't looked upon as an overpriced, unnecessary gadgetry that also adds weight."
Funny you should write that.
One would think the best way to ensure that SH-AWD is viewed positively, would be to build a high-performance car around it. But you flipped out when Acura showed the ASC.
The next best method would be to make SH-AWD available in their best known product. But you clearly don't think it should be part of a performance package for the TL.
If Acura had the funds of the US government, I'll bet they could do quite a bit. But that's silly. Of course, they don't.
Honda doesn't have a line capable of building a RWD vehicle.
Building a new line would be far too expensive and far too time consuming. More than a year ago, Honda announced plans to built the new Civic line in Indiana. They just broke ground on it the other day. It cost them something like $550 million.
Adapting an existing line would also be expensive. They don't have a plant here in NA with free capacity. And bringing the vehicle here from overseas would mean paying import duties, jacking the price back up.
It shouldn't take that long for a Platform, however it could. If they started right this minute, I'm sure they could finish by 2009. But then again I'm not sure... They've been using the same 3.2l v6 for 10years and its been fine. Maybe they're thinking that after using FWD for 30+ years, why rush when its been doing fine.
I guess if push comes to shove, since the next NSX is supposed to be Front engine Rear drive, They may use it on some Acura vehicles also? Maybe Honda tells us everything without saying anything .
1. When could Acura build a new RWD sedan platform?
Assuming they are able to modify an existing line or add a line to an existing plant, they could probably do it in 2-3 years.
2. When could Acura build a RWD TL?
This is a different question. Acura doesn't have anything already in progress, so they aren't going to make 2009. That means 1-2 years until the FMC plus another 5 year cycle for the 2009-2013 model. So, we're looking at 6ish years before we see a RWD TL.
Rumors about the next "NSX" are all over the road. Even if it is an FME plaform, it'll most likely be build in a factory which cannot handle mass-production. So, sharing the platform with a volume car like the TL would be a non-starter.
Just took a none intended test drive in an auto TSX a few weeks ago. Went to Nissan dealer sat in a 32K Altima, was not overly impressed and I like the V6 power my son has an 05. Since the Acura dealer is connected, I went to Acura and sat in a TSX. Wow love the interior, and especially the blue dash lighting. This was so nice had to go on a test drive. I have read a million posts and all the reviews on the TSX prior to this so I thought I knew what to expect. What I found was a nice driving car with a severe lack of torque, I had the engine screaming and went nowhere. Bottom line, hold the price ,the beautiful interior, and raise the torque. Old Mike
Did not take a TL test drive but did sit in a TL-S did not like it as much. Here is really what might be wrong with Acura. My wife leased Accords from 1995 through 05, when here lease was up on the 02 she was tired of driving accords and wanted something different. We stopped by the Acura dealer and she sat in a TL. The first words out of her mouth were, this is too much like the Accords I have been driving. Two hours later she bought an Escape, go figure. Old Mike
"We stopped by the Acura dealer and she sat in a TL. The first words out of her mouth were, this is too much like the Accords I have been driving. Two hours later she bought an Escape, go figure."
Buy a Ford? Brilliant move. So I guess if she gets tired of the smell of the flowers in your garden, she'll just stick her nose up the butt of a horse? :confuse:
Popular opinion suggests that Acura will be adding a turbo to the next TSX. It makes sense for many reasons.
That will take care of the torque problem, but will also ruin the smoothness of the engine (turbo lag) and probably cut into fuel economy.
My personal hope is that Acura offers a naturally aspirated 4 banger like the current model. Then creates a TSX Type S with the turbo and SH-AWD as an optional trim.
TL is nothing like an Accord (I have both in my garage).
Well perhaps it was the steering wheel that she first noticed, can't say. I just looked at pictures and to me the TL steering wheel looks like a very nice upscale Accord steering wheel. Old Mike
To be honest the steering wheels do sort of look alike but from there, to me, those two cars are as different as night and day. To me, if the TL didn't have "Honda" stamped on the glass the uninitiated wouldn't know it was a Honda product.
Acura dropped the one car I really liked: the RSX. Small, affordable, and sporty but nicer, more refined, and more upscale than a Civic. I wish they'd build a replacement.
I'd really like to see Acura make a go at the affordable (relatively) sports car market. Something in the 350Z/Mustang GT price range, hard top, RWD, Manual tranny. Think hard top S2000 with updated styling and a useable trunk.
The trunk on the S is actually quite useable. Best part is you lose nothing in space once the top goes down.
We take it on weekend trips during the spring and summer all the time. Load a couple of good sized suitcases and we are good to go.
It's not like the ridiculous Kappa cars where you have to decide whether you take your wife and luggage but keep the top up the whole time, or have to make a decision which one sits in the front seat with you (wife or luggage) just so you can drive topless... :sick:
Comments
Thats how Acura and Honda shoot at each others' foot. Accord's being decapitated to make room for TSX/TL sales. In terms of performance, we saw that happen to Civic. Finally, RSX went away and here came Si.
Soon, someone will chime in about RWD tl and forget the current TLS advantages over the TL.
There are many reasons to by the TL other than styling. It offers Power advantages over the Accord, technology that is yet to seep into the accord -Nav Traffic for example-, and its position as a FWD ELLPS.
The accords sales aren't down because of the TL/TSX as their sales are down now also. All are aging designs(Accord since 2003 and TL/TSX since 2004) and are due for a refresh/redesign/MMC.
All of said cars offer Something different and are in different places in the market. Someone Looking to buy a Cadillac CTS is not going to look at the Accord. Someone looking to buy the Altima is not going to look at the TL.
The TSX OTOH is in a special market place. It offers accord buyers a step into acura but being a much sportier car than the accord(The turbo will make more hp/torque than the v6 accord). The TSX competes with cars from the 328i to the Volvo s40. An OPTIONAL AWD TSX could compete with the AWD version of said cars or even cars like the Mazdaspeed6 or Subaru Legacy.
-Cj A RWD TL is a good IDEA but it is much too soon to be implemented. Maybe in 2014 if cars dont fly the TL can be RWD.
No, I don;t mistake the 03+ Accord for the 04+ TL or vice versa but to clearly more explain my point buyers want Acura's and Honda's to look different on the outside and not be confused for each other(like they do now.) I don't even confuse an 03+ Accord with the 05+ RL.
I hope you folks that continue to defend the FWD platform aren't crying rivers when the TL fades to oblivion long, long before 2014.
I have a very good friend who owns an Acura and Mercedes dealership in Pennsylvania. He sold his Saab franchise a few years ago when their product line - which had never been huge in sales volume but had a faithfull following - lost further market share and loyalty. He has expressed grave concerns over the current Acura line-up. He has sold approximately three (3) Mercedes S classes at an average price of $90,000 for each RL he has sold at below invoice. The TL, which did well in 2004/5 has become "stagnant" in 2007. If not for the new MDX, he'd have few people coming into the Acura showroom.
He would have given my nephew a spectacular deal on a TL-S 6-speed, but as soon as he heard he was considering the 335i and knew he wanted something that had serious performance, he advised him to get the 335i "at any price" over the TL-S. This is a guy who loves cars - and he is embarassed that Acura is milking a FWD platform for its "sport sedan" and has an obesely overweight and underpowered AWD platform for its "flagship". By the way, he is located in an area that received 120+ inches of snow this year (so far). And RWD Mercedes still outsell the AWD RL by a large margin.
His assessment is blunt: When Acura redesigned the TL in 2004 and offered a sport suspensioned 6-speed model, they took a positive step in the right direction vs. the previous, lame duck model. But they have since taken a big step backward (forcing one to buy an overpriced TL-S to get the so-called "sport" version and, in the meantime, the competition has taken two steps forward. The TL needs to be RWD or, simply, permanantly removed from any and all comparisons to other ELLPS that take the "performance" attribute seriously.
This is from an Acura Dealership owner.
If that's the case then I'll crown him to be the "real car guy" instead of another auto dealership owner whinning about slow business.
Well I see some 07 TL-S's around New Jersey where I live so I don;t think the TL-S is a total flop.
If Acura does put TL on a new platform (along with RL), and still doesn't sell at the volumes that it has in 2004 and 2005, TSX gets to play a bigger role than it can right now, picking up customers. From that point on, TL becomes a car that has room to grow and would be competitive in more than couple of areas. Lets say TL sales drop to 50K units/year from 70K, with additional (more powerful/equipped) features I bet TSX can pick up another 20K-25K customers every year.
Besides, quantity versus quality... which way should Acura go?
Wow Acura and Mercedes share the same dealership because where I live in New Jersey both Acura and Mercedes have mostly stand-alone dealerships that don;t share dealers with any other car brands.
"This is a guy who loves cars - and he is embarassed that Acura is milking a FWD platform for its "sport sedan" and has an obesely overweight and underpowered AWD platform for its "flagship".
Reponding to your statement Acura is milking a FWD platform for its sports sedan: I don't understand but what do you expect Acura to do too switch the TL to RWD or AWD in the middle of its current model cycle? However they could have made the 07 TL-S AWD.
"His assessment is blunt: When Acura redesigned the TL in 2004 and offered a sport suspensioned 6-speed model, they took a positive step in the right direction vs. the previous, lame duck model."
Ok I agree with your statement although the old model's TL and CL were good cars for the value and $$$ that you paid for them.
"But they have since taken a big step backward (forcing one to buy an overpriced TL-S to get the so-called "sport" version and, in the meantime, the competition has taken two steps forward."
The competition all has newer cars out though than the TL.
For the record I think the 09 TL should AWD and the next RL should be RWD.
As for the RL there is more thing wrong with it than the current model RL not offering RWD.
Besides, the way I see it, Acura is going to have difficulty selling FWD cars with $35K plus price tag. At $38K, no matter how good TL-S can perform (“for a front driver”), it is no longer considered a value. The amount of engineering Acura has applied to make high powered FWD car competitive can go a long way to creating bench mark cars. And that’s something I expect from Acura. I won’t mind SH-AWD as a standard feature if TL continues to weigh 3600 lb, deliver 23-24 mpg in city, and doesn’t cost $3K too much just because of the fancy AWD system. Perception matters in this price class, a lot more than the effect “value” does especially since most buyers seem to lease vehicles above $35K.
The future has to be a concern. It would be a stretch to expect Acura change TL drastically before 2009 model arrives, but the concern really relates to what they bring with 2009 (or whenever redesign happens). And to get there, they better be working on something that outdoes the 2004 TL launch. That’s not going to be easy with the current formula especially given that Acura wants to sell performance (not “Lexus”). Even Lexus knows how to market performance, just look at IS and GS duo. The former may be 3-series wannabe largely due to “Lexus issues” but it is selling reasonably well alongside GS whose sales we definitely don’t want to compare to RL’s.
This is not to suggest that I want to see TL compete with IS. That should be left to TSX which has a similar orientation and size. But TL can certainly be a real Legend with RL being something more that Acura has not dared to be serious about.
AWD is a decent fix but it won’t take Acura anywhere. Look at Audi. Its not a brand Acura should look up to. The result is in heavy cars that cast a shadow on otherwise superb potential from the drive train. And AWD doesn’t come free either and has potential for added maintenance.
Are you defending the FWD platform of the TL? I thought at one time, long, long ago, you claimed that even though you admittedly were not a driving "enthusiast", you could easily tell the difference in handling between FWD and RWD?
I continue to learn the downsides of FWD - like the difficulty in getting the car to track straight and vibrations from the drive wheels. I am taking my TL back after having the wheels balanced because the dealer thinks it must be the alignment. My Acura service manager said essentially the same thing as the dealer spiritinthesky mentioned. Namely, that Acura needs to "cut the crap and make "premium" platforms for premium cars rather than keep borrowing from the Honda Accord". He used to work for Lexus and BMW.
So here I own a FWD TL 6-speed and advocating change, while you own a RWD IS350 and appear to be defending the status quo. Funny.
you caught my drift... The TSX an TL should not be competing against the same cars. Same with the RL and TL. The RL should be with the big boys:BMW7, LS460, and A8 for example. That something that confused me when the RL got smaller. Thats where a Full Size Luxury sedan comes into play. And the V8 engine.
My Proposed 4.8l W8 was not well received either. A 360hp w8 (180hp+180hp). As a temporary fix for a v8 engine. Honda could put 2 2.5l I4's together for the 4.8l W8. It something to attract buyers who want v8 power now.
BTW, Hyundai is building a car to go against the BMW 7... I hope Acura gets there 1st!
Could honda make their own 6/8 speed automatic by combining 2 3/4 speed automatics? by theory, it should offer DSG like Automanual shifting and many gears for better fuel economy. Soon, HONDA/acura too may use CVTS only since they havent made an effort to make a bigger transmission.
-Cj :shades:
NO, I am not defending the FWD TL. I think for TL to be a legitimate sports sedan, it should come with RWD or AT LEAST AWD. Me as the Honda/Acura faithful would love to see TL comes with RWD so some of the so call "enthusiasts" could give the FWD bashing a rest.
On the other hand, from Honda/Acura's perspective, if the FWD TL could generate more sales/profit than going RWD/AWD then I won't fault them for keep it original. Ultimately, Honda is out to make money, to satisfy the enthusiasts at a cost I believe isn't even on their top 10 to-do list. If you have paid attention to all my posts that was actually one of the reasons I rally for Lexus, because they know whom are their targeted buyers and they make darn good products for them.
The issue that many seem to disagree on is what it would cost Honda to develop a RWD platform and marekt a truly different model. Personally, I think Honda and Acura have interlaced and bunched up their FWD product offerings to the point that there is internal cannibalization. By making the TL a RWD vehicle, the Accord line would be free to go after the FWD lower end market and the TL would likely win share from the ELLPS market that won't accept a FWD setup. I'd bet a dollar or two that combined total sales of the two models would increase due to the broader appeal.
The issue that many seem to disagree on is what it would cost Honda to develop a RWD platform and marekt a truly different model. Personally, I think Honda and Acura have interlaced and bunched up their FWD product offerings to the point that there is internal cannibalization. By making the TL a RWD vehicle, the Accord line would be free to go after the FWD lower end market and the TL would likely win share from the ELLPS market that won't accept a FWD setup. I'd bet a dollar or two that combined total sales of the two models would increase significantly due to the broader appeal. I'm also pretty sure that Infiniti would not be happy with such a move by Acura, since the G35, good as it is, still lacks Acura refinement. Take away the TL's FWD disadvantage and the G35 (sedan) would have a tough time competing, IMO.
I think the ideal solution for Acura is:
- keep TSX FWD with optional SH-AWD and boost its size up just a little to attract low-end luxury buyers whom want to step up from their midsize sedans.
- Give TL RWD with optional SH-AWD to satisfy the not-too-regular Joes.
I guess I am suggesting a duel-entry for Acura's entry level lineup. Oh well...
To me, the W is a more practical choice for larger engines as they literally can shut off half the cylinders for better MPG when performance is not needed.
-Cj
To me, the W is a more practical choice for larger engines as they literally can shut off half the cylinders for better MPG when performance is not needed.
No, I hadn't noticed. But my goodness, better MPG would be very comforting for the person who just dished out $1.2 million for a 1001 hp Bugatti. :surprise:
Honda has too many priorities now.
-V8
-NSX
-Sales
-RWD
-Fixing Recalled Vehicles
-Slow selling RL
-Decreased TL sales (Could be fixed if a 6speed manual is offered in the base model like before )
-Redoing the TSX
- Marketing the CSX
- Diesel engines
and probably more...
-CJ
W8 engine
However, since Honda currently doesn't have any V4 in their inventory (at least that I am not aware of) so it is pointless for them to go with a W8. A nice V8/V10 (or both) would be a much better option.
As for the priority list, a nice RWD platform should take care of the TL/RL issue. TSX is bundled with the new Accord (at least the Euro/Japan version) and the development of the NSX shouldn't take priority over their mainstream products such as TL, TSX or even RL in this case. To me, the priority list for Acura/Honda should be:
RWD
V8/V10
NSX
Coupe
RWD
V8/V10
NSX
Coupe
Holy cow - we agree on something else. Exact order I would have picked. I guess people that drive automatics aren't from a different planet after all! :surprise:
Let us look at and address the arguments made against this platform.
-Honda doesn’t have manufacturing facility: True. But it has got to start somewhere like they did for Odyssey in 1998 which paved the way for an immensely successful light truck platform. It’s a part of doing business (well) that companies take some risk to improve their lineup.
-RWD is not acceptable for people who deal with snow: Well, that hasn’t stopped other automakers from having (exclusively) RWD cars which are also successful. Besides, just like SH-AWD applied to FWD platform, Acura could still offer SH-AWD on RWD cars and the difference would be that now SH-AWD won’t need to be a standard feature. It can be optional if people see value in it.
-New platform will cost more: Initially yes. But that was also true in 1998 for the light truck platform. And a company like Honda shouldn’t be scared of that aspect, if they want to be taken seriously outside of the mainstream segment. If they are happy with status quo, then they might as well scrap any plans to offer cars beyond $40K mark. Dump “Acura” badge and sell everything under the Honda banner.
-RWD platform is not space efficient: This is a political statement, especially considering the fact that people are complaining about interior (and trunk) size in RL but not in, say, GS, 5-series, M and E-class.
-RWD platform is not fuel efficient: Again, it is Honda who claims the benefits of longitudinally mounted engine in its motorcycles as being the efficient way compared to transverse. So, how does that idea change in automobiles? Could it be another political statement? Besides, using SH-AWD as a fix is not exactly about improving efficiency. In fact, it not only hurts by way of increased drive train losses but also by way of added weight.
First of all, Honda needs to reconsider its approach with Accord. It is the single most important car in the lineup. And that will require forgetting about cars above it (TSX and TL) and give it the best Honda can, in terms of power train, features and styling.
Then consider TSX. Honda takes middle of the road approach in tuning the Accord sedan and that works in the Acura’s favor. It gets to have its own niche. Obviously, there is no harm in it sharing platform with Accord. With a little more power (especially low end) or at least a wide span 6-speed automatic, which should be offered in every Acura at the minimum, it can sustain its sales in near $30K price class well and that I think could be around 40K units per year. Not too shabby.
This is the cut off point that Honda needs to consider. What should be the TL? Having pushed itself to the limits with Accord, TL should have its own identity. It does not need to be a car that has to have a base price in low 30s. Starting at $35K, and going up to $40K, should still garner 50K-60K units/year sales if not better. Now some may say, but it is fewer than the FWD TL Acura sold in 2004 and 2005. True. But that is history, and if we must rely on it TL, over last nine years or so, has sold at an average of about 65K (estimated). So, 5-10K fewer units with room to grow in terms of prestige and sales isn’t something to be bothered about.
And that takes us back to TSX. If TL can be so different, it allows TSX to grow beyond what it can be. Combined with more powerful engine and SH-AWD, it can fill that low-30s void left by TL and here Acura may get those sales that they might lose on TL. It will also address the needs of those who believe RWD sucks in snow, so give them FWD or AWD. Well, now people can have all three choices. They could pick TSX as FWD or AWD, or TL with RWD.
And why not offer TL with AWD as well? With a performance trim to top things off (the Type-S), a 325-350 HP V6 and SH-AWD could do the trick. BMW, Lexus and Infiniti will have reason to be worried. Not only will this allow TL to satisfy $35K-$45K price class (if Accord can span $10K in terms of pricing, so can TL) it will also close the gap with the RL, the next step up.
RL grows from where TL leaves, a larger, more luxurious flagship that can be offered with V8 and SH-AWD as option and actually could compete with virtually any car under $60K instead of getting bogged down at $50K.
This should be Honda’s vision for the global Acura. At this point, we may be talking about the same sales as in Acura’s best years, but with this scenario, there is plenty of room to grow with a possible CL which can be Acura’s coupe/hard top convertible sharing pieces with TL and RL and sitting between them. Even RDX could use the same platform and drive train combinations.
A car like NSX on top would just seal the deal. And not only Acura would have the potential to grow at the top and in the middle, it could also make a move at lower end with a revived CSX (which should NEVER be simply a rebadged Civic, a differentiation like that between Accord and TL/TSX makes more sense).
With this approach, Acura should be able to beat 250K units/year sales while delivering cars that people expect a premium badge should.
A 210hp TSX or a 250hp/260lb ft of torque turbo engine. Its Sporty, it should cost less than the 33k RDX with SH-AWD. I like it.
-Cj
V8
Diesels
RWD
Coupe/Convertible
Similar to yours :shades:
-Cj
I don't think anyone here is defending FWD. There are several of us defending AWD.
Why do we do that? Because it provides a realistic option for Acura in the near future. Going RWD with the TL is unrealistic today, and probably cannot be managed for another 4-6 years.
I'm not quite sure why people are applauding BMW's AWD for weight savings. At 195 lbs, it's only 10 lbs lighter than conservative estimates for SH-AWD. Furthermore, I've read articles which cite the weight of SH-AWD at 176 lbs.
That said, BMWs don't NEED AWD. That company has the fundamentals right. It can offer cars for $2K-$3K less, while being lighter on the weighing machine too. AWD should never be seen as the savior, at least not by a company of Honda's pedigree and focus on efficiency.
Acura does, in fact, need SH-AWD to retain any semblance of sport for the next few years. (Unless you think they can accomplish that with FWD?) So, yes, AWD is the savior of the moment. It solves more problems than it creates.
Nobody is talking about tomorrow, but this is something Acura has to consider when planning its future, and there is no better time than to coincide it with the JDM Acura launch, also coinciding with next generation of TSX and TL (and RL needs big time help too). If not now, its going to be a long ride with the next generation of these vehicles.
And if Acura hasn't considered these, then good luck to them. I won't be surprised a bit to see their "competitive edge" that they have tried to build over last 7-8 years, disappear.
Frankly, the RDX and MDX come closer to matching BMW levels of performance than any other Acura since the NSX.
What you want is not possible. SH-AWD allows Acura to continue until such a time that they can achieve Acura-specific platforms.
Furthermore, I expect there's big potential for Acura to convert the lessons learned with SH-AWD into something better than RWD. As discussed in other threads, SH-RWD would provide the performance balance of a RWD platform and the lateral torque-vectoring capability that makes Acura's AWD unique.
It’s not about whether they can deliver an Acura specific platform tomorrow, but that they better have one in the works so it can come out as soon as possible. Giving another try for evaluation purposes will only bring disappointment.
Its all about meeting expectations that people have in certain class of vehicles. Acura better be working on it. And they could still use SH-AWD on top, to exceed them.
Are you kidding me? Up to six years to turn the TL around from a FWD to RWD car? I hope that's just a pitiful statment, otherwise it's a pitiful state of affairs for Acura.
Historical Perspective: In September of 1962 the President delivered a speech at Rice University in which he pledged the U.S. would put a man on the moon "before the end of this decade." Seven years later, July of 1969, Astronaut Neil Armstrong sets foot on the moon.
Acura should be able to develop a RWD platform and produce RWD TL's inside of two years - in time for the 2009 model year. I've seen what they can do in two years of development with microjets, first hand. Ability is not lacking at Honda. Motivation may be.
Six year to go from FWD to RWD. :confuse: It took about 120 days for GM to convert from cars to jeeps and airplanes in World War II.
Funny you should write that.
One would think the best way to ensure that SH-AWD is viewed positively, would be to build a high-performance car around it. But you flipped out when Acura showed the ASC.
The next best method would be to make SH-AWD available in their best known product. But you clearly don't think it should be part of a performance package for the TL.
Honda doesn't have a line capable of building a RWD vehicle.
Building a new line would be far too expensive and far too time consuming. More than a year ago, Honda announced plans to built the new Civic line in Indiana. They just broke ground on it the other day. It cost them something like $550 million.
Adapting an existing line would also be expensive. They don't have a plant here in NA with free capacity. And bringing the vehicle here from overseas would mean paying import duties, jacking the price back up.
Either option is possible, but not for 2009.
I guess if push comes to shove, since the next NSX is supposed to be Front engine Rear drive, They may use it on some Acura vehicles also? Maybe Honda tells us everything without saying anything
-Cj
1. When could Acura build a new RWD sedan platform?
Assuming they are able to modify an existing line or add a line to an existing plant, they could probably do it in 2-3 years.
2. When could Acura build a RWD TL?
This is a different question. Acura doesn't have anything already in progress, so they aren't going to make 2009. That means 1-2 years until the FMC plus another 5 year cycle for the 2009-2013 model. So, we're looking at 6ish years before we see a RWD TL.
Rumors about the next "NSX" are all over the road. Even if it is an FME plaform, it'll most likely be build in a factory which cannot handle mass-production. So, sharing the platform with a volume car like the TL would be a non-starter.
What I found was a nice driving car with a severe lack of torque, I had the engine screaming and went nowhere. Bottom line, hold the price ,the beautiful interior, and raise the torque. Old Mike
Did you try the TL? Is better in terms of interior elegance, power, and equal by looks for only 3k more than a TSX w/nav.
-Cj
Buy a Ford? Brilliant move. So I guess if she gets tired of the smell of the flowers in your garden, she'll just stick her nose up the butt of a horse? :confuse:
That will take care of the torque problem, but will also ruin the smoothness of the engine (turbo lag) and probably cut into fuel economy.
My personal hope is that Acura offers a naturally aspirated 4 banger like the current model. Then creates a TSX Type S with the turbo and SH-AWD as an optional trim.
Well perhaps it was the steering wheel that she first noticed, can't say. I just looked at pictures and to me the TL steering wheel looks like a very nice upscale Accord steering wheel. Old Mike
I'd really like to see Acura make a go at the affordable (relatively) sports car market. Something in the 350Z/Mustang GT price range, hard top, RWD, Manual tranny. Think hard top S2000 with updated styling and a useable trunk.
We take it on weekend trips during the spring and summer all the time. Load a couple of good sized suitcases and we are good to go.
It's not like the ridiculous Kappa cars where you have to decide whether you take your wife and luggage but keep the top up the whole time, or have to make a decision which one sits in the front seat with you (wife or luggage) just so you can drive topless... :sick: