Acura RL vs. Acura TL

frisconick · August 2005

Sorry I missed spelled colour. :P

But you are so correct, Acura has some very nice exterior-interior combos. For example, my wife's silver TL has a black interior that I would never want, but looks fantastic with the silver.

bodble2 · August 2005

"Sorry I missed spelled colour."

Actually I think colour can be spelled both ways (American v. British).

However, you may want to run a grammar-check on "missed spelled"! :P

frisconick · August 2005

LOL

had a few bears in me last night, and today a few beers, so pleas fogive me. :P

laurasdada · August 2005

Well, there you go with the ol' "beauty is in the eye." Someone at work has an RL in that light blue (Robin's Egg Blue?) and most of the guys agree it is the last color we would ever put on a car! Doesn't make us right for you, NIck. Just let me pick the color for the Aston Martin DB9 you are buying for me...

frisconick · August 2005

LOL

I don't think the RL looks that great, but the light blue is it's best color. Blue just happens to be my favorite color, and are implying that the light blue is a chick color? Of course you are

No, I will pick the color of my new Aston Martin DB9 :P

cstiles · August 2005

Wait a sec...the RL does not offer a "light blue" color option. But maybe it's the Meteor Silver that looks blue in the light?

The RL is available in Premium White Pearl (my wife's car), Carbon Gray, Nighthawk Black, Celestial Silver, Lakeshore Silver, Opulent Blue (which is a very dark blue), Redondo Red, and Desert Mist.

In any case, I agree that the RL looks classy. It also looks like an Accord on steroids. That's not a bad thing, IMO. The M looks like a Maxima on steroids. Not necessarily a bad thing, although I am not a fan of the current Maxima styling. You can argue that the GS looks like a classy Avalon (but wouldn't say it's an Avalon on steroids, however)....

But none of these cars looks like Rafael Palmeiro or Jose Canseco....

frisconick · August 2005

But none of these cars looks like Rafael Palmeiro or Jose Canseco....

LOL

The light blue car I saw was an older RL, but it was an Acura. Or it was the Silver, I don't know. :confuse:

frisconick · August 2005

I meant to say was "maybe the RL was an older model.

pat · August 2005

Just for future reference, you have about 30 minutes after making a post to edit it. During that time, you will find an Edit link in the gray titlebar of your post.

But let's get back to comparing these two vehicles, if indeed there is anything to compare between them.

frisconick · August 2005

Thanks for the info Pat.

I just thought if the TL came in the same color I saw the RL, it would be a stunning car color for the TL. The TL exterior is very dynamic, the RL rather conservative and bland, however, the RL is a rather inexpenisive lux car, and a very good value.

frisconick · August 2005

I didn't feel the RL had any more room than the TL, and the RL cost so much more :surprise:

taxesquire · August 2005

uh-oh, Nick, you're talking to yourself!!! :surprise:

bodble2 · August 2005

Wait till he starts arguing with himself! :P

frisconick · August 2005

LOL, I did tell myself to shut up once :P

But the RL is not roomier than the TL, so shut up, no you shut up.

taxesquire · September 2005

Hmmm...whaddaya think of this random musing:

Honda is secretly developing an 8 cylindar engine for the RL. Once they do, they'll reincarnate the RL as a full-sized 8 cyl sedan with 1 trim-level. Simultaneous to that, the TL will be changed to 3 trim levels:

The base model, which is what we have now (nav optional).
A TL-R which is the luxury model using the current TLs body with the RLs 300 HP, softer ride, AWD and nav system included (AT only)
A TL-S with the current TLs body and tight suspension, RLs current 300 HP engine and AWD (nav optional).

I think this is a great idea - hope someone at Honda/Acura is thinking about it, too!!!

billyperks · September 2005

I hope they don't, their maketing technique works fine the way it is.

All they need to do is minor improvement to both the RL and TL

frisconick · September 2005

I have been told by Acura dealers that the RL looks too much like an Accord and does not sell that good, so the exterior styling must change drastically, much like the TL changed to a much sportier look. The RL does not have to look sportier, but much different than the Accord. Really, from the side the RL and Accord are almost identical.

bodble2 · September 2005

I think both of you should shut up! :P

(You may have to change your handle from frisconick to schizonick!)

frisconick · September 2005

LOL

:P

But really, Acura must radically change the styling of the RL if they are going to charge 50k for a car that looks too much like an Accord.

billyperks · September 2005

Drive a RL and Accord back to back, the difference is Dr.Jeckle and Mr.Hyde.

I test drove the RL twice and boy this car rides sweet, a little softer than the TL but worlds apart from the Accord.

nebraskaguy · September 2005

I test drove the RL twice and boy this car rides sweet, a little softer than the TL but worlds apart from the Accord.

A good friend just bought a TL and I've never particularly cared for the ride, though I hadn't ridden in it much. Yesterday, we spent about an hour total driving around. The TL's ride is a lot choppier than the RL. We felt every bump in the road. It was very similar to the TSX I had as a loaner the last time. Another disadvantage to the TL - the scoop in front is so low, he has to really watch parking bumper guards, driveways, etc. The scoop hits on a lot of things I wouldn't think twice about in my RL.

As far as comparisons to the Accord, it may look like a very close relative to the Accord, but there is NO comparison to the RL, in my opinion.

delmar1 · September 2005

Yes....each of the cars have a different ride 'character' as they are each geared for a different driver. Would most characterize the TL as choppy? It was intended to be a tighter ride. And does it drive like a TSX....no.

As for the scoop you were mentioning...I haven't seen any TL with scuffed bottoms and noses.

The description reminds me of Hans Christian Andersen's The Princess and the Pea. Is there any all around correct ride...no...all personal preference.

frisconick · September 2005

Oh I agree the RL is an excellent car, I am just saying the exterior styling is very much like an Accord which may turn people off. Additionally, I have been told that if you get a better brand of tires than the stock tires on a TL, the ride is much smoother. However, I must add, the TL ride is supposed to very different than the RL..

nebraskaguy · September 2005

As for the scoop you were mentioning...I haven't seen any TL with scuffed bottoms and noses.

Well, unless there are an awful lot of very careful TL drivers, they're out there. Three times on our outing Monday, the scoop touched bottom. Once on an angled driveway and twice on parking bumper guards. The bumper guards were of normal height and would have been a problem, but he was aware of the scoop and drove in very slowly until he just barely touched.

delmar1 · September 2005

Ahhh...hate to tell you what you heard. Perhaps you are unaware as you are not a TL owner.

What you heard is the little hard rubber air dam which sits under the nose of the car....which is engineered to flex and pretty much indestructable. Reason is that the car is taunt and lower to reflect its sports tendencies....and the air dam intentionally lower to improve air flow management.

The air dam touching parking guards is not uncommon in other sports cars I had...and never broke one. And the air dam is not visible and will not have any visual damage. No damage to painted surfaces as you guessed.

billyperks · September 2005

I did not mean to say the TL ride is soft.
Because of the sports tuned suspension, the ride on the TL tends to be firmer.

nebraskaguy · September 2005

What you heard is the little hard rubber air dam which sits under the nose of the car....which is engineered to flex and pretty much indestructable. Reason is that the car is taunt and lower to reflect its sports tendencies....and the air dam intentionally lower to improve air flow management.

Well, I won't argue with you. However, I do know that my 99RL had a similar setup and I broke the plastic twice on high curbs.

bodble2 · September 2005

If you get it caught on one of those metal ties that anchor the concrete curb, then you could damage the rubber air dam or the front apron. (A friend's mother actually backed into one of those metal ties that had come up loose and ripped her gas tank. They had to call in the fire department to clean up the leaked gas!)

dbcafy · September 2005

Hi,

Just drove the RL and the TL today. Besides the price, the RL seems sluggish in acceleration. I didn't expect a 300HP car to feel sluggish and the response seem delayed.

The dealer said it could be the Air conditioning, 3 passengers and the New- ness of the car. What do you think?

Dave

frisconick · September 2005

I thought the RL had a 280hp engine, I am probably wrong. But that is nonsense, I took my 2 brothers in law for a ride in my TL, and they are both over 250lbs (and I am being very kind) and the TL took off like a rocket when I was showing off. BTW, my wife is skinny, go figure? :P

bodble2 · September 2005

"BTW, my wife is skinny, go figure?"

She obviously lost the fight at the dinner table when they were kids! :P

frisconick · September 2005

LOL

acuralady · October 2005

I drove a Honda Accord, then the Acura TL, and then the Acura RL. I felt every bump in the Honda Accord and the TL. Both the TL and the Accord ride the same. The Acura RL was smoother. It still felt a little bumpy, because I am use to driving a Toyota Avalon, which is very smooth and I also have an MDX which you don't feel the bumps as much because you are so high. We were in the dealership that day to buy the TL, but decided to buy the RL for the smother ride and the beautiful wood trim. I don't care about AWD as I live in California. There is only a $7,000 difference between the 2006 TL price and the 2005 RL price. We are really going to get a great deal on the RL. It probably is not even worth $7000 more, but my husband wants the RL. To bad the RL has such a plain look, we are adding chrome wheels, deck lid spoiler, wood steering wheel, and wood shift knob.

taxesquire · October 2005

It sounds like you may have been happier with Lexus' offerings. Acura is more sport-oriented (and infinit even moreso). Regardless, the hwole Acura line is great - enjoy!!!

kgd_007 · November 2005

I also had a hard time warming up to the RL because of the accord type look, especially the front end. But I fell in love with the interior and handling. I also live in California and don't need AWD for snow, but if you are on a mountain road doing spirited driving the AWD makes a huge difference. It also makes a big difference any time you accelerate, especially if you are turning at all. Doesn't feel at all like a FWD car.

I also went with the 18" chrome wheels and deck spoiler. I thought those really made is look better, especially from the side and the rear. Still think the front could look alot better. I will consider adding the A-Spec front spoiler. I see you can get it as a stand alone option for 2006, so I suspect you could order it and add to the 2005. That does make the front look alot sportier.

kris

mevande · December 2005

What is the best price anyone has been able to get on a 2006 RL? Thanks in advance! Also there have been a few comments re: the RL looking plain' however I saw one with the rear spoiler and front spoiler and it changed (in a good way) the overall look of the car. Do dealers bargain' on these accessories?

Thanks

Mike

houstonrl · December 2005

I had the full spoiler package added, front, sides and rear spoiler and apron, and the wood steering wheel. I offered them 50 cents on the dollar and they came back at about 65 cents. I took it. It really changes the looks, I really like it now. I did think it was too plain before. Total came in at about $1700.

tommyg29 · December 2005

Just read that review of the RL in Money magazine.
Why do so many reviewers have to compare the RL to the Accord?, and then downrate the RL because it shares some parts with the Accord, or the TL, both of which can be had for a LOT less. That reviewer even claims the TL is nearly as much car, but for $15,000 less, so he downrates it! By that logic, why not downrate the GS because an Avalon is a much better deal?!, or why pay so much for the G35 when you can just buy an Altima for a lot less! Or why stop there, why not compare the 530i to the TL, because the TL is nearly as much car for $25,000 less!
I own an RL, and I've driven the TL numerous time, and the new Accord. There is no comparison. I don't know or care how many parts the cars may share...you cannot drive all three cars and tell me there isn't a huge difference.
I almost purchased a TL. It is a very nice car, and a great value. If anything, it probably does share a lot of parts with the Accord, and I think even comes off the same assembly line in Ohio. That is not a bad thing. The Accord is one of the best selling and most reliable cars around. The RL is made in Japan, and imo is made with higher quality materials, and has a much more luxurious look and feel to it, especially the interior. It also "feels" more substantial. I've done a lot of research, and since the RL can be had in the real world for about $8,000 more than the TL, it is worth every penny. It is a LOT more car. Drive one, and look it over very carefully. They are two very different cars. That said, I agree the TL is a great car, and a great value as well.
Although I agree the exterior styling of the RL has a "family" resemblence to the Accord, I think comparing it to the Accord in just about any other way shows a lack of objectivity. Doesn't the GS resemble the new IS? How about the M35 and the G35? Or even the Maxima/Altima for that matter. What about the new BMW stying? Except for the different sizes, I have a hard time telling them apart. But I guess Acura still has dues to pay, before entering and competing in the realm of the BMW dominated world of reviewers.
I've driven most of the competitors offerings, and imo they are:
E350, M35, 530i, and the GS350. Haven't driven the 530i or the Audi, but I prefer the RL, especially since I got mine for just under $40,000.
Anyway, to each his own. Different preferences make the world go round.

taxesquire · December 2005

Nice post. From an exterior-only standpoint, I understand the comparison of the exterior looks of the RL to the Accord, particularly the back-end, but I agree that such a "criticism" is shortsighted b/c it's a great car! As a TL owner, I've read the posts comparing the TL to the Accord b/c of the FWD platform and understand them, but find it very funny that most people supposedly discounting the TL b/c of the FWD platform are G35 drivers who need a RWD platform b/c of its sportiness; yet, most of those drivers choose an automatic transmission, goes against "sportiness."

I think these people make their decision and then find these things to back up their decision, or use it to make them look like educated consumers. Kudos to you for driving all 3 Honda products before making yoru decision. Hopefully, you drove the G35, too. I doubt it would've changed your decision!

nebraskaguy · December 2005

Why do so many reviewers have to compare the RL to the Accord?, and then downrate the RL because it shares some parts with the Accord, or the TL, both of which can be had for a LOT less.

I agree totally. So what if it looks a little like an Accord. It's not an Accord and once you drive, or even ride in, both, you'll see the difference. As far as the TL, it's a great car for the price, but I wouldn't trade my RL for a TL for any amount of money.

habitat1 · December 2005

"The RL is made in Japan, and imo is made with higher quality materials, and has a much more luxurious look and feel to it, especially the interior. It also "feels" more substantial. I've done a lot of research, and since the RL can be had in the real world for about $8,000 more than the TL, it is worth every penny. It is a LOT more car."

I can agree with at least part of your statement. If 500+ lbs is "a LOT" than the RL is indeed a lot more car than the TL. Unfortunately, that is a major reason why I was happy to turn in an RL loaner and get my TL 6-speed back from service. IMO, Acura went out of their way to market the RL as a "Super Handling", "300 HP" performance oriented luxury sedan. And that's precisely where it fell well short of my expectations. It felt much heavier, handling and steering were less nimble and precise, and it was noticably slower than my TL 6-speed. I can (and do) say many nice things about an RL relative to it's luxury and comfort. But after taking it for several runs through DC's winding Rock Creek Parkway, I could not label it as "fun to drive", at least not by my standards.

I have been accused by others of not recognizing that the RL was never meant to be a luxury "sports" sedan, but rather simply a "luxury" sedan. Sorry, I guess I was paying too much attention to Acura's own advertising. But as I have also responded before, I think Acura would do well to establish loftier goals for it's "flagship". And charge more for it, if necessary and appropriate.

As a case in point, if I were to upgrade from the TL 6-speed today, it would be into a BMW 550i 6-speed. The current RL - hell the current TL for that matter - can "outgadget" the BMW. But the RL needs some serious reworking to match the BMW's driving feel and performance. The BMW is priced at $63k +/-. That gives Acura a lot of wiggle room. I hope they use it, rather than continue to produce a rather boring to drive "flagship" that gets compared to a TL automatic and Accord. Even when the RL "wins" over the TL in the luxury amenity and do-dad comparison (as in your case) or the MDX "wins" over the Pilot (as in our case), it still dissapoints me that Acura as a company appears hesitant to reach for more unique and loftier goals.

This criticism is "hard love". I still consider my former Honda S2000 as a superb example of what Honda is capable of if they put their engineering minds to it. Their $32k masterpiece was a no-apologies required alternative to the $50k+ Porsche Boxster.

Even if my preference for "driver's cars" is not what Acura is shooting for with the RL, they still need to aim higher. In the Buick-like luxury arena, the flagship Lexus LS430 doesn't seem to get cross shopped against or compared with the ES330 or Toyota Avalon nearly to the same extent as the RL does to it's less costly siblings.

Just my 10 cents.

spiritinthesky · December 2005

With Acura's positioning of the RL vs. TL is that the TL is not only more of a driver's car, with comparable luxury amenities, but it is nearly the same size as the RL.

In the case of the BMW 3 series vs. 5 series, if you want the sportier, less expensive 3-series, you have to be prepared to give up a fairly significant amount of rear seat comfort and size.

In the case of one of our friends, they immediately ruled out the 3-series due to it's size limitations. (They are in their 40's with two kids). But they compared the 530i to both the RL and TL. They ended up going with a TL (6-speed). Had the RL been a notch or two up on performance, they would have gone in that direction, or had the TL been a notch or two smaller (i.e. comparable to the 3 series), they would have gone to the 5-series or RL. But they felt the TL gave them the best of all worlds of size, sportiness, luxury and reliability. They were prepared to spend $50k+, so absolute price wasn't an issue.

Personally, I think Acura has too many cars crammed into the $25k to $45k space. Especially for a "premium" brand. I agree with the suggestion that they need to put more distance between the models - in size, performance and price. In fairness, Acura would probably never get me to turn in the keys of my BMW M5, but I do know a lot of 5-series owners that would consider a more preformance oriented RL next time around.

6sptl · May 2006

Well, I can say that I was pleasantly surprised. The michelin PAX MXM4 combined to the larger (18in) rim do make the RL a noticeably better handling car. The tranny is still a little on the slow side even when using the paddles, but overall the car feels much tighter and surefooted on the twisties. I don't know if the noise cancellation system has been improved, but the car did also feel significantly quieter. The first time I drove the RL (during its debut) I was a little disappointed with its athletism, great ride for sure but a big downgrade form my manual TL. I'm happy to say that the "upgraded" RL handles now as adroitly as the auto TL. SInce my TL is turning "40" and I really want an AWD car (WI winters) July will probably by my last time with my beloved TL. I will let it go with a broken heart but I think it wont bleed for too long (it will heal right up when the first snow storm of the season arrives) .

guille57 · June 2006

My sense is that the premium needed to purchase the RL over the going price for the TL can be largely recovered at resale time (check the KBB value for 05 models with 20k miles). Given the technological and safety advantages of the RL over the TL and the fact that those can be have for not much more than the financing cost of the price differential it seems to me that the RL at going prices is a compelling proposition over the TL.

habitat1 · June 2006

Your economic analysis might make sense for someone who finds the RL more appealing than the TL. And I suspect a lot of prospective TL buyers would. But speaking just for me, I do not find the RL's "technological and safety advantages" over the TL to be that significant. The TL is pretty well do-dadded and gizmoed. Rather, compared to the significantly lighter TL 6-speed, the RL feels underpowered, not as nimble and certainly not as much fun to drive for me.

In order to get my attention, Acura would need to take the type of ground up performance engineering that produced the Honda S2000 and put it to work developing a premium sedan that is a true driver's car. Until they do, my jump from the TL 6-speed would be to a BMW 550i 6-speed, not to another do-dad or two in the slushbox equiped RL. But over the last 8 months, I've put more miles on our 911S (7,100) than I have on our TL (3,500), so I'm probably not sedan jumping no matter what Acura, BMW or anyone else does.

guille57 · June 2006

I cannot disagree with anything you are saying. By technological and safety advantages I was referring to things such as the super handling all wheel drive and navigation system with real time traffic information. I agree that the TL may be more fun to drive and I am sure your 911S is thrilling. My post was aimed at those buyers who may be tilting towards the RL because they don't value the harder ride of the more fun-to-drive TL but are reluctant to pay the, now smaller, price difference between the TL and the RL.

habitat1 · June 2006

By technological and safety advantages I was referring to things such as the super handling all wheel drive and navigation system with real time traffic information.

I think I am a little negative on the RL not because it isn't a very nice car - it certainly is. But Acura created a bit of false expectations with me based upon it's "super handling AWD", "300 hp", etc. advertising campaign.

On the real time traffic Nav system - do you have an RL and use the system? I believe it's a service provided through XM Satellite Radio. Here in the Wasington DC market, they just plain suck. We will be sitting in standstill traffic and XM's traffic report says the beltway is flowing smoothly. Or vice-versa. The time I had an RL as a loaner, they might as well have given my daughter 3 crayons to color the routes red green or yellow. She sould have guessed better than XM did. Hopefully, it's more accurate in other areas, but in my experience, it's a big annoyance. I have to tune to AM radio for a real traffic report.

ocim · September 2006

You say that you purchased your RL for under 40K. Was this for a new car? That would be significantly under invoice. Did anyone else get a similar deal out there? I would be interested what others have paid and where they purchased as I will be in a market for a new car soon. I live in the Pittsburgh area but would be willing to travel some distance for a good deal. Also, has anyone cross shopped the Toyota Avalon against the RL. I would be interested in hearing any constructive comments.

pat · September 2006

You might want to check out this discussion also: Acura RL: Prices Paid & Buying Experience.

lorenzo2 · September 2006

40,600.00 jenkintown pa. sussman acura

Acura RL vs. Acura TL

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles