Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Acura RL vs. Acura TL
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
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.
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
had a few bears in me last night, and today a few beers, so pleas fogive me. :P
'21 Dark Blue/Black Audi A7 PHEV (mine); '22 White/Beige BMW X3 (hers); '20 Estoril Blue/Oyster BMW M240xi 'Vert (Ours, read: hers in 'vert weather; mine during Nor'easters...)
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
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....
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:
But let's get back to comparing these two vehicles, if indeed there is anything to compare between them.
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.
But the RL is not roomier than the TL, so shut up, no you shut up.
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!!!
All they need to do is minor improvement to both the RL and TL
(You may have to change your handle from frisconick to schizonick!)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Because of the sports tuned suspension, the ride on the TL tends to be firmer.
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.
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
She obviously lost the fight at the dinner table when they were kids! :P
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
Thanks
Mike
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.