Older Acura TLs

igiban · September 2004

Maybe because ES330 has the least power (225 HP). But I recall the old TL (non-S) has similar power but required 91 already. So while an engine can be designed to take 91 the goods out of the extra cost, although not much, got to be something more than just raw power (anyone cares to explain).

Come to think of it, the Accord's 240 HP engine that needs only 87 seems like a very good combo, if you forget about the 'covers' on a car for a while.

mdhauke · September 2004

I just did a side by side comparison of the 2004 W/NAV to a 2005 W/NAV and could not for the life of me find any differences. Wait, I take that back, the 2005 is 17LBS lighter and 3 inches shorter. THAT'S IT! Am I missing something here?

1violinist · September 2004

About $250 more for the 05, but it's more than worth it if you get the Navi w/Michellin Pilot Sport A/S tires!

eg424 · September 2004

I thought exactly the same thing, "there must be something more", so I went back into the Acura website and took another look.

If you click on the 2005 tl and then go into "specifications" you get different information than what appears under comparison between the 04.

In specs under "safety features", it says that the 2005 has auto on/off headlights. When you look under "interior features",in the same section, it says just auto off.

Also you are correct about the comparo saying the 05 is 3 inches shorter. However, when you look at the picture of 05 at the bottom of the specs page, the specs are exactly the same as the 04, 189.3. I guess we'll just have to wait for the 05 to hit the showrooms to get our answers.

I was hoping the 05 might offer an option of power rear sunshade (nice for so.calif. and the desert), blinkers on the outside mirrors, and 6 way passenger seat (addition of up/down capability).

Nevertheless, I think we all agree the the tl is a great value for the money.

leoniv · September 2004

Actually Pat, the I35 does not require premium fuel, it's only recommended. It's been that way for quite some time with the maxima/i30/i35's.

http://www.infiniti.com/content/model/ModelSpecifications/0,,3114- 8,00.html

Leon

kyfdx · September 2004

Recommended fuel: premium unleaded

That sounds pretty clear to me.. If someone wants to run regular, fine.. but, I'd rather not have your car, when you are done... Sounds like semantics..

If you have an I35 and run regular, what else are you cheaping out on, when it comes to your car?

regards,
kyfdx

bodble2 · September 2004

Well, I think the 3" "discrepancy" is due to the fact the TL is actually only 186". I don't know why it is listed as 189" in certain literature.

igiban · September 2004

Every car under luxury brand at least recommends premium. The difference is that some, like TL, require premium while some others, like ES or I35, require regular but will add the recommendation for performance. If the manual says premium required I'd not mess with other gas. But if it's just for performance then it's up to drivers to see if they care about that extra power, or if any mpg delta pays.

I think if using regular will damage a car's engine, then its manual should say premium required, not just recommended for performance.

bodble2 · September 2004

I don't think any of them "require" premium. You can always use regular, but performance will be reduced. Required v. Recommended. I think it's just semantics.

307web · September 2004

There is a difference between required and recommended. If damage is caused from low octane fuel use and you used regular when you are "required" to use premium, your warranty is voided.
I think the use of required vs recommended reflects their level of confidence that no damage will be done when you use regular fuel.

oman9 · September 2004

I own a 98 Inifiniti I30t. I take very good care of my car (121,000 miles) and it takes good care of me.

I believe the engine in the I30 is the same as the Nissan Maxima. If memory serves correctly, yes the Infiniti manual says recommended fuel is premium but the same year, same engine Maxima indicates regular fuel.

Always thought that interesting. I could be proven wrong as I can't say I've ever seen a 1998 Maxima manual, maybe someone out here can advise.

I've used premium for years (and I check my mileage just about every tank, top off to top off and check miles versus gallons I put in) and have also used 87 and 89. I always use Chevron (believe it to be good gas, actually its the additives, I think all gas starts with essentially the same base if you will, additives make the difference...at least that's my understading). I can't say I notice a power delivery difference, knocking is not noticeable, maybe using the engine mgmt system it's mitigated and mileage differences are difficult to determine in unscientific analyses.

That being said when I have moved back up to 89 and will stay there. With my next vehicles I will go by what the manual says...it's not worth it to get cute (although thus far I seem to have gotten away with it with the I30t) for the difference in price. Just painful when we initially crossed that $2/gallon mark a few years back...now it's just like a hot bath, I'm used to it now I guess.

Strangely enough I use Mobil 1 religiously in both vehicles...always felt good syn oil is helpful in keeping the engine healthy, so yep not sure why I cheaped out on the gas the last few years...

akirby · September 2004

Isn't it funny how the overall cost of gas seems to be a major factor for people switching from Premium to Regular even though the price difference between the two doesn't really change? At least here in Atlanta there is almost always a 20 cent difference regardless of whether regular is $1.30 or $1.80. So it always costs around $3 per tank more for premium, yet people have the illusion that they're saving more than that when premium prices go up.

kyfdx · September 2004

I agree.. As the price has moved up, the spread has stayed the same..

But, the Shell stations in my area re-named their premium grade last year (V-Power), and raised the octane rating from 92 to 93.. At some stations, they occasionally push the spread to $.22/gal., but only when the price of regular is something like $1.77.. then, premium is $1.99.. However, when regular is $1.79..then premium is still $1.99, not $2.01

It is all marketing, evidently.

jjabbytaylor · September 2004

One other difference I noticed with the '05 TLs was that there is now a passenger airbag off indicator to show when the passenger airbag is disabled. If you look at the interior pictures, you can see it where the hazard button is shown.

Jeff

mattf · September 2004

I currently am negotiating a lease for a 2004 Acura TL without navigation system. I feel like I've been given the run-around by a couple of dealers, and I was wondering if I could bounce the terms of my deal off anyone who may previously have leased the same car (or similar car).

The terms are as follows:

The starting price is $30,400
48 Months Lease
0.0022 (2.2) money factor
Residual Value is 50% after 48 months
2,200 up front (including first month payment)
$407/month
includes wheel locks and mud flaps

I appreciate any insights as I am getting to the point now where I may move on this deal today or tomorrow. Thanks!

kyfdx · September 2004

I come up with $390 + tax.. So, your monthly payment seems pretty close, if it includes tax.

1) Upfront should include 1st payment ($407), security deposit ($450), and acquisition fee (approx $600). That adds up to about $1457.. I'd want to find out what is included in the $2200... Unless registration fees are $600-$700, it looks like a little padding going on there..

2) Your price is $100 over invoice, so that and the rest of your numbers look good.

3) Assuming you can get the upfront monies straightened out, I'd ask them to roll the acquisition fee into the monthly cost, and keep my upfronts to around $1000. Rolling another $600 into the cap cost will raise the payment about $15/mo.

regards,
kyfdx

habitat1 · September 2004

My 4th generation 1995 Maxima SE 5-speed recommends premium, so I believe your thinking there was a distinction between the 1998 Maxima (also 4th generation) and I30 is wrong. The one comparison I am aware of is the Pilot/MDX, which use the same engine, but slightly different exhaust systems. The MDX is rated 10 horsepower more than the Pilot, but requires premium instead of regular. My Maxima has given me 153k miles trouble free on 93 octane premium, with oil changes every 4,000 miles using standard Castrol GTX (not Mobil 1).

As far as using 89 octane, I often thought that was the least "prudent". At least in my area (DC), the price of premium is often on sale for 5-6 cents off at Shell, Mobil, Exxon or others various days of the week. The last time I bought (Mobil), the price was $1.75 for 87 octane regular $1.85 for 89 octane mid grade, $1.95 for 93 octane premium. But the premium price was reduced to $1.89 on a Wednesday. If you are O.K. with running at 89 octane, you could always fill 1/3 of your tank with premium and 2/3 with regular and get a total price less than mid-grade. When premium is on sale, it is often times the same price as mid-grade, making that "mixing bowl" strategy an even better deal. Click and Clack, those "Car Talk" financial gurus from Nationgal Public Radio even figured that one out. For me, life is too short. Once I figured out I could afford a $20,000, $30,000 or $40,000+ car, I figured out that I could afford the recommended premium gas. Albeit, I do try to buy it on sale.

kyfdx · September 2004

I'm not sure how the tax is figured in your state.. If they are rolling the acquistion fee into the cap cost, and you are paying $1000 tax in your upfront money, then your numbers also work out...

I'd just have to see the breakdown to know...

boiko · September 2004

Other people have asked this same question before, should I buy an 04 now or maybe wait for the 05's.. Many people ask this because of possible changes/features to the 05 vs the 04. I ask this same question, but for a different reason.

Is it better to purchase an 04 because not only will you be able to get a better deal (ie. Auto with no Navi for $30,887) but you'll start off with an 04 with alot less miles on it...compared to picking up an 05. Since there will be little difference between an 04 and 05 - having alot less mileage might be the way to go.

Your thoughts........thanks

oman9 · September 2004

Thanks guys for the feedback.

akirby, you're so right. I've read a fair amount about differences between 87 and 91 and what the related impacts might be re: not using the recommended fuel. I grew up without much money and find myself fortunate (worked damn hard to get here) but still have my old mechanisms in place sometimes re: finances. It's just plain questionable (was going to write dumb, but then figured I would be in this category and would offend others as well : )

Thanks habitat re: Maxima info. I wasn't sure as I wrote in my post...something I heard years ago and never cared enough to investigate.

All this being said 87 seems to have done fine in my Infiniti. Again, unscientifically I can't tell much of a difference in performance at all in mileage or power between the grades, too subtle I guess.

I don't see any incentives for manufacturers to artificically recommend premium, don't see what's in it for them. Perhaps there are subtle but real performance diffs...for the 150 bucks a year probably worth it to just comply, I know.

And yes, the spread doesn't change...it's just stubborness and "questionable" judgment that caused me to move to 87....I'm back at 89 FWIW.

Also, here in So Cal, mostly it's 10 cent even diffs between grades, so no math to determine value....it's up the middle between the grades...

kyfdx · September 2004

After three years..

A 4-year-old '04 with 45K miles... or

A 3-year-old '05 with 45K miles...

I'm not sure that the mileage thing will make a big difference, one way or another..

The '04s are a good deal right now, but the less time you own the car, the more the difference in model year hurts you on resale..

If you keep it 6-7 years, then that low, low price you got on the '04 is just money in your pocket..

For many people, they need the lower price on the '04, just to afford the car, so there isn't a lot of choice.

just my $.02

regards,
kyfdx

akirby · September 2004

I actually did a comparison of used car prices a few years ago. I think I used an explorer but I compared 2 consecutive model years with the same mileage which would simulate one person buying an end of model year vehicle and one buying a brand new model year vehicle and then driving them exactly the same way for 3 years. After 3 years there was only about a $300 difference between them. So if you got a bigger discount on the leftover 04 you could actually come out ahead.

Now I haven't done this comparison lately and it may not work on different vehicles but it's easy enough to check on any website that does used car values.

akirby · September 2004

Ok, I just did the same comparison on a 2001/2002 TL in good condition with 45K miles (without Nav). The difference in Trade-in value was right at $1000. The wholesale difference would be a bit less.

Bottom line is you're not worse off taking an 04 if it's at least $1k cheaper than the 05 and if it's more than $1K cheaper you may actually be ahead.

I'm sure if you kept it more than 3 years the difference is much less.

kyfdx · September 2004

That is a good comparison.. I would pretty much always buy the new model, if I could get it for only $1K more.

bodble2 · September 2004

One big intangible is that they may have worked most of the bugs out for the '05.

akirby · September 2004

"One big intangible is that they may have worked most of the bugs out for the '05. "

And they may have also introduced new ones......

All I meant to suggest is that you don't automatically dismiss a leftover model if it has a discount. There are always other factors to consider.

highender · September 2004

Hi habitat.::

just got back...

yeah....I hear you....perhaps it's the extra horses that are making the mpg a little less than expected...

but like you said, the other cars got similar or better mpg, even though they are older, with less new light components.

Perhaps the engine needs to be running at 60 mph for peak efficiency ?

leoniv · September 2004

kyfdx,
Didn't know if your reply was directed at me or not so just thought I'd clarify. I drive a Maxima and always run premium. There have been several reports of problems down the road with Maximas when using regular so I play it safe. I agree with your comments above though. If you can afford the car, you should be able to afford the gas and everything else it requires.

highender · September 2004

I was on the powerchip site...and they offered an aftermarket chip for the cayenne for 91 octane, and one for 93 octane...

the higher octane chip , which works if you can get a hold of 93 or higher octane gas, will give you more horsepower....

if you use 87, the hp may decrease....but many newer vehicles have fuel systems and engines which can temporarily accomodate big differences in octane.

FWIW, I used to work for a consulting group which tested gasoline, and we did octane numbers for both buyers and sellers....

each batch of gas is different...and have diff octane numbers...and the lower quality batches must have toluene /benzene, etc added , to up the octane numbers.......

on the TL....my highway gas mileage for TL, going about 70 to 75 mph, is 27 mpg...

I guess if I go 60-65 mph, it may improve to 30 mpg.

carwacko · September 2004

Has anyone heard of the TL will get the new RL's SH-AWD system? SH-AWD sounds great, but I'm never going to pay the extra $15K do get the RL. Plus, I'd rather have the system with a manual tranny, which the RL doesn't have.

1violinist · September 2004

Not currently! Perhaps in a couple of years, along with traffic-update navigation.

igiban · September 2004

In that case, I'd expect TL price to go up (no one thinks SH is free right?). Acura more than likely will leave TL as it is to render enough incentives for people to pay for RL.

1violinist · September 2004

They could offer it as a factory option, but it doesn't seem to be Acura's policy to offer many of these -- except Navigation!

bodble2 · September 2004

I just don't think Acura would want to steal the RL's thunder this early in the game. BTW, I got an invite today to preview the RL on October 13th.

kennyg5 · September 2004

Does "preview" mean "test drive"? If so, make sure you report back :-)

Over the weekend, I went to a shopping mall for an "auto show" (with only a dozen cars) run by one of the big dealers here -- Rallye -- that sells Acura, Lexus, MB and BMW. No 05 RL was available, and the salesman told me that the public won't see its debut until mid-Oct at the earliest.

billyperks · September 2004

Preview means you stand around the car with a bunch of sales guy offering you bagels and donuts.

PS- They also echo the same thing over and over-

"This car is an amazing product".

kyfdx · September 2004

Onion bagels? with cream cheese? I'm in..

bodble2 · September 2004

billyperks is right. I'm sure the RL preview is similar to the one I went to for the TL -- a wine and cheese party with one car sitting in the middle of the showroom covered until the big unveiling, and then everyone takes turn oohing and ahhing over it. But they will take reservations that night for testdrives at a later date. I'll do that for sure even though there is almost no chance the car will entice me enough to buy one at this time.

nkeen · September 2004

I had my first experience with the Bridgestones in heavy rain today. I wasn't impressed -- the car was hydroplaning at 50 to 60 in conditions that would leave my old VW GTi on Continentals totally unfazed at 80. Perhaps it's tire width that's at play here. Anyway, I'd be interested to hear whether anyone has experience with Michelin Pilot A/S tires in the wet on the 2004 TL.

akirby · September 2004

Not on the TL but I've had them on my Lincoln LS for about 30,000 miles (2 sets - long story). I can't make them hydroplane - I've tried. Once I did a panic stop from about 40 in the rain and the car just stopped dead within about 2 car lengths. The ABS didn't even activate. You will not find a better wet tire. The downside is they are expensive.

habitat1 · September 2004

What Bridgestones do you have? I have a 6-speed with the "HPT" Potenza's and was quite pleased with how they performed on a 375 mile highway drive through the remnants of one of the recent hurricanes. Not pouring rain, but a fairly steady medium to heavy drizzle and some standing water.

jpiatchek · September 2004

My TL with MPT averaged 30mpg at 80 mph on two recent trips to St Louis and 28.5 on the return trip. This was with cruise on and the computer showed an average speed of about 77mph. This is by far better than any vehicle I have ever owned. My 98 M3 did about 26.5 and my 99 540ia did about 24mpg. My Q45's were in the low 20's. Habitat, you mentioned you had a buddy with a BMW convertible a few posts back that averaged about 33. I would seriously question the validity of his calculations if he was running at 80mph. If he was using the trip computer, the BMw's are sometimes off by several mpg. Also, I think our 5 speeds are turning a higher rpm than the automatics.

jpiatchek · September 2004

Glad to see you like the TL. I drove an automatic as a loaner for my first oil change and it was not as much fun as the 6 speed. HOwever the torque steer on the 6 speed does suck on occasion. I do like the Brembo and tire upgrade on the 6 speed. On e-bay a while back, I saw a whole new set of Brembo's and disks and springs go for about $800 for the 2004 TL. You might keep your eye out for some in the future. How do you like the A-spec package?

gled0501 · September 2004

I only have about 700 miles on my TL, and last night in the tail end of hurricane rain here in PA I drove to the gym and got to see how the car did in torrential rain. I had upgraded my Bridgestones to the Michelins when I bought the car, and had no hydroplaning issues at all, I also have the 6spd. So far I am glad I upgraded and have had no issues with them. Now I just need to see how they hold up in the snow!

nkeen · September 2004

Mine are the four season Bridgestones. I seem to read nothing but good things about the Michelin Pilot A/S. I think wet weather performance, especially in high speed standing water, is very important -- an extra .02 g in the dry is secondary. That's why I liked the Contis -- not exceptional but they gave me a lot of confidence in the wet.

nkeen · September 2004

I'm still experiencing proper loading of the steering when turning right but next to no loading and an almost unstable feel when turning left (e.g on a tight left hand exit ramp at speed). Too little caster on the right front perhaps. Also, still a slight tendency to wander to the left. Anyway, I wish the dealer would get to the bottom of it. It's wearing down my patience with the car and should be fixable.

bodble2 · September 2004

Maybe you should check on the Accord boards. I know when the '03 Accord came out, quite a few people posted about a pulling/drifting problem. Since the Accord and TL share the same platform, if there is a solution for the Accord, it should work for the TL.

carwacko · October 2004

I think you're probably right, Acura usually waits a bit before bringing out improved versions of models. I believe they waited a year or two before coming out with the "S" versions of the RSX and the prior generation of the TL. The price gap between the new RL and TL is too large. They definetley have room for a souped up TL or stripped down RL, or both, to fill in the price gap.

kfhmail · October 2004

Has anyone seen the 2005 TLs on the dealer lots...yet?

dtate99 · October 2004

It's been a while since I've posted, but I put the Michelin Pilot Sport A/S on my '04 and they are excellent in wet weather, and very, very good in dry weather.

Older Acura TLs

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles