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

Older Acura TLs

11112141617175

Comments

  • hunter001hunter001 Member Posts: 851
    About a while back, I saw a video of the 300M being crash-tested. The whole structure of the car was caving in like a tin-can. The steel beams and the ribs under the sheetmetal of the car determine the structural strength of a car and it was obvious that the 300M was positively un-safe even in a moderate crash.....you will be bought out in body bags....even in a minor accident...not a comforting thought by any measure....

    But got to admit that from a cursory observation, the the Chrysler boys have done a pretty good job at the interior/exterior design, lack of structural strength notwithstanding. Closer observation however, would show the mis-aligned panels and poor fit-and-finish. Almost like admiring a super-model's beauty from afar, and then you get closer and find decaying teeth and foul odor issuing from the mouth (of the supermodel).....sure it turned me off.

    For me, thorough competency, with smooth seemless powerful silent operation, without any eccentricities is the best personality I could desire - in a car...and the Acura TL meets my personality targets perfectly....

    just my 2c

    Later...AH
  • stevejjjjjstevejjjjj Member Posts: 31
    Chrysler reliability is terrible. Not to mention the resale value of it in a few years. But I couldn't tell you how it drives since I haven't driven a 300m. I do like their round instrument gauges on the dash.
  • pjonkheerpjonkheer Member Posts: 22
    There is NO way the 2000 Acura TL produced a 0-60 mph time anywhere CLOSE to 6.38->6.7 seconds. I'm sorry, it's just not true. Acura only claims 6.57 seconds for the 0-60 time for the CL-S, and something very similar for the TL-S (maybe a hair quicker). Unless you're talking about a modified TL (but you DID say "stock" TL), I stand corrected, and I'd be equally interested to hear how these people modified the TL's at Motortrend. But people routinely .. you said "routinely" producing those times, .. uh eh, nope.

    pete
  • varmitvarmit Member Posts: 1,125
    Mototrend's numbers are almost always faster than other mags. They take the fastest time for the car on the day of testing. Most other mags will take an average of several runs.

    Puberdee - If Chrysler rules, why can't they keep up with a "modified Accord"? It must really eat em up that the press and public prefer a modified Accord to their precious 300 series.
  • hunter001hunter001 Member Posts: 851
    pjonkheer states:
    ================================
    "There is NO way the 2000 Acura TL produced a 0-60 mph time anywhere CLOSE to 6.38->6.7 seconds. I'm sorry, it's just not true. Acura only claims 6.57 seconds for the 0-60 time for the CL-S, and something very similar for the TL-S (maybe a hair quicker). Unless you're talking about a modified TL (but you DID say "stock" TL), I stand corrected, and I'd be equally interested to hear how these people modified the TL's at Motortrend. But people routinely .. you said "routinely" producing those times, .. uh eh, nope."
    =============================

    Acura claims a figure of 6.57secs for the CL-s because automakers are generally pretty conservative in releasing such figures. Magazines typically obtain much better figures. Also, since the TL/CL/CL-s share the transmission with the EXACT SAME GEAR RATIOS, the additional HP/Torque (of the CL-s/TL-s) would not make the same impact as say, if the gearing in the TL-s/CL-s were done differently to take advantage of the additonal power. Hence the TL/TL-s should have a 0-60 that is very close to each other. Of course the TL-s would have better times, but not by a lot (as much as say 35 additional horses would lead you to believe). But due to stiffer springs/dampers and other suspension modifications (including a stiffer rear anti-roll bar), the TL-s should handle way better than the regular TL. If it is 0-60 that you seek, then the TL/TL-s would not have much difference.

    Motortrend obtained a 6.7 0-60 figure for the stock 2000 TL (their figure for the 1999 TL was 7.2secs).... similarly Road and Track obtained a 7.2 figure for the 1999 TL (which was slower than the 2000 TL by about 0.50 secs in 0-60)... so basically, if you subtract 0.50secs from 7.2secs, you will find that Road and Track would also have obtained a 6.7secs 0-60, if they had tested the 2000TL....as for 0-60 times, go to www.acura-tl.com and check out the TL owners over there...

    Personally, I am a guy who does not lay much store by such 0-60 figures.....since these can vary with the air temperature, altitude etc.... the same car if tested on a very hot day can give miserable 0-60 numbers than if tested on a colder day....due to which, you would not be able to truly compare the 0-60 figures for 2 cars, unless they were taken at the same time, same place in similar conditions..... normally aspirated cars are at a disadvantage to turbo or super-charged cars when the altitude increases, since the air thins with altitude..... basically, these 0-60 figures are just that ..... figures .... entertaining but nothing more.... more to the point is how you find the car, and does it meet your needs - the turbine smooth and powerful engine of the TL should meet the needs of most people.....

    Later...AH
  • bluesky999bluesky999 Member Posts: 253
    Well, besides driving both cars a good bit, I read a number of car magazines monthly, and am influenced by them. Car and Driver is perhaps the most respected, as they are very careful in their testing by keeping testing conditions uniform (e.g. the same amount of gas in the tanks of ALL cars tested, etc.). Since those men and women test and think about cars all week long, year after year, I'll reply to your arguments with their data and opinions.

    "Ugh! What an ugly car." Response: Car and Drivers editors in their comparison tests as a group felt the 300M is very attractive. The plain-jane TLs looks are considered very conservative and a negative. But looks are subjective, so I respect your personal opinion. Some people like the Pontiac Aztek, and that's great for them.

    "And, I'm sorry, for a car w/ 253 horses under the hood, it sure doesn't perform like it." Response: Car and Driver times the 300M at 7.9 seconds 0-60, while the 2000 TL is 7.4 (the 1999 TL was a 1/2 second slower). Quarter mile times are 16.1 for the 300M and 15.9 for the 2000 TL. Please see the C&D 9 car comparison test in 02/2000 issue, or the comparison tests right here on Edmunds, both of which confirm the 300M's standup performance. I don't understand your comment, unless you are so much into performance that 1/2 second makes a big difference to you.

    "You're talking about competence in many areas?? Well, unless you're including the trunk size, and glove compartment size of the 300M as being some "serious" competency categories, wake up"
    Response: As stated, my choice of the TL over the 300M is based on the TLs competency in many categories, but not about personality or looks.

    "You're obviously taking Chrysler's multi-million dollar t.v. ad campaigns way too seriously." Response: I don't watch television, so I haven't seen the ad campaigns. That's the simple truth.

    "And by the way, Acura's sales are pretty good right now. According to JD.Power, more TL's were sold since '99 than ES300s, and that's a pretty good benchmark." Response: I'm aware of the sales, and certainly don't deny them. I consider the TL and the 300M to be the top cars in their class, and prefer them over the I30s, the ES300s, the Saabs, etc.

    "Furthermore, why did you decide on the ultra-plain TL? You seem to imply that the 300M does handsprings all over it." Response: Didn't mean to imply that. Resale value and quietness are high priorities to me, not personality/brakes/ looks, etc., thus I prefer the TL. I'll also add that the Camry is much quieter than even the TL.

    "I'd be very interested to read an objective, convincing argument on why the 300M is a superior vehicle if you are comparing it with the TL. The challenge is yours for the taking...." Response: I don't consider the TL a superior vehicle. It is superior, according to test data, in certain areas such as braking, transmission, and looks (again see Car and Driver February 2000), whereas the TL is better in other areas such as fit and finish and resale value. I think that one needs to know ones priorities before making the right decision between these two vehicles. What is right for one person would not be right for another, based on what is most important to a specific consumer.

    Enjoy your TL, I think you are really in love with it.
  • PeterUbersPeterUbers Member Posts: 48
    If you're referring to any post of mine, what are you talking about?

    "modified Accord" keeping up with a Chrysler that rules?? Since when have I implied that the any car in the Chrysler line-up (sedans) is superior to Honda/Acura. Oh, and the play on words, "puberdee," very mature, and very cute. You're the big winner and get to sit in front of class for that one!

    Bluesky999 -- in love with a car? Some people may be, but there are far too many things in life that I love infinitely more -- such as my family and friends. And you seemed to be equally equipped with an arsenal of defense for what is in MY opinion (as you stress so often -- everyone IS entitled to their own opinion -- thanks to you, we all understand that now) an inferior vehicle. This is an automotive forum for the TL, so naturally, those who are interested in the TL will have great things to say about it because they feel very strongly about it in comparison to other cars in its class.

    What I don't understand is why you still post on this -- why not create a forum (unless it already exists, I don't care to bother looking): Acura TL vs. 300M ?? Sounds like something to do in between discovering more things you love about your 300M.

  • L8_ApexL8_Apex Member Posts: 187
    ...the topic title is "Acura 3.2TL - Five". Please post accordingly.

    Thank you,

    L8_Apex
    Host
    Sedans Message Board
  • msu79gt82msu79gt82 Member Posts: 541
    An earlier post (~646) remarked about the Lexus GS430.

    "mhammy84" had some favorable comparisons between the two vehicles. If he finds the TL to compare favorably with the GS430 that is indeed a compliment to the TL. The Lexus GS430 MSRPs at about $50 to $55,000.
  • varmitvarmit Member Posts: 1,125
    Peter - My post was not in respose to yours. I was responding to an inflamatory post with the author's name as I spelled it. Dunno if they were making jokes at your expense. Anyway, sorry I took his/her bait. No offense intended to you.
  • PeterUbersPeterUbers Member Posts: 48
    None taken -- thanks for clarifying. Let the TL games continue!!

  • puberdeepuberdee Member Posts: 1
    Could someone tell me if I can expect to get a 2001 TL with Navigation for invoice or close to invoice pricing? Thank you.
  • PeterUbersPeterUbers Member Posts: 48
    At least here in the midwest, TL w/ Nav and w/o Nav are definitely going for anywhere from 1000 over to 100 dollars over invoice. If you're in the Illinois/Chicagoland area, try Continental Acura -- they're great people to do business with and they're rollin' out the deals (boy, do I sound like a car salesman or what?!)
  • dougsilverdougsilver Member Posts: 62
    I was one of those shopping around for a 2000 back in fall of 2000 when the 1999s were still on the lot. Other posters at the time, including myself, were bemoaning the fact that you were lucky if you could get perhaps $300 off the sticker price. The "line" from ALL the Acura dealers at the time was how the TL was "value priced" no-haggling (since the sticker was reduced several $thousand from the 1998--never mind that the 1998 was obviously overstickered). There was not even much of a discount on the 1999s that were still sitting while the 2000s trickled in.

    Amazing what a difference a year makes. Now it looks like you can just about name your price for the TL. So much for no-haggling value pricing.
  • soberssobers Member Posts: 496
    nothing else ..!
  • dougsilverdougsilver Member Posts: 62
    Except that my observations at the time were that Honda was, in part, creating the high demand by holding back on the supply. Of course I realized that, like every other car in the market, once the initial frenzy subsided, pricing would revert to the typical invoice+ situation. What cracked me up was the absolute insistence of the various sales people and sales managers that no way would this happen--"they were going to a value price/no haggle philosophy just like Saturn and we better get used to it". Yeah right.

    Which brings me to the current frenzy that is being stirred up on the imminent TL-S (discussed elsewhere). Various discussion boards (e.g., Acura-TL.com) are full of folks that are just chomping at the bit to be the first to get their S. I hope they don't sucked into paying a premium for features that will be standard on the following year's base mode.
  • PeterUbersPeterUbers Member Posts: 48
    You also have to take into consideration (regarding people about to be sucked into paying ..) that the acura-tl.com forum is home to a handfull of people that regularly post and express their strong interest in the TL Type S (as is the 2002 Type S forum here on Edmund's). I'm still of the lot that believes that there really isn't much demand for this car, and a lot of it is due to the economy, as well as .. and more importantly, Acura's paltry effort to advertise this new model. I also understand that Acura is trying to lower the age brackets of their target market -- they want to begin to cater to the IS300 crowd with this new TL Type S, as well as the BMW 3-series crowd. Perhaps by slipping some info. here and there around the country about the TL Type S (as well as leaving MOST dealers absolutely clueless about the Type S's arrival .. as mine is), they may begin to attract only the enthusiasts FIRST who are internet sav vy, and more prone to being members of such internet car forums. After all, the best way to get word of mouth advertising started is to deliver the vehicle to people who they KNOW will fall absolutely in love with the car from the minute they receive their ordered vehicle. People like this .. and this is just human nature, tend to exaggerate the performance and capabilities of their new vehicle -- and this is EXACTLY what acura and any other manufacturer would love to happen. Now, I'm not saying that anyone would exaggerate .. or even NEED to exaggerate the features of the TL Type S, I'm just speaking from a marketing point of view.
  • dougsilverdougsilver Member Posts: 62
    I know there are a whole class of folks (I am partly in this class) who, the minute after they buy a car that they have been researching and waiting for, start studying what improvements will be offered on the next model. What amazes me is the number posts I have seen on the Edmunds site in the past where someone is ready to trade his/her one- or two-year old car in on the next model or some different car entirely.

    These folks seem to be economic dunces or else they have so much money they don't care. They seem to long for some desireable model for which they must have paid a premium, then take a soaking when they trade or sell it one or two years later, only to pay another premium for the next desireable model. The auto manufacturers are experts at being able to pull off this type of consumer manipulation.

    Back to Acura, their marketing strategy is perplexing. They were actually the first Asian marque to try and break into the luxury market with introduction of the Legend (back in 1986?). Then after years of establishing the name but without any real innovations, they let Lexus and even Infiniti one-up them. Then what do they do, they DROP the Legend!?!?

    Seems like they are trying to get back in the game but even then I'm sure they angered some of their loyal customers. For example, lowering the price of the TL in 1999 by several $thousand to attract potential ES300 buyers was brilliant marketing but I'm sure those who bought 1998 TLs were not very happy.

    Since the TL is somewhat underpriced (or more accurately the ES300 is overpriced), Acura has to do something to bump the price up. So the TL-S is established at about $3 thousand more at little cost to Acura (how much can it cost to tweak a few more horses out of the same engine). Then, next year, the features of the TL-S become standard on the base model TL--along with the higher price. Mission accomplished.
  • tlswhiztlswhiz Member Posts: 19
    I agree. It's all part of the autmotive, proverbial "circle of life." And the only lives i'm talkin' about are the exec's at Acura.

    I'm not sure they dropped the legend completely. This may be an acura urban legend (if there is such a thing -- if not, there is now).. but I've spoken with many salepeople who claim the "RL" in their 3.5L V6 flagship is actually and acronym for "Real Legend" and that in some parts of Canada, the RL (introduced in '96?) actually bore the embroidered "Real Legend" nameplate on the dashboard. Go figure if it's a legend..

    The legend was a smashing success, I'll have to agree. It's developed a sort of cult following, or iconography of sorts (joining the ranks of the '96 Impala SS and the Buick Grand National). The value of some vehicles with under 40K miles is just astonishing -- 16,000!! But hey, it was revolutionary in 91 when they redesigned it and then when they intro-ed the coupe with the 220hp five speed in 92.

    I totally agree with you about trading in a one or two year old car for a new TL-S -- talk about negative equity! Seriously, these people must have some money to burn, or perhaps the stash they saved up initially for the ES300 will cover the hit they're about to take on the TL trade-in for the TL Type S. At any rate, I'd rather salivate for three more years and wait for the introduction of some more "super" sedans from other badeges (i.e. Lexus, Infiniti) before I sell the deed on the farm.
  • tlswhiztlswhiz Member Posts: 19
    http://members.nbci.com/babylexus/


    At this address, here's what you do: Place your pointer over the "Import Sedans" Category, and then click on Acura TL Type S. There are four vid clips from Motorweek's weekly tv car news show. I must give credit to the host of this site -- please email him with thanks if you like it!

  • svec7186svec7186 Member Posts: 56
    whats the best deal someone got on an acura tl /wo nav on the NY/NJ area? please give dealership name and phone

    thanks
  • ukrickukrick Member Posts: 66
    Has anyone heard any details regarding MSRP? I heard the horsepower was increased to something like 260hp! Any other new functionality?
  • tlswhiztlswhiz Member Posts: 19
    you're outta the loop bud,

    Go to: 2002 Acura TL Type S -- a forum on Townhall ... plus, I currently own one.
  • tlswhiztlswhiz Member Posts: 19
    These are pics of the new TL Type S as well as they new 2002 TL's:


    http://angus.home.texas.net/2002_TL/


    There is a SIDE BY SIDE comparison of the 2001 and 2002 TL .. NOT type S models..


    many people find this pic very interesting.

  • bcjacob1bcjacob1 Member Posts: 39
    I have a '00 TL w/ Nav. It seems that my system is approx 100-200 feet off. For example, I will be at the intersection of 2 streets and the display will tell me that I an 100-200 feet away from the intersection. I've tried adjusting the calibration several times but the prob keeps hapening.

    Help! Any thoughts?
  • boe_dboe_d Member Posts: 66
    The issue is not a real fault of the GPS. The government restricts the acuracy to prevent smart missiles and the like from using GPS. GPS standards are actually set for within 1 block accuracy - I don't know the exact measurement. If you are in the military you can get an accurate GPS
  • ruskiruski Member Posts: 1,566
    I thought the government has lifted the military restriction on the GPS.

    BTW, If needed a smart missile can be homed in on your cell phone. Ask Russians how they do that.
  • msu79gt82msu79gt82 Member Posts: 541
    The old restrictions limiting the public accuracy of home GPS systems has been lifted. What do the specifications claim the accuracy to be? If they are within spec, I suppose there is nothing you can. If not, have the system checked.
  • dougsilverdougsilver Member Posts: 62
    If the worst of your troubles is that you can't find an intersection when you are within 100-200 feet, perhaps you need something more than a GPS :)
  • hunter001hunter001 Member Posts: 851
    From what I understand, the restriction by the Government was lifted only for non-sensitive areas....for the sensitive areas like in-and-around a military installation, the inaccuracy purposely built in by the government (about 300 ft ?), still stands.

    In regular (non-sensitive) areas, the Navigation accuracy is about 10 feet....also this system is terrific in thick fog or pitch darkness or in un-familiar terrain...when it pin-points your location and gives a countdown before your turn approaches...like 1000ft....900ft....800ft....600ft....400ft....200ft....100ft...you just cannot miss your turn (in thick fog/pitch darkness/unfamiliar areas), unless you are blind....

    Later...AH
  • ezaircon4jcezaircon4jc Member Posts: 793
    I am an Air Traffic Controller. We just had a breifing on GPS . There are 2 sensitivities, one military and the other civilian. The civilian version is PURPOSEFULLY inaccurate (for obvious reasons). I believe the built in error is ~300ft.
  • shoparound2shoparound2 Member Posts: 1
    You can get TL at or close to invoice price from Brunswick and Ocean Acura in NJ.
  • hunter001hunter001 Member Posts: 851
    I would modify your statement to:

    The Civilian and the Military Nav operates pretty much the same everywhere (it was not so till a year back) except for sensitive areas, where the civilian version has a built in error of ~300ft.

    I say that because, the GPS Navigation in my 3.2TL, never ever misses a turn....the built-in in-accuracy at best is a few feet (<10ft ?) and while driving, the 10ft in-accuracy cannot be noticed....with a 300ft error, I would have been missing every street, turn and highway exit, I would suppose ?!!! :(:( But possibly, if I were to drive around in a sensitive area that has say, a Nuclear Power plant, the 300ft in-accuracy would kick in....never experienced it however..

    Later...AH
  • jeffvalinejeffvaline Member Posts: 2
    The GPS system does NOT have areas of intentionally greater/lesser accuracy. There is a relationship between GPS accuracy & where you are at this moment on the earth, but that is because of the number of satellites & their geometry relative to you. The GPS satellites are not geostationary, and even if you stay in one spot, the satellites are moving relative to you, and the geometry & number of visible satillites will change. There are two signals transmitted by each GPS satellite, one available only to the military, and one for civilians. In the past, the civilian signal was also degraded to reduce accuracy to a spec of approx +/-300 ft. That degradation has been removed, and the civilian spec is now approx +/- 90 ft, although you should typically experience much better than that. The military signals are better still.


    Geometry and availability of satellites is the key to GPS. If you are in an "urban canyon" (tall buildings all around) that block the satellite signals, accuracy will be poor. It takes a minimum of 3 satellites to do 2-D positioning, but 4 or more is MUCH better. In a fairly open environment, you should be seeing 6-10 satellites at all times, and the accuracy will typically be +/- 20-30 ft.


    Do not confuse the accuracy of the navigation & mapping software with the accuracy of GPS. If the number of available satellites drops, the software may put more emphasis on the inputs from other sources, such as the speedo, the steering angles, etc. Mapping accuracy may degrade fairly quickly.


    For more GPS info, try:

    http://www.trimble.com/gps/index.htm


    A former GPS Engineer

  • lgtltdlgtltd Member Posts: 8
    This car moves!!... and this was the TL not the TLS. Of course the engine was very smooth and responsive, but I was particularly impressed with the transmission. It responds immediately to throttle input and shifts are imperceptible, noticed only by the increased rpm's. This car is QUIET. Gone is the wind whistle from the side mirrors(noticed on test drive of a pre-owned '00 model). I'm not real crazy about the rims, TLS rims look much better.

    I want one, but do not want to pay MSRP. Dealer has had 8 cars for three days now and has yet to sell one. He told me I would be the first. I am beginning to believe some of the earlier posters who say that demand for this car isn't going to be as great as we are made to believe. I'm not in a hurry and going to wait to see if they will come down off of MSRP.
  • robnisrobnis Member Posts: 78
    Interesting, it sounds like the Acura (typically) wants to gouge the public. Rather than settle for an appropriate profit. I have the TL-S first on my list but if the dealerships play their games again, I can easily go to my #2 vehicle. Hey, I can even see what the new A4, Jaguar X, and ES300 are like then!

    Can you tell me where you are located? I am near Harrisburg, PA
  • hunter001hunter001 Member Posts: 851
    Jeffvaline:

    Your explanation sounds reasonable and pretty much jells with what I experience on a daily basis...thanks for the link.

    Later...AH
  • hunter001hunter001 Member Posts: 851
    If Acura were to come out with an All-wheel-drive sport-wagon (similar to the BMW 540i sport-wagon),with the VTM-4 AWD system and maybe a limited-slip-differential and the Navigation system, I would trade my beloved 2000 TL up in a second.

    But such wonderful ideas never seem to occur to the powers-that-be.

    At least Acura/Honda is coming out with a Sedan/Coupe on a stretched Honda S2000 RWD platform....should provide some desperately needed competition for the BMW 3-series and maybe the Lexus IS series. Wonder what took them so long...especially since the S2000 was available for the past couple of years...

    Later...AH
  • schollscholl Member Posts: 13
    I'm going to be buying a TL soon and wonder (not having had leather seats before) - would there be an appreciable difference in interior heat if I bought the silver or the black exterior (both have ebony interior - I definitely like the ebony more than the taupe). Yes, I understand that it has a good air conditioner - however, I live in sunny Southern CA and am curious. Checked out the 2002 and am glad I waited - even though I'll be buying base TL - the minor changes are worth it. I think the rims and headlights are nicer.
  • svec7186svec7186 Member Posts: 56
    just got a new 2001 tl for $26000 for paramus acura in NJ.

    2 questions:
    1) what octane is needed? the salesman said 91.

    2) i read in another newsgroup that the tl has paint flaking problems. any news about paint problems?

    thanks
  • tlswhiztlswhiz Member Posts: 19
    This question has been asked and answered EXTENSIVELY on www.acura-cl.com and other acura forums -- see "2002 Acura TL Type S" for my post on it.
  • dougsilverdougsilver Member Posts: 62
    I'm also in sunny SoCal (San Fernando Valley). I have owned several cars over the years and many of them white. I can say that cabin temp does stay cooler in a lighter color and the lighter color is also much easier to keep looking clean. That being said, our 2000 TL was a replacement for my wife's 90 white Maxima and she did not want another white car--so she ended up with Montery Blue. Pluses are that the color is not that common and (when clean) looks great--especially with gold logos and accents. Of course, like I warned her, the car heats up much more quickly than a ligher color and the dirt starts showing within hours after washing--requires daily wipe with the California duster.
  • sundance_goldsundance_gold Member Posts: 19
    Saturday was my test drive day, as I got to drive a 2002 TL Type S, a 2002 TL (non Type S), and a 2001 TL (in exactly this order). I found the Type S to be very similar to my CL Type S (IE no surprises--except that the back seats are really comfortable!). The regular 2002 TL was also pretty good and provided a bit softer ride. When I took the 2001 TL out of the parking lot, I immediately noticed that the amound of wind/road noise in the cabin was remarkably worse than the 2002. Actually the new TL's are quieter than my CL. For "kicks and giggles", I stopped by a Honda dealer later that day to get the details on their financing special. I took out an Accord EX-V6 and noticed that it, too, was much quieter than the TL.

    Consequently, I'm in a real quandry as to what to buy.
  • jbreez1jbreez1 Member Posts: 46
    HE GROUP,

    BEGAN MY SEARCH FOR A PER OWNED LUXURY WITH BTW 323/328. ALTHOUGH I LOVE THE LOOK, PRICES SEEMED HIGH AND I KNOW THEY CAN BE CRANKY. SO I CHECKED ON CARS IN THE SAME CLASS. LOOKED AT AURA AL, INFINITY 1S30, AUDIO A4, LEXUS ES300. AM I SEEING THINGS OR IS THE AL 3.2 AS GOOD A DEAL AS IT LOOKS? SEEMS LIKE YOU GET MORE FOR THE MONEY THAN ALL THE OTHERS, WITH THE PEACE OF MIND OF A RELIABLE AUTOMOBILE. MOST TESTS COMPLAIN YOU DON' GET THE PERFORMANCE LIKE A BMW (YOU ALSO DON'T GET A $30-35,000 PRICE TAG FOR A 2000. I'M LOOKING AT A 2000 BUT IF I VAN GET A 2001 FOR 26000, I'LL JUMP ON IT. IM IN ORLANDO, SO ANY INPUT FROM CENTRAL OR SOUTH FLORIDIANS IS WELCOME. ALSO LIKE INPUT FORM ANY OWNERS AS TO THEIR EXPERIENCE.

    THANX

    JBREEZ1
  • jbreez1jbreez1 Member Posts: 46
    SORRY, DIDN'T KNOW HOW TO WORK THE SPELL CHECK AND WHEN I HIT EDIT IT CHANGED ALL THE WORDS. BTW SHOULD BE BMW, AURA SHOULD BE ACURA, AUDIO SHOULD BE AUDI AND SO ON...

    THANX FOR THE PATIENCE, IM NEW HERE

    JBREEZ1
  • dougsilverdougsilver Member Posts: 62
    We forgive you for the spell check but please STOP SHOUTING. Anyway, you have discovered what we all found out--the TL is one of the best bang-for-the-buck bargains around. If you have never owned a BMW and if you can find a good deal, get one and get it out of your system. The BMW I owned (1986 325es) handled unbelievably and nothing else I have driven handles quite like a BMW. Of course you pay the price of entry and will continue to get soaked by maintenance costs.
  • mhammy84mhammy84 Member Posts: 167
    Havent been following too closely with Acuras lately after purchasing a 2K TL and 2K+1 CLS last year. Made a service appt at my local dealer for my CLS, and noticed the new 2002 sitting in the front. I checked the price, and it went way up...but its still worth it (TL-S with navi, 33,700). Now, the only thing i DONT understand is that my dealer had a dumpster-load of 2002's in the back, mostly TL-S's. Now, from my own experience last year, I couldnt even see a CLS when I bought mine, and had to wait a month for mine to show up. Dealer lots were barren...no CLs to be seen anywhere. My TL was about to be sold to someone else also, and I had to jump on the color i wanted since they only had about 3 of them total on the lot. Whats up with all the 2002's just sitting around? Is all the hype totally gone?
  • jbreez1jbreez1 Member Posts: 46
    Sorry for shouting. The fact that I can get a new TL for less than a '99 BMW will probably sway me. But most of all, the maintenance/reliability factor will probably be the most influential issue. Must admit though, BMW does great with fianancing. I was already approved for 5.9% on a used vehicle. Does Acura do some creative stuff with money? Anyone with experience in that area?
  • tiresiustiresius Member Posts: 1
    Hello all,

    Does anybody have any comment about the headroom in the 2002 as the 2001?
    It seems they took almost 2" headroom off the 2002. I verified this yesterday by visiting the dealer and sitting in both cars, as well as the Type S. My observations:
    The 2002 is definitely fighter for me, I'm about a 1/2" short of 6 feet. I had noticed when testing the 01 that I was pretty much right in the roof unless I leaned the seat back a little more than I usually do. In my '97 Altima I have about 2" between my head and the ceiling. In the 2002, my head is squarely in the ceiling unless I lean left into the sunroof opening or lean the seat way back. The Type I seemed to have a little more room. Someone mentioned that this may be because of the different seat. This appears to be true, I felt there was a little more room in the Type S. The 2002 brochure does not list a different headroom for the Type S.

    Here are the numbers from the 2001 & 2002 brochures:
    2001 exterior vehicle height: 56.1"
    2002 exterior vehicle height: 53.7"

    2001 front headroom: 39.9"
    2002 front headroom: 38.2"

    2001 rear headroom: 36.8
    2002 rear headroom: 36.5

    As you can see by Acura's numbers, they shortened the car by almost 3", almost 2" of this was lost as front headroom. It didn't look too high in '01 to me. WHAT WERE THEY THINKING!

    Anybody know or have any insights on this? I really want all the changes on the 2002, but this is really setting me back. More headroom would sure be a weird reason to spend the extra money on the Type S.

    One last question, the dealer I was at yesterday seemed to want to stay at msrp on the 2002. Has anybody gotten a sense from dealerships about how long they think they'll be able to get list on the 2002, on Type I's? This dealership has received 2 shipments of '02's this week but only had 2 on Type I's on the lot. They still had about five '01's. My impression is that once the '01's are gone and the '02 keep piling in, prices will come off MSRP. I can wait a few weeks.
  • dougsilverdougsilver Member Posts: 62
    When the TLs were redesigned in 1999, the supplies basically trickled to the various dealers while prospective buyers were lining up--hence not much discount from MSRP until this year's model (2001). It seems that supply has picked up while the initial interest has died down somewhat. I see no reason to rush to the dealer the first week the new models come out--what do you expect in terms of price? I'm sure if you are patient then negotiating can be done.
Sign In or Register to comment.