I love the XM and signed on for 5 years at $5.99/month, paid upfront. If all you want is music, then cds are fine, but what about the other +/- 100 channels? It doesn't fade out and you have news, traffic, baseball, O&A, etc... Long trips are a pleasure. For me it's definately worth it.
but dont you think the reg radio is okay for news.i understand that sometimes the signal fades but if ur listening to music thats what cds r for.u dont need 5.1 sound to hear the news...what do u think
I have an '05 6MT and commute about 110 miles round trip. My mileage is about 24-25 mpg. It's about 44 miles highway and parkway to the bridge, where I go as fast as I can or traffic allows, then 11 miles "city" each way. I've gotten 27.5 on trips.
I think you are right. Although it still looks terrific, Honda should update with a few electricals here and there and a brand new body shape so that it keeps itself up-to-date with Honda's design direction
thanks for agreeing with me on that. the s2000 deserves it alot. If they dont keep up with the modifcations then its gna get left behind and have to be replaced. i dont want that car to be a thing of the past so soon(ghost) :surprise: :sick: .
I've been reading the postings on this site for months to make sure that the TL was the right car for me. I've test driven nearly every other car in the same class including the new Lexus IS and the TL is always on top. So I had decided to get the TL once I get my tax return and hopefully by then the Ipod integration would have been out and tested. Well the other day I went to VW dealership to look for a Tourag with my girlfriend and decided to take a second look at the Passat. I wasn't to impressed with the new 2006 model when it came out a few months ago and never really even bothered to test drive it. But this day they had a fully loaded version with V6 and sport package #2, which is their best sport version of the Passat. So I decided to take it out. I was ready to be disappointed because the value edition of the Passat looked and felt cheap and I thought it would be the same with this car. But man I was wrong. Besides NAV (they do offer it, but it is not nearly as good as the TL NAV) it had everything I wanted in a new car. Great fit and finish, very nice leather and even more power than the TL. The test drive went well and I wanted to see the TL right away to make a comparison. Five minutes later I am at the Acura dealer looking that the TL. The Passat has the edge on fit and finish, quality of materials and a much better stereo (i listed to both cars stereo with my own cd's for about 30 minutes each). I was 100% sold on the TL from my own experiences with the car and the info on this board, but after the Passat test drive I am really don't know which one to get. I think the biggest factor in not getting the Passat is that EVERYONE that I know that has bought a VW has had a :lemon: lot of problems with the car and trying to get it fixed. Like the looks of the TL but the quality of the Passat feels better. Any suggestions?
I think the biggest factor in not getting the Passat is that EVERYONE that I know that has bought a VW has had a lot of problems with the car
Kind of answered your own question.....
I just bought a TL. I looked at the Passat but thought the ergos weren't right and the styling was very bland. The Passat was more money, got worse gas mileage, insurance is higher, and the resale value wasn't as certain.
I'd recommend the Acura. Good luck & Happy New Year!
Hopefully, that is the Chinese version and not the US 2007 model. I'm sure the 2007 will get some changes as usual the last 2 years. I like the mirrors in the photo, but I expected more dramatic changes like completely new headlights and taillights for the 2007 instead of those super-mild differences. When the last TL was updated, you could tell a 2002 from a 2001 very easily due to the new headlights and a few other very visible updates.
that very true. i like this style of the TL i hope it says around for awhile. The minor change is ok with me. B4 this model i never even paid attention to the TL. But if they had an idea and released it to the public of how the future car would look like id be intrested. But that China Version is better than the canadian/american
The TL is an all-around better car: better interior, exterior, electronics, NAV, safety ratings, price, reliability, resale value, and audio system. The VW's Dynaudio simply does not compare to the TL's ELS 5.1 DTS surround-sound system.
There is simply no comparison between the two cars.
I would not touch the new Passat with a ten foot pole.
I prefer the TL as well (enough to have bought one over the 2006 Passat after leasing a 2003 Passat) but based on IIHS testing, the Passat has superior safety ratings to the TL.
I'm not clear on what your question is and I'm familiar with the new '04+ nav system, not the '03 system, but not all navigation systems give voice commands. I believe what the salesperson is explaining is that the directions appear on the screen, but are not spoken. He should be able to demonstrate how the system works.
I have an '04 TL. My prior car was top-of-the-line '01.5 Passat. I agree that the Passat's interior is "richer," "classier," or whatever similar term you want to use. The TL is a better handler - especially if you're going with the manual transmission. I am surprised you think the Passat has a better sterio, as the TL's is considered top-of-the-line.
Actually this is a popular misconception. The TL is significantly superior to the Passat in crash test ratings and overall safety and is one of the safest of all cars. The commonly disseminated information regarding this issue is insufficient. Here is the real deal on the most comprehensive evaluation of safety in accidents to date:
The Passat stereo pales in comparison to that of the TL. It is not even a surround-sound system. Lots of hype but no delivery. I'd say it's a merchandising gimmick at best.
Nothing beats the ELS 5.1 surround-sound DTS system of the TL.
Check the audioworld.com review of the ELS system. It beats everything including the LOGIC7 of the BMW and Mercedes and the BOSE system in the Cadillac CTS as well as the highly acclaimed system in the Lexus, the Mark Levinson.
Comprehensive in some sense but definitely NOT the whole story. ANY safety ratings which do not consider braking and handling--that is, *active* safety, or the vehicle's ability to avoid an accident in the first place--don't tell the whole story.
What you want to know is, if I drive this car, how likely is it that I'm injured? Crash test ratings tell you something about the probability of injury given a crash, but to get the probability of injury, you also need to know the odds of a crash in the first place. Obviously the driver is a critical component of this, but the vehicle matters a great deal, too. An alert driver has a far better chance of avoiding an accident in a good-handling and fast-braking car than in some lumbering hulk. The provided ratings don't take that into account. For example, there's no way a cow like the Uplander is actually safer than the incredibly nimble RX-8.
That said, I wouldn't dispute that the TL is a very safe car. 60-0 braking in 123 feet and 0.87g on the skidpad (R&T numbers) are very good. But I highly doubt the Nissan Quest is actually safer than the TL (as per the informedforlife ratings) because the TL driver can avoid things the Quest driver has no hope of getting out of.
(On a side note, those "comprehensive" ratings include weighting for the crash results for rear passengers. If you never have rear passengers, why on earth should that get any weight in the final rating?)
Oh, sorry, we now return you to your regularly-scheduled discussion of the TL vs. the Passat. Is the Passat even "average" in reliability these days?
we've had the dedicated TL and the dedicated Passat discussions both tangled up in a debate between the two of them for a while now. It's time for me to ask that anyone who wants to continue this conversation hop over to the Sedans Comparisons board and create the right place to continue this comparo.
These dedicated discussions are not the right place for this extended debate.
I got the 06 non-navi auto TL with end of year savings. My lease on my 03 Accord EXV6 was up. I was between the new 06 Accord V6 or the TL. The Accord V6 is a great car too, but the TL has those little extras that made the difference for me. After test driving it, I got hooked on the TL. The tire pressure monitor was a nice addition to the 06 line-up.
Then you're missing the point. Crash test ratings only tell you about what may happen *assuming a crash*. But to figure out how safe you are, you have to also factor in how likely you are to meet that assumption; that is, how likely is an accident?
While it may be the case that you're more likely to avoid injury when you have an accident in the Uplander (though not by much--the Uplander doesn't actually have stellar crash ratings), you're much less likely to get into an accident in the first place when driving the RX-8.
Some 30-35% of auto fatalities come from SINGLE-VEHICLE accidents. It's *not* just about collisions.
After I had my new Acura TL for a week, I discovered the voice command "What time is it"? I happen to have gotten a new watch for Christmas. So I dragged my wife out to the car to show her how my new watch had come with a bluetooth option. I took the watch off, held it in my right hand and spoke into it while hitting the talk button with my left and said "what time is it?" The car answers back "The time is 11:35". My wife is amazed. I say to her, do you know why they have bluetooth watches? "No why?"
Blind drivers.
I've had endless fun with this little joke. I had to explain it to my wife and she felt rather foolish. She tells the story to other people, though. Occasionally, I'll speak into the watch when we're in the house, "what time is dinner?".
Give it a try and see how many people you can fool. It's too easy with kids.
I don't think Acura is putting much effort for 2007 for the TL. Acura already has a all new MDX, RSX, new smaller SUV, and future NSX replacement coming soon.
I too considered the Accord EXV6 only because it's $5 cheaper than the TL. But the Accord's "styling" is aweful. And I love Hondas. Went with the TL for obvious reasons. Its worth the extra $100/month in payment.
Honda's in trouble with the Accord. Sales were off 30% in December. How can the company that built the awesome looking Civic have a problem on their hands with Accord? New Camry and Altima coming out, and Sonata nipping at all of em's heels. C'mon Honda. Kick it up.
I have a 99TL with 114,000 Miles. Have Run on Regular since about 5000 miles when I mistakenly filled up with regular instead of premium. Car ran fine. Noticed no decrease in performance or mileage. I get 27 to 29 MPG highway @ 65 to 75 mph. Since then I have tried premium from time to time. No benefit so not worth the extra $$. A general rule -- use the lowest octane gas with which the engine does not ping.
I would think the newer TLs ('04 and later) have more highly tuned engines with higher compression ratios. The negative effects of regular gas would be more pronounced.
"A general rule -- use the lowest octane gas with which the engine does not ping."
IMO, that is a VERY BAD "general" rule. My Acura and Porsche service managers agree. Almost all high performance engines have an knock sensor that will adjust the timing to compensate for low octane gas. By the time you hear a ping, you have so overstressed the adjustments that they are no longer able to compensate. That's unlikely to occur in the US where regular is still 87-88 octane. BUT, you can be robbing the engine of peak performance and efficiency long before you ever hear a ping.
There seems to be some disagreement - even among experts - as to whether consistently running a high performance, high compression engine on lower octane fuel has more serious long term consequences than loss of fuel efficiency or performance. I've read some reports that the constant forced timing adjustments can lead to more serious engine problems, carbon build up, etc. I've seen other reports that put that probablity as relatively low. But I haven't seen a legitimate credible report that states absolutely no long term problems from "under-octaning" a high performance engine.
Anecdotal evidence that "I'm doing fine at 115k miles" is, in my opinion, like the guy who eats a pound of bacon every morning claiming it's OK because he hasn't had a heart attack. Yet. Maybe never will. But that doesn't make it a healthy practice.
P.S. I get 29-30+ mpg out of my 2004 TL at 70-75+ mph on the highway. And it is considerably more powerful/quicker than the 99 TL. I suspect it would suffer more noticable drops in efficiency and performance on regular.
I am going to be looking at new cars in the next couple of months and I really like the TL. However, I had pretty much ruled it out because I thought it would be too small (I'm 6-5 and not exactly thin!) I'm also considering the Toyota Avalon and Chrysler 300C, which I thought would be a better fit for me initially. I just pulled up a comparison of the cars, though, and as far as front seat space goes it does not sound like the TL is all that far off from the other two - and the legroom is actually a little more. I'm not too concerned with passenger space as most of my driving is alone.
Anybody out there who's reasonably large and owns this car? Just how big/small is it in the real world? I realize people are tall in different ways etc., but I'd like to know if I should keep the car on my short list or not. The driver room is really the only hesitation I have on this at the moment (I know, I should just go "try it on", but I would hate to get there and "not fit!"). Also, does anyone know what kind of pricing to expect on a TL in the late spring time frame? Will they typically sell around invoice at that time of year (current year models)? I see that people sometimes get good deals now but I hate negotiating so if near-invoice is more common at that time that would up the TL's chances as well.
I'm just going to respond to a small portion of your post about the size of the TL. It's a very wide car. I'm 6'0, about 230 lbs, and I actually wish the car were a tad narrower b/c I cannot comfortably drive with my left elbow on the armrest. I eaither keep it in the air or rest it on the windowsill b/c there's so much width tot he car.
Thanks for the reply. That's interesting, I have the same issue in my current car (Chrysler 300M) but I never really thought much about it, I just use the windowsill most of the time also. Mostly, wide is good for me. I was concerned with leg and head room too, but the measurements seem to indicate they aren't much different in the cars I'm looking at.
I was wondering if anyone has noticed some cost cutting in the 06 TL.
The new 06 seats have a very short bottom cushion similar to what you usually see in Toyotas. I sat in some of the 05 Acuras, and they still have the longer seats. With the shorter seats you feel like your sitting closer to the seat edge.
The new seats are very stiff and not as soft as those in the 05 TSX or RL. This may address the complaints people had about the leather getting wrinkled but now its at the sacrifice of comfort.
The 2006 TL now uses fixed head rests. We have a 04-05 TL here at work and it has the 05 RL style head rests.
If there haven't been many changes in the 06, I would recommend checking out the 05 models. Something to consider.
I've felt that way about the bottom front seats of the '05. I've always felt they were a little too short. Others have not felt the same, but to me, they are...
I'm with you regarding the '05 (and I'll assume '04) seat bottoms. Just a bit too short. And I'm of average height. Not uncomfy, but would be more comfy if a little longer.
I haven't checked out an '06.
'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'm a smidge over 6' and 190 pounds. I've had 3 TLs, '99, '03 and '06. All have been comfortable and reasonably spacious. The '06 TL now has telescoping steering as well as the tilt function which makes it quite easy to find a good fit. It is also wider and taller than the '03 and '99. The seat track seems plenty long.
Overall, the Avalon and 300 might be bigger. When they started Avalon was a bench up-sized Camry and the 300 was a mid-size like the TL. Both may now be bigger than their original size.
What I would look closely at is the footwell space and the dead pedal position. They seem to have a big real world affect on comfortable real space. Manufacturer's measurements don't always seem comparable in my experience.
The new TL also has improved shoulder space.
Being tall what you also should test is entry and exit, although the doors are good size and open wide, you might have to duck more than you find comfortable to get inside.
Also for reference, my wife has a cousin who bought a(now defunct) Acura CL partly because it's 2-door configuration worked better with his 6 foot 350 pound size.than his other options.
Over all I think you shouldn't delist the TL until you try it for size.
Thanks, I will definitely keep it on the list as it sounds like it's not as small as I thought. I've been told by some people that the drivers area was like a cockpit, which sounds less than spacious.
With my commute, my whole salary would go to the gas companies in one of those things. Definitely cars only for now... and one that can handle a lot of mileage without falling apart or losing *all* it's value.
Comments
2025 Toyota Crown Signia Hybrid, 2022 Ram 2500 Laramie 6.4 Hemi, 2007 Mazda MX-5 Miata PRHT
Timing matters!
Will pick up on 1/4, very excited but concerned about gas mileage (60 miles round trip into city).
Happy New Year to All.
2025 Toyota Crown Signia Hybrid, 2022 Ram 2500 Laramie 6.4 Hemi, 2007 Mazda MX-5 Miata PRHT
Looks like turn signal lights will go into the side mirrors.">
Kind of answered your own question.....
I just bought a TL. I looked at the Passat but thought the ergos weren't right and the styling was very bland. The Passat was more money, got worse gas mileage, insurance is higher, and the resale value wasn't as certain.
I'd recommend the Acura. Good luck & Happy New Year!
I'm sure the 2007 will get some changes as usual the last 2 years.
I like the mirrors in the photo, but I expected more dramatic changes like completely new headlights and taillights for the 2007 instead of those super-mild differences.
When the last TL was updated, you could tell a 2002 from a 2001 very easily due to the new headlights and a few other very visible updates.
There is simply no comparison between the two cars.
I would not touch the new Passat with a ten foot pole.
There is always the slight issue that not paying for music is illegal and that you risk prosecution.
http://www.informedforlife.org/
Click on the risk order link.
The TL gets an overall score of 62 while the Passat gets 72 which is significantly worse.
The TL is the one you want to be in in the event of a serious accident.
Nothing beats the ELS 5.1 surround-sound DTS system of the TL.
Check the audioworld.com review of the ELS system. It beats everything including the LOGIC7 of the BMW and Mercedes and the BOSE system in the Cadillac CTS as well as the highly acclaimed system in the Lexus, the Mark Levinson.
The TL rules, the others follow!
Comprehensive in some sense but definitely NOT the whole story. ANY safety ratings which do not consider braking and handling--that is, *active* safety, or the vehicle's ability to avoid an accident in the first place--don't tell the whole story.
What you want to know is, if I drive this car, how likely is it that I'm injured? Crash test ratings tell you something about the probability of injury given a crash, but to get the probability of injury, you also need to know the odds of a crash in the first place. Obviously the driver is a critical component of this, but the vehicle matters a great deal, too. An alert driver has a far better chance of avoiding an accident in a good-handling and fast-braking car than in some lumbering hulk. The provided ratings don't take that into account. For example, there's no way a cow like the Uplander is actually safer than the incredibly nimble RX-8.
That said, I wouldn't dispute that the TL is a very safe car. 60-0 braking in 123 feet and 0.87g on the skidpad (R&T numbers) are very good. But I highly doubt the Nissan Quest is actually safer than the TL (as per the informedforlife ratings) because the TL driver can avoid things the Quest driver has no hope of getting out of.
(On a side note, those "comprehensive" ratings include weighting for the crash results for rear passengers. If you never have rear passengers, why on earth should that get any weight in the final rating?)
Oh, sorry, we now return you to your regularly-scheduled discussion of the TL vs. the Passat. Is the Passat even "average" in reliability these days?
The cow (Uplander) is more likely to live after being hit than the cat (RX8). SQUISH :sick:
I don't buy your line of safety reasoning.
These dedicated discussions are not the right place for this extended debate.
Thanks.
I got the 06 non-navi auto TL with end of year savings. My lease on my 03 Accord EXV6 was up. I was between the new 06 Accord V6 or the TL. The Accord V6 is a great car too, but the TL has those little extras that made the difference for me. After test driving it, I got hooked on the TL. The tire pressure monitor was a nice addition to the 06 line-up.
This car rocks! :shades:
While it may be the case that you're more likely to avoid injury when you have an accident in the Uplander (though not by much--the Uplander doesn't actually have stellar crash ratings), you're much less likely to get into an accident in the first place when driving the RX-8.
Some 30-35% of auto fatalities come from SINGLE-VEHICLE accidents. It's *not* just about collisions.
Blind drivers.
I've had endless fun with this little joke. I had to explain it to my wife and she felt rather foolish. She tells the story to other people, though. Occasionally, I'll speak into the watch when we're in the house, "what time is dinner?".
Give it a try and see how many people you can fool. It's too easy with kids.
Pinot44
The TSX was updated for 2006.
Honda's in trouble with the Accord. Sales were off 30% in December. How can the company that built the awesome looking Civic have a problem on their hands with Accord? New Camry and Altima coming out, and Sonata nipping at all of em's heels. C'mon Honda. Kick it up.
I would think the newer TLs ('04 and later) have more highly tuned engines with higher compression ratios. The negative effects of regular gas would be more pronounced.
This may be an apples to oranges comparison.
IMO, that is a VERY BAD "general" rule. My Acura and Porsche service managers agree. Almost all high performance engines have an knock sensor that will adjust the timing to compensate for low octane gas. By the time you hear a ping, you have so overstressed the adjustments that they are no longer able to compensate. That's unlikely to occur in the US where regular is still 87-88 octane. BUT, you can be robbing the engine of peak performance and efficiency long before you ever hear a ping.
There seems to be some disagreement - even among experts - as to whether consistently running a high performance, high compression engine on lower octane fuel has more serious long term consequences than loss of fuel efficiency or performance. I've read some reports that the constant forced timing adjustments can lead to more serious engine problems, carbon build up, etc. I've seen other reports that put that probablity as relatively low. But I haven't seen a legitimate credible report that states absolutely no long term problems from "under-octaning" a high performance engine.
Anecdotal evidence that "I'm doing fine at 115k miles" is, in my opinion, like the guy who eats a pound of bacon every morning claiming it's OK because he hasn't had a heart attack. Yet. Maybe never will. But that doesn't make it a healthy practice.
P.S. I get 29-30+ mpg out of my 2004 TL at 70-75+ mph on the highway. And it is considerably more powerful/quicker than the 99 TL. I suspect it would suffer more noticable drops in efficiency and performance on regular.
Women -- very good. Cars -- not so good, but getting better! :P
Anybody out there who's reasonably large and owns this car? Just how big/small is it in the real world? I realize people are tall in different ways etc., but I'd like to know if I should keep the car on my short list or not. The driver room is really the only hesitation I have on this at the moment (I know, I should just go "try it on", but I would hate to get there and "not fit!"). Also, does anyone know what kind of pricing to expect on a TL in the late spring time frame? Will they typically sell around invoice at that time of year (current year models)? I see that people sometimes get good deals now but I hate negotiating so if near-invoice is more common at that time that would up the TL's chances as well.
Appreciate any info!
The new 06 seats have a very short bottom cushion similar to what you usually see in Toyotas. I sat in some of the 05 Acuras, and they still have the longer seats. With the shorter seats you feel like your sitting closer to the seat edge.
The new seats are very stiff and not as soft as those in the 05 TSX or RL. This may address the complaints people had about the leather getting wrinkled but now its at the sacrifice of comfort.
The 2006 TL now uses fixed head rests. We have a 04-05 TL here at work and it has the 05 RL style head rests.
If there haven't been many changes in the 06, I would recommend checking out the 05 models. Something to consider.
I haven't checked out an '06.
'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...)
Overall, the Avalon and 300 might be bigger. When they started Avalon was a bench up-sized Camry and the 300 was a mid-size like the TL. Both may now be bigger than their original size.
What I would look closely at is the footwell space and the dead pedal position. They seem to have a big real world affect on comfortable real space. Manufacturer's measurements don't always seem comparable in my experience.
The new TL also has improved shoulder space.
Being tall what you also should test is entry and exit, although the doors are good size and open wide, you might have to duck more than you find comfortable to get inside.
Also for reference, my wife has a cousin who bought a(now defunct) Acura CL partly because it's 2-door configuration worked better with his 6 foot 350 pound size.than his other options.
Over all I think you shouldn't delist the TL until you try it for size.
With my commute, my whole salary would go to the gas companies in one of those things. Definitely cars only for now... and one that can handle a lot of mileage without falling apart or losing *all* it's value.