The '06/'07 RL vs. '06/'07/'08 TL 6MT question...
11-09-2009, 09:54 AM
#1
Intermediate
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Age: 45
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The '06/'07 RL vs. '06/'07/'08 TL 6MT question...
I am currently awaiting the word from my insurance company on whether or not they are going to total my damaged TL. I am curious though, is anyone able to cite any specific benefits provided by the '08 TL-S that were not in the '07 TL-S? I've even read a post that has me wondering if an '06 TL 6MT wouldn't be sufficient. Personally, I prefer the solid red tails on the 04-06l although I am sure I could change those out if I had to. Anyhow, here's the review:
http://www1.epinions.com/review/2007...t_278522793604
The quote that got my attention:
The bottom line is that I am a fan of a manual TL. My wife is a fan of the RL. We're both open to all models, though. Right now, I'm essentially considering an 06 MT6 TL or 07/08 Type S TL or 06 Tech RL or 07 Tech RL. The thing I like about the 06 RL is that you get the CMBS and ACC with the tech package where in the 07 it is an option and harder to find. I also believe that this review of the 07 RL says things that concern me:
http://www.edmunds.com/acura/rl/2007/review.html
The quote that got my attention:
It's strange, because on one hand people feel that the 286 horsepower of the TL-S may almost be overpowered for a FWD manual and say that you only get benefit of the extra HP in the automatic. On the other hand, they say that the almost identical engine in the heavier AWD RL doesn't provide enough low-end torque. You never know what to believe.
Thanks! [Posting in both the 2G RL and 3G TL forums for good measure]
http://www1.epinions.com/review/2007...t_278522793604
The quote that got my attention:
During my back-to-back test drives, the larger engine feels moderately more energetic throughout its range, but when hitched to the six-speed manual the 3.2 is far from a slouch. So I'm not seeing a huge gain here. I suspect the 3.5 makes a larger difference with the automatic, as with that transmission the 3.2 feels a bit weak off the line.
The bottom line is that I am a fan of a manual TL. My wife is a fan of the RL. We're both open to all models, though. Right now, I'm essentially considering an 06 MT6 TL or 07/08 Type S TL or 06 Tech RL or 07 Tech RL. The thing I like about the 06 RL is that you get the CMBS and ACC with the tech package where in the 07 it is an option and harder to find. I also believe that this review of the 07 RL says things that concern me:
http://www.edmunds.com/acura/rl/2007/review.html
The quote that got my attention:
The main culprit for that lack of thrills is the 290-horsepower 3.5-liter SOHC 24-valve V6 powering the RL. By any standard this is a sweet-natured engine that builds power seamlessly, with no apparent transition when the VTEC variable valve timing system engages and it operates in virtual silence, but the RL weighs in at just over 2 tons and there's no way 256-pound feet of peak torque is going to shove that much mass around with authority. Also, unlike many direct competitors in this segment that have moved on to six- or even seven-speed automatic transmissions, the RL still makes due with five and the paddle shifters are more a distraction than a performance enhancement. It could use those additional gears even more than its V8-engorged competitors.
It's strange, because on one hand people feel that the 286 horsepower of the TL-S may almost be overpowered for a FWD manual and say that you only get benefit of the extra HP in the automatic. On the other hand, they say that the almost identical engine in the heavier AWD RL doesn't provide enough low-end torque. You never know what to believe.
Thanks! [Posting in both the 2G RL and 3G TL forums for good measure]
11-09-2009, 06:57 PM
#3
Torch & Pitchfork Posse
Apples and Oranges.
Different vehicles designed and tuned for different driving experiences.
Many features, equipment and dimension similarities,,,,but very different in most every aspect, throttle tip in an tranny types are just the start.
Several here are former TL owners, and can best explain the differences by the fact we now drive RLs.
Short of metric comparisons and semantics over other's opinions....just go drive the two vehicles and decide which appeals to you.
Different vehicles designed and tuned for different driving experiences.
Many features, equipment and dimension similarities,,,,but very different in most every aspect, throttle tip in an tranny types are just the start.
Several here are former TL owners, and can best explain the differences by the fact we now drive RLs.
Short of metric comparisons and semantics over other's opinions....just go drive the two vehicles and decide which appeals to you.
11-10-2009, 11:43 AM
#5
Senior Moderator
As usual, Tampa hits the nail on the head. I was also a 3G TL owner who migrated up to the 2G RL 
You just have to drive them to understand the difference, and there are many differences.
You just have to drive them to understand the difference, and there are many differences.
11-10-2009, 12:18 PM
#6
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Cleveland, OH
Age: 43
Posts: 315
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
6 Posts
I looked at a 08 TL-Type S manual and took it from the dealer for a day, what fun! My wife said I wasn't allowed to buy a car that I had to call four of my friends over to take them on rides. You get a lot more for your money with the RL. After driving an RL for a year and trying a TL Type-S for two days I went back to another RL that cost $4k less and had only 4k more miles.
11-10-2009, 01:16 PM
#7
Intermediate
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Age: 45
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting. Yeah, in the other thread I shared the following (in case it helps profile me better):
I live in Northern Virginia (D.C. Metro area), so snow is an infrequent guest. I suppose there is the occasional Nor'easter, but it's really rare and temperatures don't usually hold below freezing for two consecutive weeks in a row (i.e. the snow doesn't stay long). I do, however, enjoy long road trips throughout the year and could see myself driving purposefully to colder/snowier climates. It's really strange that the RL doesn't offer hardly any increased room to the TL, and it all seems to be a matter of fit, finish, and AWD. I am intrigued by the CMBS/ACC features in the RL, but tend to enjoy the more "hands-on" driving experience that the TL-S offers.
I'm parting with a 2004 NBP 6MT. I'd have to say that the '07 TL-S that I drove seemed to be a smoother shifter and throatier in the low-end. My smoother shifting comment comes even after the GM Syncromesh fluid swap in the '04, which was definitely an improvement. The '07 also seems to rev a bit higher on average. For all I know, that may have just been a product of how I was using the accelerator in the '04 and not being used to handling the additional 30+ HP offered in the '07 TL-S.
I know that my comments may show my bias or preference to the TL-S, but I am really trying to keep an open mind for my wife; who really seems to enjoy the added elegance of the RL. I was even impressed by a 2006 BMW X5 4.4i that I drove, but I probably shouldn't mention that here. I know there's a regular here that went from a TL to an RL to a CTS-V; neuronbob. I've thought much of his review: https://acurazine.com/forums/2g-rl-2005-2012-76/test-drive-2-rl-vs-tl-impressions-long-498203/ and wondered if that is a similar predicament to my own. Somehow, though, I still feel that there is a handling compromise that you forfeit in the RL. It seems counter-intuitive that the SH-AWD car feels as if it doesn't handle as well as the FWD TL-S, but it just doesn't. This is a tough decision.
I live in Northern Virginia (D.C. Metro area), so snow is an infrequent guest. I suppose there is the occasional Nor'easter, but it's really rare and temperatures don't usually hold below freezing for two consecutive weeks in a row (i.e. the snow doesn't stay long). I do, however, enjoy long road trips throughout the year and could see myself driving purposefully to colder/snowier climates. It's really strange that the RL doesn't offer hardly any increased room to the TL, and it all seems to be a matter of fit, finish, and AWD. I am intrigued by the CMBS/ACC features in the RL, but tend to enjoy the more "hands-on" driving experience that the TL-S offers.
I'm parting with a 2004 NBP 6MT. I'd have to say that the '07 TL-S that I drove seemed to be a smoother shifter and throatier in the low-end. My smoother shifting comment comes even after the GM Syncromesh fluid swap in the '04, which was definitely an improvement. The '07 also seems to rev a bit higher on average. For all I know, that may have just been a product of how I was using the accelerator in the '04 and not being used to handling the additional 30+ HP offered in the '07 TL-S.
I know that my comments may show my bias or preference to the TL-S, but I am really trying to keep an open mind for my wife; who really seems to enjoy the added elegance of the RL. I was even impressed by a 2006 BMW X5 4.4i that I drove, but I probably shouldn't mention that here. I know there's a regular here that went from a TL to an RL to a CTS-V; neuronbob. I've thought much of his review: https://acurazine.com/forums/2g-rl-2005-2012-76/test-drive-2-rl-vs-tl-impressions-long-498203/ and wondered if that is a similar predicament to my own. Somehow, though, I still feel that there is a handling compromise that you forfeit in the RL. It seems counter-intuitive that the SH-AWD car feels as if it doesn't handle as well as the FWD TL-S, but it just doesn't. This is a tough decision.
Trending Topics
11-10-2009, 01:28 PM
#8
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Cleveland, OH
Age: 43
Posts: 315
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
6 Posts
The TL-S that I drove had the summer tires as all manuals do and it did not handle better than my RL in my mind. Much higher limits in the RL where the TL-S understeered relentlessly, don't get me wrong it was lighter and easier to place in a corner but couldn't hang on as long or at as high of speeds as my RL. Though I do have 255/40ZR19 Kumho Ecsta SPT on the car right now which helps. That being said it was a lot more fun blasting through those gears. My wife said the RL makes more sense and she was right. Ask to take a used RL on someones lot for an overnight. Go Indians! Keep LeBron in Cleveland! OhioRocks!
11-10-2009, 02:21 PM
#9
Intermediate
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Age: 45
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Haha! Don't pay too much mind to my nickname; I spent a number of years in Ohio and it wasn't in Cleveland. The tires on my TL are the Bridgestone Potenza RE960AS Pole Position. They're really fantastic. I've seen a variety of comments about the TL's tendency to under-steer and I'm almost ready to chalk that up to the driver. In my 3 years as a TL owner, I've rarely encountered much under-steer.
11-10-2009, 03:12 PM
#10
Senior Moderator
I know there's a regular here that went from a TL to an RL to a CTS-V; neuronbob. I've thought much of his review: https://acurazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=498203 and wondered if that is a similar predicament to my own. Somehow, though, I still feel that there is a handling compromise that you forfeit in the RL. It seems counter-intuitive that the SH-AWD car feels as if it doesn't handle as well as the FWD TL-S, but it just doesn't. This is a tough decision.
I have two words for you: A-Spec suspension. That and hi-po tires were the key to my enjoyment of the RL. With those things and SH-AWD, you can get away with stuff in the curves that would wreck a TL. In addition, A-Spec gives up remarkably little of the ride quality.
PS, the last paragraph of my linked review couldn't have been more wrong. Acura sure disappointed in the new TL . YUCK! It's a great car with an awful exterior.
11-10-2009, 03:21 PM
#11
Torch & Pitchfork Posse
Size does not make a better car.
Speed does not make a better car.
0.5g does not make a better car.
What makes a better car is understanding what appeals to your taste and finding the appropriate match.
I think the auto enthusiast community is subject to many misnomers.
One is the best car is what other people think is the best car. But I have yet to see those opinionated people writing the check or passing out cash.
Another is 'performance'. MOST drivers are not F1 drivers. MOST drivers do not care what a car's limits are...they will never approach them. Most drivers DO care how a car behaves in their typical driving style and experience. Safety issues aside, those comparos so many banter and feud over are moot to most drivers. 'Performance' is not an attribute that must be bested with every metric. A best performing car is one that exhibits the attributes that pleases the driver, is utilized by the driver and gives the driver confidence and peace of mind in most driving experiences.
One could argue an F1, LeMans or NASCAR vehicle are the best performers. I would also argue I would NOT want to drive one for anything but a track experience. A best performing car is not, IMHO one that will punish me on my daily drive. A TL may perform better than an RL is SOME situations, but that meant I had to deal with compromised comfort, vibration, noise and harshness I find below my favored 'performance' characteristics. IMHO, the RL is a better performer with not only driving metrics, but doing so with refinement, ease, serenity, smoothness and construction because it pleases my tastes, my expectations, and instills confidence in my driving experience. I would argue the TL that plowed into the concrete embankment while trying to tail my RL around a 45 degree tight sweeping turn was not a better performing car. My RL did so without white knuckles and a smoothness that betrayed the TL driver.
Aching over size, speed and grip variances would make me think that every car must be exactly the same...which they are not. The mixtures of car attributes are seemingly endless. But that is what allows us to find what appeals to ourselves and not what others think we should drive and buy.
Speed does not make a better car.
0.5g does not make a better car.
What makes a better car is understanding what appeals to your taste and finding the appropriate match.
I think the auto enthusiast community is subject to many misnomers.
One is the best car is what other people think is the best car. But I have yet to see those opinionated people writing the check or passing out cash.
Another is 'performance'. MOST drivers are not F1 drivers. MOST drivers do not care what a car's limits are...they will never approach them. Most drivers DO care how a car behaves in their typical driving style and experience. Safety issues aside, those comparos so many banter and feud over are moot to most drivers. 'Performance' is not an attribute that must be bested with every metric. A best performing car is one that exhibits the attributes that pleases the driver, is utilized by the driver and gives the driver confidence and peace of mind in most driving experiences.
One could argue an F1, LeMans or NASCAR vehicle are the best performers. I would also argue I would NOT want to drive one for anything but a track experience. A best performing car is not, IMHO one that will punish me on my daily drive. A TL may perform better than an RL is SOME situations, but that meant I had to deal with compromised comfort, vibration, noise and harshness I find below my favored 'performance' characteristics. IMHO, the RL is a better performer with not only driving metrics, but doing so with refinement, ease, serenity, smoothness and construction because it pleases my tastes, my expectations, and instills confidence in my driving experience. I would argue the TL that plowed into the concrete embankment while trying to tail my RL around a 45 degree tight sweeping turn was not a better performing car. My RL did so without white knuckles and a smoothness that betrayed the TL driver.
Aching over size, speed and grip variances would make me think that every car must be exactly the same...which they are not. The mixtures of car attributes are seemingly endless. But that is what allows us to find what appeals to ourselves and not what others think we should drive and buy.
11-12-2009, 02:29 PM
#12
Intermediate
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Age: 45
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe my problem is that I will really, really miss the manual transmission. There's something about going from a 6 speed manual to a 5 speed automatic that's messing with me. If the older model had the sport mode found in the '10, I think I would feel a bit less conflicted. At least I can get the A-Spec, I suppose.
BTW, TampaRL, that was a well written and thought out comment. I appreciate your candor.
BTW, TampaRL, that was a well written and thought out comment. I appreciate your candor.
11-12-2009, 03:42 PM
#13
Torch & Pitchfork Posse
Better to be clear what it is you desire before paralyzing yourself over which car is the better fit.
If you cannot be clear with yourself with what you want, car shopping is the worst thing you can do with your money.
If you cannot be clear with yourself with what you want, car shopping is the worst thing you can do with your money.
11-14-2009, 01:47 PM
#16
Maybe my problem is that I will really, really miss the manual transmission. There's something about going from a 6 speed manual to a 5 speed automatic that's messing with me. If the older model had the sport mode found in the '10, I think I would feel a bit less conflicted. At least I can get the A-Spec, I suppose.
BTW, TampaRL, that was a well written and thought out comment. I appreciate your candor.
BTW, TampaRL, that was a well written and thought out comment. I appreciate your candor.
it's next to impossible to get "it all" in one car. there are always compromises. you can get an RL, add aspec and you will have a pretty sporty driving luxury car. you can get a TL-S manual and have a sports sedan that is pretty luxurious - but neither will fully give you "everything".
i drove the TL-S quite a few times. Honeslty, if I had to have ONE car that "did it all" I think the TL-S is a pretty good car. there were thingsa bout it that bothered me..FWD was the big bother tome. get on teh gas and it sounds great, it goes pretty darn fast, but i would feel the steering wheel wiggle on me and it just annoyed me. but overall - it's an awesome car. if you have to have "that" kidn of car, and want a bit more speed, more handling, and more "status" look at a BMW 335i and you can't go wrong. you can get smokin' deals on CPO models. add a vishnu chip to it and you have 400hp and will be so fast your head will spin.
OR you can dow hat I did - if half of you wants a sporty car and half of you want sa luxury car - get htem both! depending on yoru budget, you can have "it all". get a CPO RL for $25-30k and then pickup a used S2000 for about $15k, maybe even 10k. I bought a used boxster and a CPO RL. the boxster is not cheap to maintain...but you can get them for under $15k and jus tlike the S2000 - the old ones look almost identical to the new ones. find a well kept example, put it in teh garage, and drive it on Friday and on weekends and get a nice sports car "fix" when you need it.
a TL-S will NEVER give you teh true fun/pleasure that you will get from something like an S2000 or Boxster. Period. Id on't care what mods you do to it. and the TL-S will never be as luxurious as the RL.
the TL-S is a GREAT sports sedan, and if I coudl only have ONE car, I honeslty think I might have selected a TL-S over the RL...at this poitn in my like, something sporty is still something I want - and if I had to have ONE car, it would have to have a sporty edge to it. the RL, doesn't really have it - at least to me. it's an amazing car, but to me, it feels more like a big heavy luxury ride...very comfy, very quiet...very luxurious, maybe not a car with the pedegre off a BMW 5 series or M/B E class...but given the test drives that I had in those cars -teh RL is right there with them in terms of what you get, how it drives, and quality/fit/finish. for a lot less money. but it's not a sports sedan. i know you can aspec, biger wheels, and make it handle really well...but you can't make it into a real sporty car..not by my standards. you can make it better..but you can't change ti's overall nature and you can't udno the fact that it is HEAVY. you coudl likely add the supercharger that one member did here, and a bone stock 335 woudl still blow your doors off...
if you want a super sports sedan, and only wnat one car, get the TL-S if you want an Acura. get a 335i if you have more money to burn. if you want to "have it all" - get two cars. it's more affordable than you think. you can grab used roadsters for cheap now - people are unloading their toys, and if you have the funds, you can get smokin deals.
figure out what you really want/need. test drive a roadster and see how you like it. if you really really enjoy it - you might settle on a lesser "daily driver" car to get the "toy" car you like/love.
good luck. in the end, remember, it's just a car. buy it, drive it a while..if you get sick of it, sell it and buy anothe rone. it's not like you're getting married to it. yeah, yhou ahve transaction costs, taxes, and things you can't recoup..but you don't ahve to live wtih it forever.
11-15-2009, 11:23 PM
#17
Proboscis-free zone
Another former 3G TL driver here. Tampa nailed it. You have to go with what floats your boat.
The RL--or LEGEND as we wish Acura would call it--is classy, serene, extremely competent, comfortable and authoritative. It is capable of kicking booty when required, yet it is not a muscle car. My wife calls it my "grown-up car."
I would never go back to a TL. Especially not the butt-ugly current version!!
Hope that helps.
The RL--or LEGEND as we wish Acura would call it--is classy, serene, extremely competent, comfortable and authoritative. It is capable of kicking booty when required, yet it is not a muscle car. My wife calls it my "grown-up car."
I would never go back to a TL. Especially not the butt-ugly current version!!
Hope that helps.
11-24-2009, 12:03 AM
#18
Intermediate
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Age: 45
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was posting to a new thread and almost forgot to update this one. I just wanted to reiterate my appreciation for all of the input. I wound up taking the...
RL!
I somehow found an '06 Meteor Silver Metallic (pale blue) with Ebony interior and CMBS/ACC last week. It has 49k miles on it and I haggled them down to $22,000 (which I think is a solid price). Clean CARFAX, 1 owner, with no leather or clear coat issues. I may have lucked out! Purchased the warranty the very next day, so now I am good for the 7 years/99.75k miles. The only thing I can't figure out is why someone would have bought the '06 CMBS/ACC without the backup camera? Lame.
I definitely would have liked to read the following thread when I was still deciding:
https://acurazine.com/forums/2g-rl-2005-2012-76/sh-awd-sets-bad-example-500489/
I could still see myself buying an '07/'08 TL-S when my wife takes this baby over. I just dunno how I can go back to FWD. It's a real shame they never made a 6MT AWD TL in the old body style. Maybe someone will come up with a decent body kit for the '10 TL 6MT or Acura will do a Type-S of it next year.
As hard as I try, I just cannot get into the 4th Gen body style.
I'm also already in love with ACC. I just wish I could program it to follow a bit closer than it does. If you leave the space it wants to, even on the shortest setting, you will find yourself cut off constantly in a city with "real" traffic.
RL!
I somehow found an '06 Meteor Silver Metallic (pale blue) with Ebony interior and CMBS/ACC last week. It has 49k miles on it and I haggled them down to $22,000 (which I think is a solid price). Clean CARFAX, 1 owner, with no leather or clear coat issues. I may have lucked out! Purchased the warranty the very next day, so now I am good for the 7 years/99.75k miles. The only thing I can't figure out is why someone would have bought the '06 CMBS/ACC without the backup camera? Lame.
I definitely would have liked to read the following thread when I was still deciding:
https://acurazine.com/forums/2g-rl-2005-2012-76/sh-awd-sets-bad-example-500489/
I could still see myself buying an '07/'08 TL-S when my wife takes this baby over. I just dunno how I can go back to FWD. It's a real shame they never made a 6MT AWD TL in the old body style. Maybe someone will come up with a decent body kit for the '10 TL 6MT or Acura will do a Type-S of it next year.
As hard as I try, I just cannot get into the 4th Gen body style.I'm also already in love with ACC. I just wish I could program it to follow a bit closer than it does. If you leave the space it wants to, even on the shortest setting, you will find yourself cut off constantly in a city with "real" traffic.
11-24-2009, 09:36 PM
#19
Senior Moderator
Congrats!
The rearview camera is a dealer-installed option on the 2006 RL. It costs just south of $700 to install it, which I highly recommend.
Meteor Silver + Ebony interior= great combo!
The rearview camera is a dealer-installed option on the 2006 RL. It costs just south of $700 to install it, which I highly recommend.
Meteor Silver + Ebony interior=
great combo!
11-26-2009, 11:24 AM
#20
2012 Cadillac CTS-V Coupe
Size does not make a better car.
Speed does not make a better car.
0.5g does not make a better car.
What makes a better car is understanding what appeals to your taste and finding the appropriate match.
I think the auto enthusiast community is subject to many misnomers.
One is the best car is what other people think is the best car. But I have yet to see those opinionated people writing the check or passing out cash.
Another is 'performance'. MOST drivers are not F1 drivers. MOST drivers do not care what a car's limits are...they will never approach them. Most drivers DO care how a car behaves in their typical driving style and experience. Safety issues aside, those comparos so many banter and feud over are moot to most drivers. 'Performance' is not an attribute that must be bested with every metric. A best performing car is one that exhibits the attributes that pleases the driver, is utilized by the driver and gives the driver confidence and peace of mind in most driving experiences.
One could argue an F1, LeMans or NASCAR vehicle are the best performers. I would also argue I would NOT want to drive one for anything but a track experience. A best performing car is not, IMHO one that will punish me on my daily drive. A TL may perform better than an RL is SOME situations, but that meant I had to deal with compromised comfort, vibration, noise and harshness I find below my favored 'performance' characteristics. IMHO, the RL is a better performer with not only driving metrics, but doing so with refinement, ease, serenity, smoothness and construction because it pleases my tastes, my expectations, and instills confidence in my driving experience. I would argue the TL that plowed into the concrete embankment while trying to tail my RL around a 45 degree tight sweeping turn was not a better performing car. My RL did so without white knuckles and a smoothness that betrayed the TL driver.
Aching over size, speed and grip variances would make me think that every car must be exactly the same...which they are not. The mixtures of car attributes are seemingly endless. But that is what allows us to find what appeals to ourselves and not what others think we should drive and buy.
Speed does not make a better car.
0.5g does not make a better car.
What makes a better car is understanding what appeals to your taste and finding the appropriate match.
I think the auto enthusiast community is subject to many misnomers.
One is the best car is what other people think is the best car. But I have yet to see those opinionated people writing the check or passing out cash.
Another is 'performance'. MOST drivers are not F1 drivers. MOST drivers do not care what a car's limits are...they will never approach them. Most drivers DO care how a car behaves in their typical driving style and experience. Safety issues aside, those comparos so many banter and feud over are moot to most drivers. 'Performance' is not an attribute that must be bested with every metric. A best performing car is one that exhibits the attributes that pleases the driver, is utilized by the driver and gives the driver confidence and peace of mind in most driving experiences.
One could argue an F1, LeMans or NASCAR vehicle are the best performers. I would also argue I would NOT want to drive one for anything but a track experience. A best performing car is not, IMHO one that will punish me on my daily drive. A TL may perform better than an RL is SOME situations, but that meant I had to deal with compromised comfort, vibration, noise and harshness I find below my favored 'performance' characteristics. IMHO, the RL is a better performer with not only driving metrics, but doing so with refinement, ease, serenity, smoothness and construction because it pleases my tastes, my expectations, and instills confidence in my driving experience. I would argue the TL that plowed into the concrete embankment while trying to tail my RL around a 45 degree tight sweeping turn was not a better performing car. My RL did so without white knuckles and a smoothness that betrayed the TL driver.
Aching over size, speed and grip variances would make me think that every car must be exactly the same...which they are not. The mixtures of car attributes are seemingly endless. But that is what allows us to find what appeals to ourselves and not what others think we should drive and buy.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Zonian22
Member Cars for Sale
3
11-14-2015 01:20 PM
