07 Rl??
06-11-2006, 08:12 PM
#81
2012 Cadillac CTS-V Coupe
Originally Posted by dirkpitt
From an extremely reliable source. The new RL, will in fact have options, as noted in another post. Same engine, NAV optional, SP also option, AWD option, others not defined. The target MSRP for entry is supposed to be around $ 42K.
And so it goes with Honda.
And so it goes with Honda.
Well then they're going to have to offer more than to get $50K.
While the sticker pice may say $49k and change, the fact of the matter is that you can already get the RL for ~$42K. Knowing that, why would a consumer pay $42K for a de-contented version? So what are they then going to do, discount it more and start dipping into TL territory?
So AWD is optional.... NAV is optional... unless the base RL will be a RWD model, what's going to differntiate it from a TL? Not much from where I stand.
06-11-2006, 10:46 PM
#82
Three Wheelin'
Acura will probably offer the $42K MSRP RL for the following reasons:
1) To shut the Acura dealerships up, since they keep bitching that the RL costs too much for them to sell.
2) To be able to advertise that the base MSRP is lower than their competition, even if you are getting a car that is very close to the TL for that price.
3) To lessen the price gap between the TL and the RL, since Acura customers keep wondering why the current gap is so large and the sales people can't seem to explain it.
As a side note, I just finished watching Battlestar Galatica on Universal HD. During the show, there was an ad for the Acura TL and the soon to be replaced Acura MDX. Why no commercial for the RL? Does Acura actually want to sell this car? Sometimes I think Acura resents the fact that Honda corporate in Japan is making Acura in North American sell a car that was not designed in the US like the TL and MDX.
1) To shut the Acura dealerships up, since they keep bitching that the RL costs too much for them to sell.
2) To be able to advertise that the base MSRP is lower than their competition, even if you are getting a car that is very close to the TL for that price.
3) To lessen the price gap between the TL and the RL, since Acura customers keep wondering why the current gap is so large and the sales people can't seem to explain it.
As a side note, I just finished watching Battlestar Galatica on Universal HD. During the show, there was an ad for the Acura TL and the soon to be replaced Acura MDX. Why no commercial for the RL? Does Acura actually want to sell this car? Sometimes I think Acura resents the fact that Honda corporate in Japan is making Acura in North American sell a car that was not designed in the US like the TL and MDX.
06-12-2006, 12:12 AM
#83
4th Gear
Join Date: May 2006
Age: 59
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This has been an interesting thread from my perspective as a prospective RL buyer. Clearly the RL is a nice vehicle, but also it needs some changes in order to better compete in the marketplace. In my case, I've been cross-shopping it against the Infinity M35 Sport and here is my opinion, FWIW on several points I think are important.
1. Styling. Over time, I think the RL's styling is growing on me. It's smart without being overwhelming. That still doesn't mean that it's enough to get noticed in the marketplace. But if you desire a smart looking vehicle without the "look at me" attitude, the RL works. Interestingly enough some other cars sell a lot better that have less successful styling. We can debate BMW's current 5 series for days, but I'm thinking more about the Cadillac STS. As a long time owner of Caddies, I think GM really screwed the pooch on this car. It looks to me like an unfinished design exercise (probably true since Bub Lutz asked for last minute changes). But I see a veritable fleet of STS's around here versus the handful of 2nd gen RL's I've ever seen in Nashville.
2. Drivetrain. I've never understood why Acura thinks it can compete in the RWD and RWD/AWD luxury market with FWD and FWD/AWD products. In the case of the RL, SH-AWD is a great technical achievement (better than Mercedes, Cadillac, and Infiniti efforts) that has to spend most of its time overcoming the physics of a FWD-based vehicle. Just think how great it would be with a RWD-biased design. Even Cadillac figured out that FWD cars are not the state of the art for overall balanced performance. For a company that used to make all FWD cars, they now make only one. Acura could learn from this.
My other drivetrain beefs have to do with the tires and suspension. I can't think of how many times I've read about bad choices in rubber that Acura seems to make with their base models. The run-flats offered in the tech package are better but still not the sport option I want. The A-spec seems to be a bit over-the-top in terms of suspension harshness as I have read (although I've not driven one personally). And I still can't understand why A-spec is a dealer-installed option versus a complete package from the factory. The factory is much more likely to get this right versus the dealer and frankly, nobody else does it this way.
3. Engine. Honda's MO at this point has been to squeeze the most out of a smaller package. They have had a resonable amount of success in this area (the original NSX comes to mind). But the U.S. market dictates over-the-top performance, even if it's not necessary. Yeah, you don't really need a V8 but everyone makes one these days in this class. Hell even Volvo offers one now (for the 2007 S80) and those customers were used to buying 4 and 5 cylinder large sedans for years. Not offering a choice of engines in this class of vehicle tells me that Acura doesn't understand it's customers or how the North American market operates. Even at $3 a gallon gas, this segment is in a horsepower/torque war and Acura isn't quite winning this game.
BTW, a hybrid option might be nice (a la Lexus) but Acura has other fundemental issues to fix first.
4. Interior. In many ways, I think that Acura got this part right. First, I shopped the RL since it's one of only two cars in the class that can handle my 40" inseam legs (the Infiniti M is the other). I do think the seats are a tad soft for a sporting ride....maybe there could be a sport model with different seats. In my opinion, I thought the interior was better pulled together than what I saw from Infiniti. On the surface the Infiniti was very pretty but if you looked more closely, joins between different points on the dash didn't seem as seamless as it could be, plastics were good but not great, and some cheap switchgear has been borrowed from the G35 that I could care less about.
5. Marketing. It's not like the RL isn't marketed, but it might as well not be. I've seen RL ads, but not during expensive high profile events (like sporting events). In order to get sales, you have to go to where the customers are. And I just don't see that with current Acura marketing.
6. Pricing. Ironically the lack of RL buyers is making there be very good deals out there for the loaded RL that is the standard car. But those few buyers in a hypercompetitve segment has a big downside: resale value. It's that resale value problem that is sandbagging lease deals. BMW leases are cheaper since resale value for their cars is higher....you're paying for less of the vehicle for the life of the lease. Acura artificially manipulated the resale value of the vehicle for it's May 2006 lease program, but they can't do that forever. Unfortunately resale is one of those thins that's harder to fix. Acura needs to sell more cars and make it a popular choice in order to solve this issue.
Anyway, I'm still not completely conviced one way or the other between the RL or the M35. I'm going to have to break both vehicles down in a pro/con chart in order to get an idea.
1. Styling. Over time, I think the RL's styling is growing on me. It's smart without being overwhelming. That still doesn't mean that it's enough to get noticed in the marketplace. But if you desire a smart looking vehicle without the "look at me" attitude, the RL works. Interestingly enough some other cars sell a lot better that have less successful styling. We can debate BMW's current 5 series for days, but I'm thinking more about the Cadillac STS. As a long time owner of Caddies, I think GM really screwed the pooch on this car. It looks to me like an unfinished design exercise (probably true since Bub Lutz asked for last minute changes). But I see a veritable fleet of STS's around here versus the handful of 2nd gen RL's I've ever seen in Nashville.
2. Drivetrain. I've never understood why Acura thinks it can compete in the RWD and RWD/AWD luxury market with FWD and FWD/AWD products. In the case of the RL, SH-AWD is a great technical achievement (better than Mercedes, Cadillac, and Infiniti efforts) that has to spend most of its time overcoming the physics of a FWD-based vehicle. Just think how great it would be with a RWD-biased design. Even Cadillac figured out that FWD cars are not the state of the art for overall balanced performance. For a company that used to make all FWD cars, they now make only one. Acura could learn from this.
My other drivetrain beefs have to do with the tires and suspension. I can't think of how many times I've read about bad choices in rubber that Acura seems to make with their base models. The run-flats offered in the tech package are better but still not the sport option I want. The A-spec seems to be a bit over-the-top in terms of suspension harshness as I have read (although I've not driven one personally). And I still can't understand why A-spec is a dealer-installed option versus a complete package from the factory. The factory is much more likely to get this right versus the dealer and frankly, nobody else does it this way.
3. Engine. Honda's MO at this point has been to squeeze the most out of a smaller package. They have had a resonable amount of success in this area (the original NSX comes to mind). But the U.S. market dictates over-the-top performance, even if it's not necessary. Yeah, you don't really need a V8 but everyone makes one these days in this class. Hell even Volvo offers one now (for the 2007 S80) and those customers were used to buying 4 and 5 cylinder large sedans for years. Not offering a choice of engines in this class of vehicle tells me that Acura doesn't understand it's customers or how the North American market operates. Even at $3 a gallon gas, this segment is in a horsepower/torque war and Acura isn't quite winning this game.
BTW, a hybrid option might be nice (a la Lexus) but Acura has other fundemental issues to fix first.
4. Interior. In many ways, I think that Acura got this part right. First, I shopped the RL since it's one of only two cars in the class that can handle my 40" inseam legs (the Infiniti M is the other). I do think the seats are a tad soft for a sporting ride....maybe there could be a sport model with different seats. In my opinion, I thought the interior was better pulled together than what I saw from Infiniti. On the surface the Infiniti was very pretty but if you looked more closely, joins between different points on the dash didn't seem as seamless as it could be, plastics were good but not great, and some cheap switchgear has been borrowed from the G35 that I could care less about.
5. Marketing. It's not like the RL isn't marketed, but it might as well not be. I've seen RL ads, but not during expensive high profile events (like sporting events). In order to get sales, you have to go to where the customers are. And I just don't see that with current Acura marketing.
6. Pricing. Ironically the lack of RL buyers is making there be very good deals out there for the loaded RL that is the standard car. But those few buyers in a hypercompetitve segment has a big downside: resale value. It's that resale value problem that is sandbagging lease deals. BMW leases are cheaper since resale value for their cars is higher....you're paying for less of the vehicle for the life of the lease. Acura artificially manipulated the resale value of the vehicle for it's May 2006 lease program, but they can't do that forever. Unfortunately resale is one of those thins that's harder to fix. Acura needs to sell more cars and make it a popular choice in order to solve this issue.
Anyway, I'm still not completely conviced one way or the other between the RL or the M35. I'm going to have to break both vehicles down in a pro/con chart in order to get an idea.
06-12-2006, 12:35 AM
#84
Originally Posted by jhr3uva90
Acura will probably offer the $42K MSRP RL for the following reasons:
1) To shut the Acura dealerships up, since they keep bitching that the RL costs too much for them to sell.
2) To be able to advertise that the base MSRP is lower than their competition, even if you are getting a car that is very close to the TL for that price.
3) To lessen the price gap between the TL and the RL, since Acura customers keep wondering why the current gap is so large and the sales people can't seem to explain it.
As a side note, I just finished watching Battlestar Galatica on Universal HD. During the show, there was an ad for the Acura TL and the soon to be replaced Acura MDX. Why no commercial for the RL? Does Acura actually want to sell this car? Sometimes I think Acura resents the fact that Honda corporate in Japan is making Acura in North American sell a car that was not designed in the US like the TL and MDX.
1) To shut the Acura dealerships up, since they keep bitching that the RL costs too much for them to sell.
2) To be able to advertise that the base MSRP is lower than their competition, even if you are getting a car that is very close to the TL for that price.
3) To lessen the price gap between the TL and the RL, since Acura customers keep wondering why the current gap is so large and the sales people can't seem to explain it.
As a side note, I just finished watching Battlestar Galatica on Universal HD. During the show, there was an ad for the Acura TL and the soon to be replaced Acura MDX. Why no commercial for the RL? Does Acura actually want to sell this car? Sometimes I think Acura resents the fact that Honda corporate in Japan is making Acura in North American sell a car that was not designed in the US like the TL and MDX.
Some years back two political dinners were held in my city, one was $100 a plate and the other was $1000. There were more people who showed for the $1000 a plate dinner. i was amazed because I don't live in the most affluent town in Montana. I was told that more people wanted to prove to the world that they could afford $1000. It was status.
I dated a woman who sold curtains, etc. The custom stuff that was hand made and used nicer materials, but she would always try and cut her clients a break. She did okay but started getting more clients who were willing to spend bigger bucks when she charged more. It was the same material, labor, etc. but they wanted to say how much more they spent for curtains.
Keep in mind that all of this is in a Montana economy - not the richest people in America live here - they just come to visit.
If Acura is trying to tap into that wealthier market (and personally I don't think they are), lowering the price of the RL so more people can afford it will cost them cutomers. If they are trying to placate the dealerships, then they are veering away from their original market strategies of providing a product for the consumer.
I think that for the RL they are targeting an upper middle income strata and with a few of those with lesser incomes that understand the value of all the whizzbang from the SH-AWD to the exceptional Hands-free (which by the way is very incredible considering the quality if DSP - Digital Signal Processing of just a couple years ago).
I don't think that the RL was designed for those that have a want to show off our toys by how much they cost. I think it targets those of us who appreciate what it has to offer and are willing to pay for it. It "may" be that Acura thought that if they offered it at a higher price, that they may get someone to look, just because it costs more than the TL, but I honestly think that they figure more of us will see the quality and technical sophistcation of SH-AWD and Handsfree and will be willing to spend more for it. After all we could have bought a 4WD vehicle (Ford 500, Subaru Impreza, et al), added a killer stereo, and a handsfree bluetooth device, and saved $20K.
I don't think that the people that gave us the Honda 600, Civic, Accord, Acura NSX, F1 racing engines and millions of motorbikes, lawnmowers and little funky robots are stupid nor foolish. If they offer an RL with less than what it currently has, then I will have to revise my opinion and say that someone in the main office has been enjoying too many recreational drugs.
I "do" think that we have a technologically advanced vehicle that will be copied by many manufacturers for their mainstream everyday lines. The luxury cars... Acura won't ever join that fight. They may talk about it and even bluff a little, but the people running the company have made a good living and established a reputation of making vehicles that will target the majority of the population. Lets face it, BMW, MB, Porsche don't have a Fit or Odessey or Ridgeline and probaly never will. On the other hand, Acura focused upscale on one and only market and came out with the NSX. They know their market and the RL is not the luxury entry, it is there "bells, whistles and useful years ahead" entry. Those with an RL are just at the front of the mainstream technology curve, not the luxury curve.
I "think" that may be why the RL commercials are so few and far between. Acura presumes that the majority of RL owners have spent a huge amount of time researching and checking out the benefits of an RL and really don't need a commercial or salesperson to tell them about it. There are many entries on this site where the owner was frustrated because they knew so much more than the sales staff. If you were trying to sell a product wouldn't you be excited if the customer base you were aiming for knew so much about the product that they had already pretty much made up their minds about buying before they even played with it??
As an aside, if you wonder if Acura reads the comments on this site, check back to the earlier entries and you will find a number of entries that talk about the RL being overpriced by a few thousand and now look at how much the incentive is this year($3K), how quickly in the model year it was introduced and no one rushed to buy all the surplus and Acura had extended the incentive to July 5th before the end of May. My guess is they are paying more attention than we give them credit. So be careful what you wish for on the RL becaues it might just come true ;-)
Again, just my
or maybe in this case 1 1/2Ben
06-12-2006, 07:32 AM
#85
Safety Car
Hmmm
Originally Posted by jhr3uva90
To TSX69: I think the RL and the TSX have a stronger family resemblance than the TL. What do you think?
As for the TL & TSX, those cars are almost identical from the front to the casual observer. The first time my friend & I went to a dealershiop (which did not have all their cars in any kind of order) I told him to find the TSXs & we both had a hard time doing it by lookin @ them from the front. W/ time, I figured out the little things like TSX has the shinier chrome & the yellow circles in the headlights.
As for decontenting, I agree w/ the above poster about how that is not going to help since it is already so deeply discounted. Not to mention, if they want to be taken more seriously in the luxury dept, that is not going to help. Perhaps they can include the Tech Pkg in the 49k price? Of course, not everyone is gonna want that & we go back to the problem of not offering options. Hmm, perhaps sell the non tech pkg for 46k? A FWD for a 44k for those who do not need AWD & the lower mpg? It would also be nice if they included more features in the price like ventilated seats, backup camera ... whatever Lexus & Infiniti offer that they do not.
I do not know how reliable ConsumerGuide is but this is what they have to say. Altho I would prefer a hybrid, I like the idea of deactivating cylinders since mpg is one of the reasons I have not yet bought an RL (do not really need 300hp or AWD but I guess that is what you have to do in the mid luxury market)
We hear Acura may cut the RL's price for 2007 by moving some standard features to the options list. Apparently, many shoppers think $50,000 is too much for a V6 sedan, however well equipped. Another possible change is adding parent Honda's fuel-saving VCM cylinder-deactivation feature to the RL's V6 engine. It would be an easy and timely response to roaring gas prices, as the same basic engine with VCM already powers Honda's Odyssey minivan. Another possible mpg-booster is an all-new "clean diesel" V6 now being developed. Honda recently announced plans to sell 4-cyl and V6 diesel vehicles in America by 2009, so an "oil burner" RL can't be ruled out.
06-12-2006, 08:37 AM
#86
Three Wheelin'
Just out of curiosity, does anyone know where I can find out how the Japanese Honda Legend is selling or what their sales goals might be?
06-12-2006, 09:55 AM
#87
2012 Cadillac CTS-V Coupe
Originally Posted by Benush
Just some rambling thoughts...
...
If Acura is trying to tap into that wealthier market (and personally I don't think they are), lowering the price of the RL so more people can afford it will cost them cutomers. If they are trying to placate the dealerships, then they are veering away from their original market strategies of providing a product for the consumer.
I think that for the RL they are targeting an upper middle income strata and with a few of those with lesser incomes that understand the value of all the whizzbang from the SH-AWD to the exceptional Hands-free (which by the way is very incredible considering the quality if DSP - Digital Signal Processing of just a couple years ago).
I don't think that the RL was designed for those that have a want to show off our toys by how much they cost. I think it targets those of us who appreciate what it has to offer and are willing to pay for it. It "may" be that Acura thought that if they offered it at a higher price, that they may get someone to look, just because it costs more than the TL, but I honestly think that they figure more of us will see the quality and technical sophistcation of SH-AWD and Handsfree and will be willing to spend more for it. After all we could have bought a 4WD vehicle (Ford 500, Subaru Impreza, et al), added a killer stereo, and a handsfree bluetooth device, and saved $20K.
I don't think that the people that gave us the Honda 600, Civic, Accord, Acura NSX, F1 racing engines and millions of motorbikes, lawnmowers and little funky robots are stupid nor foolish. If they offer an RL with less than what it currently has, then I will have to revise my opinion and say that someone in the main office has been enjoying too many recreational drugs.
I "do" think that we have a technologically advanced vehicle that will be copied by many manufacturers for their mainstream everyday lines. The luxury cars... Acura won't ever join that fight. They may talk about it and even bluff a little, but the people running the company have made a good living and established a reputation of making vehicles that will target the majority of the population. Lets face it, BMW, MB, Porsche don't have a Fit or Odessey or Ridgeline and probaly never will. On the other hand, Acura focused upscale on one and only market and came out with the NSX. They know their market and the RL is not the luxury entry, it is there "bells, whistles and useful years ahead" entry. Those with an RL are just at the front of the mainstream technology curve, not the luxury curve.
I "think" that may be why the RL commercials are so few and far between. Acura presumes that the majority of RL owners have spent a huge amount of time researching and checking out the benefits of an RL and really don't need a commercial or salesperson to tell them about it. There are many entries on this site where the owner was frustrated because they knew so much more than the sales staff. If you were trying to sell a product wouldn't you be excited if the customer base you were aiming for knew so much about the product that they had already pretty much made up their minds about buying before they even played with it??
As an aside, if you wonder if Acura reads the comments on this site, check back to the earlier entries and you will find a number of entries that talk about the RL being overpriced by a few thousand and now look at how much the incentive is this year($3K), how quickly in the model year it was introduced and no one rushed to buy all the surplus and Acura had extended the incentive to July 5th before the end of May. My guess is they are paying more attention than we give them credit. So be careful what you wish for on the RL becaues it might just come true ;-)
Again, just my or maybe in this case 1 1/2
Ben
...
If Acura is trying to tap into that wealthier market (and personally I don't think they are), lowering the price of the RL so more people can afford it will cost them cutomers. If they are trying to placate the dealerships, then they are veering away from their original market strategies of providing a product for the consumer.
I think that for the RL they are targeting an upper middle income strata and with a few of those with lesser incomes that understand the value of all the whizzbang from the SH-AWD to the exceptional Hands-free (which by the way is very incredible considering the quality if DSP - Digital Signal Processing of just a couple years ago).
I don't think that the RL was designed for those that have a want to show off our toys by how much they cost. I think it targets those of us who appreciate what it has to offer and are willing to pay for it. It "may" be that Acura thought that if they offered it at a higher price, that they may get someone to look, just because it costs more than the TL, but I honestly think that they figure more of us will see the quality and technical sophistcation of SH-AWD and Handsfree and will be willing to spend more for it. After all we could have bought a 4WD vehicle (Ford 500, Subaru Impreza, et al), added a killer stereo, and a handsfree bluetooth device, and saved $20K.
I don't think that the people that gave us the Honda 600, Civic, Accord, Acura NSX, F1 racing engines and millions of motorbikes, lawnmowers and little funky robots are stupid nor foolish. If they offer an RL with less than what it currently has, then I will have to revise my opinion and say that someone in the main office has been enjoying too many recreational drugs.
I "do" think that we have a technologically advanced vehicle that will be copied by many manufacturers for their mainstream everyday lines. The luxury cars... Acura won't ever join that fight. They may talk about it and even bluff a little, but the people running the company have made a good living and established a reputation of making vehicles that will target the majority of the population. Lets face it, BMW, MB, Porsche don't have a Fit or Odessey or Ridgeline and probaly never will. On the other hand, Acura focused upscale on one and only market and came out with the NSX. They know their market and the RL is not the luxury entry, it is there "bells, whistles and useful years ahead" entry. Those with an RL are just at the front of the mainstream technology curve, not the luxury curve.
I "think" that may be why the RL commercials are so few and far between. Acura presumes that the majority of RL owners have spent a huge amount of time researching and checking out the benefits of an RL and really don't need a commercial or salesperson to tell them about it. There are many entries on this site where the owner was frustrated because they knew so much more than the sales staff. If you were trying to sell a product wouldn't you be excited if the customer base you were aiming for knew so much about the product that they had already pretty much made up their minds about buying before they even played with it??
As an aside, if you wonder if Acura reads the comments on this site, check back to the earlier entries and you will find a number of entries that talk about the RL being overpriced by a few thousand and now look at how much the incentive is this year($3K), how quickly in the model year it was introduced and no one rushed to buy all the surplus and Acura had extended the incentive to July 5th before the end of May. My guess is they are paying more attention than we give them credit. So be careful what you wish for on the RL becaues it might just come true ;-)
Again, just my
or maybe in this case 1 1/2Ben
My sales rep didn't have to "sell" me the car. I was between the GS and the RL. The price point of the RL was too good to pass up and I knew I was getting a car that performed equally or better than the GS 300 AWD. The only thing I wasn't getting was the Lexus name. I don't get too hung up on that stuff, and it wasn't worth the extra thousands just to have a Lexus. If the prices were more comparable, it would of been a tougher decision. I keep my cars for a relatively long time, so resale isn't a major issue for me, and I'm fortunate to have an awesome dealer that always treat me great, so my decision was pretty easy for me.
06-12-2006, 10:01 AM
#88
Three Wheelin'
GoHawks, it's good that your sales rep didn't have to sell you on the car. Mine didn't have to sell me on the RL, either. All he had to do was let me have it overnight. But here's the question: could an Acura sales rep sell a potential customer on the RL if s/he had to? Unfortunately, I think the answer is generally no. I don't even think Acura has given individual sales reps an adequate incentive to do so.
I think Acura should drop the RL's MSRP a few thousand, since the car is selling for about $45K anyway.
I think Acura should drop the RL's MSRP a few thousand, since the car is selling for about $45K anyway.
06-12-2006, 01:47 PM
#89
Originally Posted by jhr3uva90
... But here's the question: could an Acura sales rep sell a potential customer on the RL if s/he had to? Unfortunately, I think the answer is generally no. I don't even think Acura has given individual sales reps an adequate incentive to do so.
1) Potential customer approaches sales staff
2) PC is given the dealership demo RL to take a drive for 24 - 48 hours
3) PC is given the contact information of an existing cooperative RL owner and arranges a "check ride"for questions and answers and a healthy dose of reality and enthusiasm.
4) Voila another RL is sold
This keeps the sales staff out of the lack of information loop and allows them to concentrate on selling the cars that they do know about.
I think Acura should drop the RL's MSRP a few thousand, since the car is selling for about $45K anyway.
06-12-2006, 03:01 PM
#90
2012 Cadillac CTS-V Coupe
Originally Posted by jhr3uva90
GoHawks, it's good that your sales rep didn't have to sell you on the car. Mine didn't have to sell me on the RL, either. All he had to do was let me have it overnight. But here's the question: could an Acura sales rep sell a potential customer on the RL if s/he had to? Unfortunately, I think the answer is generally no. I don't even think Acura has given individual sales reps an adequate incentive to do so.
I think Acura should drop the RL's MSRP a few thousand, since the car is selling for about $45K anyway.
I think Acura should drop the RL's MSRP a few thousand, since the car is selling for about $45K anyway.
06-12-2006, 06:29 PM
#91
Burning Brakes
The posters who mention that the RL isn't advertised must be watching different TV channels than I do. I've seen the RL TV ad showcasing the Collision Mitigation Braking System several times, most notably during PGA tour events. Maybe the advertising is targeted by region but the car is being advertised. That said, all of the RL ads I've seen are focused on the technology in the car. It seems obvious what type of car buyer they're going after.
06-17-2006, 12:26 AM
#94
Cruisin'
Join Date: Jun 2006
Age: 60
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But what about....
....yes, but what about the rain sensing wipers? I've seen on other threads that the even current MDX has this feature so why not the RL ? I certainly hope this is not overlooked in the '07 model. Also, I see in other threads that discussions on the '05 RL threads started in July and August from 'then current' owners. I may want to wait until August to see if the '07 model is out and what changes will be incorporated.
sdarryl
sdarryl
06-20-2006, 05:31 PM
#96
Intermediate
Join Date: May 2006
Age: 50
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jhr3uva90
... One problem I see with the RL is that prospective buyers are cross shopping it with the TL...
Originally Posted by jhr3uva90
BMW 5 Series buyers don't really cross-shop with the 3 Series.
Originally Posted by jhr3uva90
And Lexus GS customers don't seem to cross shop with the ES. If they did, they would probably wonder why the GS is more expensive than the slightly bigger ES.
).
06-20-2006, 06:15 PM
#97
Three Wheelin'
Usually, the styling becomes more conservative as the cars get more expensive. BMW seems to have done the opposite: the 3 Series seems to be the most conservatively-styled of BMW's sedans. That being said, most 5-series drivers seem to have already decided that they need a midsize car, which is why they don't usually cross-shop with the 3. Otherwise, they would just get a 3 like you did, since the 3 is more the "Ultimate Driving Machine."
09-13-2006, 11:46 PM
#100
Indian Acura Driver
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Ottawa, Can
Age: 36
Posts: 345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jkuniverse
I doubt that '07 will have any major changes - probably not for another couple of years. My best guess would be, different wheels, subtle grill(front) changes, ventillated(AC) seats, availablilty of base models, more color choices, increase in horse power, 6 speed auto? etc... We'll see.
09-14-2006, 12:00 AM
#101
Indian Acura Driver
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Ottawa, Can
Age: 36
Posts: 345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sevenfeet
This has been an interesting thread from my perspective as a prospective RL buyer. Clearly the RL is a nice vehicle, but also it needs some changes in order to better compete in the marketplace. In my case, I've been cross-shopping it against the Infinity M35 Sport and here is my opinion, FWIW on several points I think are important.
1. Styling. Over time, I think the RL's styling is growing on me. It's smart without being overwhelming. That still doesn't mean that it's enough to get noticed in the marketplace. But if you desire a smart looking vehicle without the "look at me" attitude, the RL works. Interestingly enough some other cars sell a lot better that have less successful styling. We can debate BMW's current 5 series for days, but I'm thinking more about the Cadillac STS. As a long time owner of Caddies, I think GM really screwed the pooch on this car. It looks to me like an unfinished design exercise (probably true since Bub Lutz asked for last minute changes). But I see a veritable fleet of STS's around here versus the handful of 2nd gen RL's I've ever seen in Nashville.
1. Styling. Over time, I think the RL's styling is growing on me. It's smart without being overwhelming. That still doesn't mean that it's enough to get noticed in the marketplace. But if you desire a smart looking vehicle without the "look at me" attitude, the RL works. Interestingly enough some other cars sell a lot better that have less successful styling. We can debate BMW's current 5 series for days, but I'm thinking more about the Cadillac STS. As a long time owner of Caddies, I think GM really screwed the pooch on this car. It looks to me like an unfinished design exercise (probably true since Bub Lutz asked for last minute changes). But I see a veritable fleet of STS's around here versus the handful of 2nd gen RL's I've ever seen in Nashville.
Originally Posted by Sevenfeet
2. Drivetrain. I've never understood why Acura thinks it can compete in the RWD and RWD/AWD luxury market with FWD and FWD/AWD products. In the case of the RL, SH-AWD is a great technical achievement (better than Mercedes, Cadillac, and Infiniti efforts) that has to spend most of its time overcoming the physics of a FWD-based vehicle. Just think how great it would be with a RWD-biased design. Even Cadillac figured out that FWD cars are not the state of the art for overall balanced performance. For a company that used to make all FWD cars, they now make only one. Acura could learn from this.
My other drivetrain beefs have to do with the tires and suspension. I can't think of how many times I've read about bad choices in rubber that Acura seems to make with their base models. The run-flats offered in the tech package are better but still not the sport option I want. The A-spec seems to be a bit over-the-top in terms of suspension harshness as I have read (although I've not driven one personally). And I still can't understand why A-spec is a dealer-installed option versus a complete package from the factory. The factory is much more likely to get this right versus the dealer and frankly, nobody else does it this way.
My other drivetrain beefs have to do with the tires and suspension. I can't think of how many times I've read about bad choices in rubber that Acura seems to make with their base models. The run-flats offered in the tech package are better but still not the sport option I want. The A-spec seems to be a bit over-the-top in terms of suspension harshness as I have read (although I've not driven one personally). And I still can't understand why A-spec is a dealer-installed option versus a complete package from the factory. The factory is much more likely to get this right versus the dealer and frankly, nobody else does it this way.
Acura doesn't need to learn from Cadillac at all, the AWD set up will work with a V8, and won't be a huge issue. It's the people who don't really intend to buy it, but are angry because they don't have the option, even though they don't give a damn. Buy the A spec, the better suspension and tires are well worth it. I was surprised that my uncle's RL was sitting on Pirelli rubber for the summer, and some Bridgestones (with the normal rims, not Aspec) for winter.
Originally Posted by Sevenfeet
3. Engine. Honda's MO at this point has been to squeeze the most out of a smaller package. They have had a resonable amount of success in this area (the original NSX comes to mind). But the U.S. market dictates over-the-top performance, even if it's not necessary. Yeah, you don't really need a V8 but everyone makes one these days in this class. Hell even Volvo offers one now (for the 2007 S80) and those customers were used to buying 4 and 5 cylinder large sedans for years. Not offering a choice of engines in this class of vehicle tells me that Acura doesn't understand it's customers or how the North American market operates. Even at $3 a gallon gas, this segment is in a horsepower/torque war and Acura isn't quite winning this game.
BTW, a hybrid option might be nice (a la Lexus) but Acura has other fundemental issues to fix first.
BTW, a hybrid option might be nice (a la Lexus) but Acura has other fundemental issues to fix first.
Originally Posted by Sevenfeet
4. Interior. In many ways, I think that Acura got this part right. First, I shopped the RL since it's one of only two cars in the class that can handle my 40" inseam legs (the Infiniti M is the other). I do think the seats are a tad soft for a sporting ride....maybe there could be a sport model with different seats. In my opinion, I thought the interior was better pulled together than what I saw from Infiniti. On the surface the Infiniti was very pretty but if you looked more closely, joins between different points on the dash didn't seem as seamless as it could be, plastics were good but not great, and some cheap switchgear has been borrowed from the G35 that I could care less about.
Originally Posted by Sevenfeet
5. Marketing. It's not like the RL isn't marketed, but it might as well not be. I've seen RL ads, but not during expensive high profile events (like sporting events). In order to get sales, you have to go to where the customers are. And I just don't see that with current Acura marketing.
Originally Posted by Sevenfeet
6. Pricing. Ironically the lack of RL buyers is making there be very good deals out there for the loaded RL that is the standard car. But those few buyers in a hypercompetitve segment has a big downside: resale value. It's that resale value problem that is sandbagging lease deals. BMW leases are cheaper since resale value for their cars is higher....you're paying for less of the vehicle for the life of the lease. Acura artificially manipulated the resale value of the vehicle for it's May 2006 lease program, but they can't do that forever. Unfortunately resale is one of those thins that's harder to fix. Acura needs to sell more cars and make it a popular choice in order to solve this issue.
Originally Posted by Sevenfeet
Anyway, I'm still not completely conviced one way or the other between the RL or the M35. I'm going to have to break both vehicles down in a pro/con chart in order to get an idea.
Are you getting the A-Spec? I think you should test drive that if you don't like the suspension actually, it may change your mind.
09-14-2006, 09:58 PM
#102
Instructor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have the A-spec suspension, the black chrome wheels, and pirelli pzero nero M&S tires...the car is awesome. Great road feel......torque is not great, but if one is realistic, it is superb and more than plenty....I paddle shift 90%.
JB
JB
